Poll: ‘Occupy’ Movement More Popular Than Tea Party, Obama

A poll by Time released Thursday, which asked participants’ opinions on President Barack Obama’s job performance, the impact of the tea party and views of “Occupy Wall Street,” reveals that the “Occupy” movement has a higher approval rating than President Obama or the Tea Party. The poll also found that a full 86 percent agree that Wall Street and its lobbyists have “too much influence in Washington,” and 68 percent agree that wealthy Americans should pay more in taxes.

Occupy Wall Street enjoys majority backing among men (57 percent) and women (51 percent), young (60 percent of respondents 18 to 34) and old (51 percent). Self-identified Democrats, unsurprisingly, comprise the left-leaning movement's largest bloc, with 66 percent professing support. But more than half of independents (55 percent) harbor favorable views of the protesters, as do a third of Republicans.

Overall, the poll found that 65 percent of respondents believe the tea party had either a “negative impact” (40 percent) or very little impact at all (25 percent). The poll shows that President Obama has an approval rating of just 44 percent, with 50 percent disapproving and six percent not sure. That stands in contrast to the 54 percent who say their opinion of “Occupy Wall Street” is either “very favorable” or “somewhat favorable.”

Comparatively, the tea party, which is essentially Republican Party coordinated campaign committee, largely funded by a few billionaire conservatives, only has a 27 percent approval rating, with just 8% being “very favorable” and 19% being “somewhat favorable.”

A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows that Americans support the Occupy Wall Street protests by a two-to-one margin (37 percent in favor, 18 percent opposed) while more Americans view the Tea Party negatively (28 percent in favor, 41 percent opposed).

This means the Occupy Wall Street protests have a net favorability of +19 percent while the Tea Party has a net favorability of -13 percent, as the chart at right, produced by ThinkProgress, shows.

Texas Agency Censors Climate Change References In Key Scientific Report

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) doesn’t want to say who’s responsible for deleting all mentions of climate change from part of a forthcoming scientific report, and that’s got at least one scientist hopping mad.

Dr. John B. Anderson (pictured, left), an oceanographer at Rice University, told Raw Story that his report on the Galveston Bay estuary, and the effects of rising sea levels on its fragile ecosystem, was censored for purely “political” reasons.

“This is a clear-cut case of censorship,” he said in an exclusive interview. “It’s not scientific editing. It was strictly deletion of virtually any information that related to global change.”

“This is the TCEQ’s report which we contracted with Houston Advance Research Center to publish regarding the State of Galveston Bay,” the [TCEQ] agency said in its prepared statement. “It would be irresponsible to take whatever is sent to us and publish it. And here, information was included in a report that we disagree with.”

“That chapter that was censored was actually a summary of scientific literature,” Anderson told Raw Story. “There’s no new data that was actually presented in that chapter. [...] One of those statements was even lifted out of Science Magazine, which last I heard was an acceptable scientific journal. So, I was rather shocked that their response was they did not accept some of those viewpoints.”

“To say you don’t accept it, when it’s been published in peer-reviewed scientific literature, usually means that you need some kind of a counter argument to say that there’s also evidence published in peer-reviewed literature that would refute that,” he added. “But [they offered] nothing of that sort...."

“We scientists commonly are criticized for not going the extra step in education, and this was my way of doing that outreach, to write an article that is not directed at the scientific community,” Anderson concluded. “To then have those very policymakers turn around and say we refuse to accept any of this… is quite discouraging. I refer to Texas as a state of denial, and I don’t think we’re the only coastal state that’s in denial.”

“These people have a responsibility to look out for, not just the voters, but the future voters,” he said. “There the ones who are going to have to pay the tab. As long as we live in the state of denial, we’re just passing the check to our grandkids to deal with.”

To see what was censored in Anderson’s article, which is no longer part of the TCEQ’s “The State of the Bay 2010″ report, click to the Raw Story article.

‘Occupy Wall Street’ A Turning Point For The Left

Dorian Warren, assistant professor of political science and public affairs at Columbia University, appeared Monday on Democracy Now to discuss the ongoing “Occupy Wall Street” protests in Manhattan and other cities across the United States.

Watch video, courtesy of Democracy Now

“This is an incredibly significant moment, I think, in U.S. history,” he told Amy Goodman. “In fact, it might be a turning point, because this is the first time we’ve seen the emergence of a populist movement on the left since the 1930s.”

“So I think when you think about that long stretch of time, especially in this moment where we’ve been growing more unequal as a country for the last 30, 40 years, the fact that this movement has emerged at this moment, I think, is quite significant.”

Warren explained that starting in the 1950s, conservatives began to co-opt the label of populist and eventually changed the entire political discourse of the United States.

The new sort of populism that has emerged with the “Occupy Wall Street” movement does not only criticize large corporations and powerful banks, but the U.S. political system as well, he said.

11 Facts You Need to Know About the Nation’s Biggest Banks

Here’s the goods, via ThinkProgress’ Pat Garofalo:

The Occupy Wall Street protests that began in New York City more than three weeks ago have now spread across the country. The choice of Wall Street as the focal point for the protests — as even Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said — makes sense due to the big bank malfeasance that led to the Great Recession.

Economist Blasts GOP’s Seven Biggest Economic Lies

By Robert Reich

The President’s Jobs Bill doesn’t have a chance in Congress — and the Occupiers on Wall Street and elsewhere can’t become a national movement for a more equitable society – unless more Americans know the truth about the economy.

Here are the seven lies told by those who want to take America backwards:

1. Tax cuts for the rich trickle down to everyone else.
Baloney. Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush both sliced taxes on the rich and what happened? Most Americans’ wages (measured by the real median wage) began flattening under Reagan and has dropped since George W. Bush. Trickle-down economics is a cruel joke.

Texas Voter Photo ID FAQ

by Michael Handley  (Updated Thursday June 27, 2013, 3:10 p.m.)

On June 25, 2013, the Supreme Court struck down a part of the Voting Rights Act that required Texas and other states to get a federal DOJ or District Court approval before implementing any election law change.

The Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, the provision of the landmark civil rights law that designates which parts of the country must have changes to their voting laws cleared by the U.S. Department of Justice or a federal court. With Section 4 now invalidated, the states listed in Section 4, which includes Texas, are no longer compelled to comply with Section 5 preclearance requirements. Those states are now free to enforce laws previously blocked under Section 5 regulations.

On August 30, 2012, a federal DC Court three-judge panel blocked Texas' new SB 14 Voter Photo I.D. Law, under provisions of the Voting Rights Act struck down by the Supreme Court. The three-judge panel found that SB 14 imposed "strict, unforgiving burdens on the poor" and noted that racial minorities in Texas are more likely to live in poverty.

The Department of Justice pointed out that hundreds of thousands of registered voters in Texas were without the necessary identification and were thus at risk of disenfranchisement. A disproportionate number were Latino.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, dissenting from the June 25th SCOTUS ruling, highlighted a paradox at the heart of the majority opinion: “In the court’s view, the very success of Section 5 [and 4] of the Voting Rights Act demands its dormancy”.

Ginsburg, supported by justices Sephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, said it is the very success of pre-clearance that underlines why it must be preserved. “The Voting Rights Act has worked to combat voting discrimination where other remedies have been tried and failed,” she writes.

In her dissent, Ginsburg lists some of the insidious changes to voting laws that could now creep back into the American electoral landscape. Under pre-clearance, states including Texas have been blocked from racial gerrymandering by redrawing electoral boundaries in an attempt to create segregated legislative districts.

Opponents of pre-clearance under Sections 4 and 5 of the Voting Rights Act say that Section 2 will be sufficient on its own as a safeguard against future discrimination. But the burden of challenging new electoral laws now shifts from the federal government to the individual voter.

Pamela Karlan, a professor at Stanford law school who had previously filed an amicus brief on behalf of the bipartisan House Judiciary Committee leadership supporting the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, said that by striking down pre-clearance the supreme court had “shifted the burden away from the perpetrators of discrimination and onto the shoulders of the victims of discrimination. Local minority voters will now have to find a lawyer and go to court to argue voting rights infringement under Section 2 – and for many that will be very difficult.”

Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act forbids states from enacting voting restrictions that have a greater impact on minority voters than on others. There is, however, a catch. Samuel Bagenstos, who was until recently the number two official in the U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division, has said that the DOJ can't bring a Section 2 lawsuit claiming voter disenfranchisement, until after voters have been disenfranchised:

“In order to bring a Section 2 case, you’d have to as a practical matter show two things. One, that there’s a significant racial disparity and two, that the burden of getting an ID is significant enough for us to care about.

Any Section 2 case would almost certainly have to wait until after the next election, since the evidence that the laws were discriminatory “can only be gathered during an election that takes place when the law is enacted.”

Minority Leader of the House Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said Wednesday that Congressional Democrats are planning new legislation to render ineffective Chief Justice Roberts Court's decision on the Voting Rights Act. But many question whether such legislation has any chance of passing in the Republican controlled House.

Shortly after the Supreme Court read its decision striking down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott tweeted that nothing now stands in the way of the state enforcing its controversial SB 14 voter photo ID law.

“With today’s decision, the State’s voter ID law will take effect immediately,” Abbott announced. “Redistricting maps [as originally] passed by the Legislature [in the 2011 legislative session] may also take effect without approval from the federal government.”

On Thursday, June 27, 2013 the Supreme Court followed up its Tuesday, June 25th, ruling on Section 4 of the VRA, officially vacating and kicking back the DC Court three-judge panel's August 2012 ruling that blocked Texas' voter photo I.D. law.  SCOTUS' action was a predictable result of its ruling, effectively ending the federal government's oversight of elections in Texas and other states with a history of discrimination in voting. The justices ordered lower courts to reconsider, in light of Tuesday's ruling, the status of previous low court rulings on appeal to SCOTUS, as was Texas' I.D. law. Legal experts remain divided on what the Supreme Court's rulings mean for the election laws that had been blocked under Section 5 review, and it could be weeks before the district courts weigh in. In the mean time, Texas and other states listed in Section 4 are not waiting to start enforcement of those laws.

U.S. Rep. Marc Veasey (D - Fort Worth) joined seven others Wednesday in filing a federal lawsuit to keep Texas from enforcing its voter ID law. Veasey, who represents the 33rd Congressional District, one of four districts created statewide during the latest redistricting battle, filed the papers in Corpus Christi federal court saying that under Section 2 of the VRA, SB 14, which requires voters to present a government-issued photo I.D. at polling places, will unconstitutionally deprive thousands of minorities of their right to vote and make re-election campaigns more expensive.

At his Redistricting Blog, Michael Li explains how Sections 2 and 3 of the Voting Rights Act could possibly provide some of the protections afforded under Sections 4 and 5.

Originally set to go into effect on January 1, 2012, the Texas Photo I.D. Law (SB 14) requires voters to present one of a limited selection of government issued photo I.D. to election Judges in order to qualify to vote. The accepted forms of currently dated photo identification include:

• Texas DPS issued Driver’s License or Personal Identification Card;
• Texas DPS issued Election Identification Certificate (EIC);  
• US passport;
• US military ID;
• Texas concealed weapons license; or
• US citizenship papers containing a photo.

For those who do not have an unexpired government issued photo I.D., the law contains a provision that requires the Texas Driver's License office to issue special "Election Identification Certificates" free of charge to citizens. Of course, a person seeking a free EIC at the Driver's License Office must present a state certified birth certificate and other I.D.'s.  Obtaining those identity documents, for those who don't already hold them, can be costly to a near impossibility. (see - Texas A Step Closer To Federal Real I.D. Act and War On Terror "Real I.D." Driver's License Federal Law Meets State Voter Photo I.D.)

The Texas Department of Public Safety announced shortly after the Supreme Court read its decision that starting Thursday, June 27, 2013, Texas driver license offices will begin issuing free Election Identification Certificates to anyone who doesn't already have another of the government issued photo I.D. documents. (DPS Webpage for EIC Info.)

Under the 2011 state law creating one of the state’s most strict voter I.D. laws, the certificates are free and valid for six years - which means they must be periodically renewed. However, there is no expiration date of an EIC for citizens 70 years of age or older.

To qualify for any Texas Department of Public Safety issued photo I.D., an applicant must give proof of U.S. citizenship and Texas residency by presenting identity documents. These identity documents include an unexpired Texas driver license, Texas Identification card, or U.S. Passport book or card.  For most who don't have one of those primary identification documents, already, they must present an original or certified copy of a birth certificate issued by their birth state's Bureau of Vital Statistics, along with another identity document listed under a menu of documents. This menu of documents includes a Voter Registration Card.

Frequently Asked Questions:

What Do The Occupy Wall Street Protesters Want?

Since the Occupy movement began on Wall Street we have heard the main stream media's near universal refrain that, "no one knows what they want." To anyone listening, the message of what they want is clearly understood and resonating with a growing number of every day Americans from coast to coast, including North Texas. The truly grassroots Occupy movement now has meetups active in 1,539 cities worldwide.

Over 100 members of Occupy Dallas, which is a part of the Occupy Wall Street movement, set up a 'tent city' in Pioneer Plaza park near downtown Dallas to provide shelter and a place to sleep. (picture right)

The Occupy Dallas group obtained a city permit Monday to remain camped in Pioneer Plaza park until 5 p.m. Friday. Their is potential for conflict between protesters and City Hall as given the liability insurance required as a prevision of the permit is difficult, if not impossible, to buy.

While the Occupy movement has spread to many cities around the U.S. over the last weeks, the movement has also found support on high school and college campuses across the country, as reported by the Student Activism blog. (Thanks to Facebook and Twitter!) In total, students from at least 100 college campuses around the country walked out of class in a show of solidarity and support for the Occupy Wall Street movement on October 5th.

Students are angry about the debt that many of them must obtain to go to college and the fact that they are graduating into the worst job market since the Great Depression. And it's no wonder: Outstanding student loan debt exceeded credit card debt for the first time in 2010 and student loan debt is up 25 percent since 2008. Organizers behind Occupy Colleges have announced this Thursday, October 13 as the date for a second national student action day in solidarity with Occupy Wall Street, with students from at least fifty-six campuses pledging support.

What do the occupy Wall Street protesters want?

Occupy Wall Street protesters are clearly saying that individuals, corporations, and special interest groups, armed with the power of wealth, have gained an unfair advantage over 99 percent of "We the People" in every aspect of our society. This "Letter To The Ruling Class," that seems to have gone viral on the Internet among Occupy Wall Street supporters, sums up the movement's complaint:

You control our world. You’ve poisoned the air we breathe, contaminated the water we drink, and copyrighted the food we eat. We fight in your wars, die for your causes, and sacrifice our freedoms to protect you. You’ve liquidated our savings, destroyed our middle class, and used our tax dollars to bailout your unending greed. We are slaves to your corporations, zombies to your airwaves, servants to your decadence. You’ve stolen our elections, assassinated our leaders, and abolished our basic rights as human beings. You own our property, shipped away our jobs, and shredded our unions. You’ve profited off of disaster, destabilized our currencies, and raised our cost of living. You’ve monopolized our freedom, stripped away our education, and have almost extinguished our flame. We are hit… we are bleeding… but we ain’t got time to bleed. We will bring the giants to their knees and you will witness our revolution! -- Attributed to Jesse Ventura by Kos

What the Occupy activists want has wealthy conservative plutocrats in a panic:

Occupy activists want the restoration of a fair and balanced playing field for every American. A field of play that is not controlled by the 1 percent of the wealthiest Americans; a field of play where everyone pays their fair share to build and maintain our public education, utility and transportation systems; and a field of play where no one person, corporation, or special interest group, armed with the power of wealth, can gain an unfair advantage over even a single American.

Occupy activists want a fair and balanced playing field that the federal government's system of oversight and regulation provided to American society, before conservatives dismantled it in their fervor for deregulation and elimination of taxes payed by billion dollar corporations and the richest 1 percent of Americans.

What the "Occupy," "The Other 98 Percent," and "The 99 Percent" movements want, in essence, is a restoration of Pres. Roosevelt's New Deal protections for the American financial system and middle class Americans.

Krugman: Panic of the Plutocrats

The New York Times OpEd by Paul Krugman:

It remains to be seen whether the Occupy Wall Street protests will change America’s direction. Yet the protests have already elicited a remarkably hysterical reaction from Wall Street, the super-rich in general, and politicians and pundits who reliably serve the interests of the wealthiest hundredth of a percent.

And this reaction tells you something important — namely, that the extremists threatening American values are what F.D.R. called “economic royalists,” not the people camping in Zuccotti Park.

Consider first how Republican politicians have portrayed the modest-sized if growing demonstrations, which have involved some confrontations with the police — confrontations that seem to have involved a lot of police overreaction — but nothing one could call a riot. And there has in fact been nothing so far to match the behavior of Tea Party crowds in the summer of 2009.

Nonetheless, Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, has denounced “mobs” and “the pitting of Americans against Americans.”

Read the full story: The New York Times

U.S. Incomes Declined During The Last 10 Years

The U.S. economy may technically be in a recovery, but it likely doesn’t feel that way for many Americans when grabbing for their wallets. Median annual household income has fallen more during the recovery than it did during the recession, according to a new study from former Census Bureau officials Gordon Green and John Code.

Between December 2007 and June 2009, when the U.S. economy was in recession, incomes declined 3.2 percent. While during the recovery between June 2009 and June 2011 incomes fell 6.7 percent, the study found. (click on the chart to enlarge)

The lack of income growth may explain why for most Americans the recovery still feels like a recession. Eight in 10 Americans believe the recession is an ongoing problem, according to a recent Gallup poll.

And workers don't anticipate things will pick up any time soon. Nine out of 10 Americans said they don't expect to get a raise that will be enough to compensate for the rising costs of essentials like food a fuel, according an American Pulse survey released in June.

Slow job growth is likely also exacerbating the feelings of recession and weighing on household incomes. U.S. employers added 103,000 jobs in September, too few jobs drive the unemployment rate below 9.1 percent and barely enough to keep pace with population growth, the Department of Labor reported last week. Those Americans that are employed are continuing to get squeezed by their employers with wage stagnation and benefit cuts, while profits per employee went up for the second year in a row in 2010, according to financial analysis company Sageworks.

While American workers find them selves under increasing pressure, American corporate profits are surging again in 2011 as corporations horde those profits in bank accounts. Corporations were sitting on $2.2 trillion in cash at the end of June, and that number has grown during the last quarter.

If giving tax cuts to corporations and the ultra-wealthy is the most stimulative approach to boosting jobs and wages, as Republicans claim in rejecting Pres. Obama's Jobs Plan, then the economy should already be racing, given the trillions of dollars in tax cuts President Bush and Republicans handed during the eight years of Pres. Bush's administration. Right? Wrong!

If the U.S. continues its sluggish jobs growth pace it could drive incomes even lower. Americans who are jobless for more than 99 weeks lose any unemployment benefits driving their incomes to zero and weighing on the national average, according to 24/7 Wall Street.

The recession’s and the recovery’s drag on income growth has put some Americans in a worse position than they were decades ago. The median income for U.S. males was worse in 2010 than in 1968 on an inflation-adjust basis.

In some states the recession and the recovery only exacerbated a decline in incomes that’s been taking place for longer. The median household income in Wisconsin plunged 14.5 percent between 1999 and 2010, The Milwaukee Wisconsin Journal Sentinel reported.

The super rich have grabbed the bulk of the past three decades' income gains.

Texas State Climatologist: Texas Drought Could Last Until 2020

Texas State Climatologist John Nielsen-Gammon thinks Texans should get use to hot dry Texas summers. He says these hot dry conditions could last another five years, or even extend to 2020.

Parts of Texas may get some nice thunderstorms this early October weekend, but the state witnessed a September that continued the trend of above-normal temperatures with exceptional drought conditions during 2011. The daily maximum temperatures were above average across the state by two or more degrees. Every major station but Amarillo, Galveston, and Port Arthur reached 100+ °F at some point during September.

As of the Oct 4th U.S. Drought Monitor, 100% of Texas was suffering under some form of drought conditions, and over 85% of the state was designated as D4 (Exceptional Drought), the worst possible scenario. Indeed, the big story for September was the continuation of the devastating drought. A majority of the state observed only a fraction of their percent averages for rainfall, with Abilene and Austin below 10%.

Texas SOS Responds To US DOJ On Voter Photo ID Law Clearance

The back and forth between the U.S. Department of Justice (USDOJ) Civil Rights Division's voting rights section, the Texas Secretary of State's (TXSOS) office, the Texas Democratic Party and various organizations opposed to the legislation continued this week over the strict voting photo identification law signed by Republican presidential candidate and Texas Gov. Rick Perry last May.

Did Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid Just Trigger The Nuclear Option?

The Republicans instituted the permanent filibuster when Obama took office, and that was the end of that. No more legislation, ever, on anything unless you have 60 votes in the Senate.

That's not the way it is suppose to work. But the Republicans decided to implement a permanent filibuster of everything, and to forever change the way the Senate works, and essentially make the body permanently dysfunctional. (see: How Can Only 40 Senate Republicans Stall Senate? And, How Senate Democrats Can Out Maneuver The Republicans.)

Tonight, perhaps, Senator Reid changed that -- The Hill:

Fellow Texas Bloggers To Speak At TDWCC Annual Dinner

Fellow Texas bloggers Eileen Smith and Rachel Farris, who write their respective blogs, "In the Pink" and "Mean Rachel" from Austin, Texas, will be featured speakers at the Texas Democratic Women of Collin County's 5th annual fund raiser dinner on Sunday, October 23 at the Southfork Ranch in Parker, Tx.

Eileen Smith is the editor of the long-running satirical political blog In the Pink Texas, which has won three “Best of Austin” awards from the Austin Chronicle. She’s currently a columnist at the Texas Observer, where she covered the most recent session of the Legislature and now writes a weekly wrap-up of Governor Rick Perry’s road to the White House called “Perryland.” She was the first-ever editor of Texas Monthly’s award-winning website, TexasMonthly.com, and she blogged the 2008 presidential campaign on “Poll Dancing.” Eileen has a Master’s in Journalism from the Medill School at Northwestern University. Originally from Virginia, she has lived in Austin for over ten years. You can follow her on Twitter at @EileenDSmith.

Native Texan and Democratic activist Rachel Farris (@MeanRachel) writes MeanRachel.com, a progressive blog that follows politics, the legislature and how they both are affected by social media. She covered the 2008 Democratic National Convention with The Texas Observer team and has spoken about social media and communications at the University of Texas LBJ School of Public Affairs, Texas State University’s “Mass Communications Week,” and St. Edward’s University. She also writes for The Huffington Post and AlterNet.org, and currently serves on the board of Texas Democratic Women.

This should be an interesting evening of discussion on “Framing the Issues” using social media communication channels on the Internet. In additional to the speakers and dinner, the evening includes a cash bar, silent auction and musical entertainment.

Read more...

Amy Lawrence Announces For Collin Co. Chair Of The Democratic Party

Amy Lawrence announced at the September meeting of the Texas Democratic Women of Collin County (TDWCC) early last week, her intention to file as a candidate for the County Chair of the Democratic Party of Collin County (DPCC) on the March 2012 Democratic primary ballot. Lawrence followed up on that announcement with a press release late last week.

In comments explaining why she decided to run for the office of Democratic County Chair, Lawrence said:

“I grew up in west Texas, but my husband and I have settled in Collin County to raise our children. I am committed to making sure this is a community we can be proud of – one where all members of our community have the opportunity to thrive.”

“Sadly, the past two years are prime examples of what can happen to a community when only one party has been in power for a generation with few viable alternatives on the ballot – we have seen our Republican representatives slash our state budgets, threatening the quality of our children’s public schools; threatening the critical safety net of Medicaid healthcare services with severe consequences for our parents and children in need; threatening the public safety of our communities by cutting law and fire department funding; and disenfranchising segments of our population, including the elderly and veterans, by creating onerous requirements on their basic right to vote. The only way we will be able to hold our elected officials accountable is by creating a strong, vibrant, and vocal Democratic Party in Collin County that can offer an alternative vision for our local communities."

"As County Chair, my focus will be on integrating the Democratic Party into the community and being vocal on issues that affect local residents, linking up with other Democratic organizations to maximize our reach and effectiveness, broadening and diversifying our base of Democratic voters and activists, and finally growing local candidates with a long-term vision for the county.”

Democrats Launch Campaign To Counter Alleged GOP Voter Suppression

As this blog posted on Monday, a new Brennan Center for Justice study (PDF) finds that a string of election laws passed in Texas and 12 other states -- and proposed in 21 more states -- since the 2008 presidential election could block up to five million voters from polling places in 2012.

ABC Poll: Obama Surges Ahead Of GOP In Trust On Jobs

Who could have imagined that by taking a spirited fight to the American people, as he did with his speeches in Dallas on Tuesday, the President could jump his approval rating? From ABC News:

Barack Obama has jumped to a 15-point lead over the Republicans in Congress in trust to handle job creation, a sign the beleaguered president’s $450 billion jobs package has hit its mark in public opinion. Fifty-two percent support the plan – and most say it just might work.

Overall approval of the U.S. Congress, meanwhile, has dropped to its lowest in polls back to the mid-1970s. And of the eight in 10 Americans who are dissatisfied with the way the country’s political system is working, more blame the Republicans in Washington than the president.

A month ago, Americans divided evenly, 40-40 percent, on whom they trusted more to handle job creation, Obama or the congressional Republicans. Now, after his jobs proposal and ongoing promotion of his plan, it’s 49-34 percent, Obama’s first significant advantage over the GOP on jobs in ABC/Post polling since early 2010.

The president’s also maintained a large advantage over the Republicans in Congress in being seen as more concerned with the interests of middle-class Americans, now 52-32 percent. And the GOP, by a vast 70-17 percent, is seen as being more concerned than Obama with protecting the interests of the wealthy, a sentiment on which Obama has capitalized with his proposed millionaires’ tax.

It's all not all good news, however. Obama's approval remains near is his all time lows in the poll. Still, this is the first sign that his numbers may be turning around. And it's because he's been consistent on his "progressive" message, fighting back against the Republican's conservative vision for America. And it's working.

What You Need To Know About The Top 1%

Income inequality in the U.S. is higher than at any other time since the Great Depression, and the U.S. is currently more unequal than countries like the Ivory Coast, Ethiopia, and Pakistan. Though Republicans dismiss concerns over the gap as “class warfare,” the ever-increasing level of disparity has tangible consequences, leading to poor work performance and a greater gap in life expectancy.

And now, according to a new Finance & Development study, income inequality also “kills economic growth.” Looking at how to sustain economic growth, the research found that “making an economy’s income distribution 10 percent more equitable prolongs its typical growth spell by 50 percent.”

Mother Jones’ Josh Harkinson noted that this lesson is nothing new, pointing to Depression-era Federal Reserve Chairman Marriner Eccles, who “blamed the Great Crash on the nation’s wealth gap.”

More on this topic in another Jobsanger post that's worth taking the time to read:

Are you one of those people who thinks "wealth redistribution" is a dirty term, and something we should never do in this country? If so, then you don't understand much about economics in the United States (and elsewhere). The truth is that wealth redistribution is going on all the time in every country, and that includes the United States.

The problem with the wealth redistribution that is happening now in the U.S. is that the wealth is being redistributed from the vast majority of Americans to the richest Americans -- especially the top 1%. This has created a wealth and income inequality not seen in this country since the 1920s -- before the Great Depression. And that vast equality was the major cause of both the Great Depression and our current Great Recession.

Here are some facts you need to know about the richest 1% of Americans:

Read the full Jobsanger post...

Outrageous

From the Texas panhandle Jobsanger blog

Political Strategy Notes For Oct 5th 2011

The Democratic Strategist

At HuffPo Pollster, Mark Blumenthal's post "Obama's Approval Rating Is Underwater, But Don't Try To Predict 2012 Yet," notes that, despite lowered approval ratings, President Obama lead GOP frontrunners Romney and Perry. Although approval ratings are slightly better predictors of election results than trial heats, "none of these polling numbers can predict the winner of the presidency a year or more before the election," as Blumenthal points out.

Obama Paid Another Visit To Texas Today

For the second time this year, President Barack Obama paid a visit to Texas. Obama attended a fundraiser in Dallas before heading to Mesquite for a 2:55 p.m. speech at Eastfield College. President Obama got a warm reception at his campaign stops at both the Sheraton Hotel in Dallas, Texas and again at Eastfield College in Mesquite, Texas.

-- Obama's concluding remarks at Eastfield College --
Dallas, the next election is 13 months away. I need you all to lift your voice -- not just here in Dallas, but anyone watching, anyone listening, everybody following online. I need you to call and tweet and fax and visit and email your congressperson...

At both stops the President pitched his American Jobs Act legislation to crowds of enthusiastic supporters.

Obama used unusually blunt language to rebut critics who say he's engaged in class warfare quoting Ronald Reagan's argument from 26 years ago that tax loopholes for the rich were unfair.

“Last time I checked, Republicans all thought Reagan made some sense,” he said at his Mesquite stop: Now, when I point this out, some of the Republicans in Congress say, ‘oh you’re engaging in class warfare.’ Let me tell you something. Years ago, one great American had a different view. I’m going to get the quote, just so you know I’m not making this up. A great American said that he thought it was ‘crazy’ that certain tax loopholes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying ten percent of his salary. Alright. You know who this guy was? It wasn’t a Democrat. It wasn’t some crazy socialist. It was Ronald Reagan. It was Ronald Reagan. Last time I checked, Republicans all thought Reagan made some sense. So next time you hear one of those Republicans in Congress accusing you of class warfare, you just tell them I’m with Ronald Reagan. I agree with Ronald Reagan that it’s crazy that a bus driver pays a higher tax rate than some millionaire because of a loophole in the tax code. And by the way, I don’t mind being called a warrior for the working class. You guys need someone working for you.

Organized Climate Change Denial To Block Green Programs,Top Scholars Conclude

Riley E. Dunlap, a sociology professor at Oklahoma State, and Aaron M. McCright of Michigan State call it the “climate change denial machine” in their book chapter, “Organized Climate Change Denial,” for the new Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society.

Key Components of Climate Change Denial Machine page 147 of Organized Climate Change Denial

In a note, the authors explain:

The actions of those who consistently seek to deny the seriousness of climate change make the terms “denial” and “denier” more accurate than “skepticism” and “skeptic,” particularly since all scientists tend to be skeptics.

Some try to downplay the central role of the denial machine in U.S. politics, but the fact is that what the deniers have accomplished in this country is unique in the world, going far beyond the spread of disinformation. They have allowed fossil fuel interests to “capture” almost an entire political party (see National Journal: “The GOP is stampeding toward an absolutist rejection of climate science that appears unmatched among major political parties around the globe, even conservative ones”).

Here is the conclusion of the study:

GOP Presidential Candidates Support Constitutional Amendments Outlawing Common Forms Of Birth Control

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) told Fox News host Mike Huckabee this weekend that he would support an amendment to his state’s constitution to define life as beginning at conception:

HUCKABEE: Would you have supported a constitutional amendment that would have established definition of life beginning of life at conception?

ROMNEY: Absolutely.

Constitutional amendment give legal rights to fertilized eggs go much farther than merely outlawing abortions. As ThinkProgress’ Marie Diamond noted, they could also have the effect of outlawing common forms of birth control, since contraceptives like the pill and IUDs can prevent fertilized egg from implanting in a woman’s uterus. Personhood amendments consider these types of birth control a form of abortion, and could potentially even treat them the same as homicide. If these amendments make terminating pregnancy a criminal act, they would also deter doctors from saving the lives of women with abnormal pregnancies because any doctor performing an abortion could risk prosecution.

Some of the Republican presidential field’s more radical candidates like Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), Herman Cain, and Newt Gingrich have already voiced support for giving legal rights to unborn children, but it’s surprising coming from Romney considering that he was staunchly pro-choice for much of his political career.

New Voting Laws Could Keep 5 Million Voters From The Polls In 2012

Strict voting laws in states across the country could affect up to five million voters from traditionally Democratic demographics in 2012, according to a new report (PDF) by the Brennan Center. That's a number larger than the margin of victory in two of the last three presidential elections.

In 2011, Texas and 17 other state legislatures across the country debated a requirement to have voters show one of a very limited selection of government issued photo identification to polling place officials to qualify to vote. The motivation for this legislative discussion is the widely distributed conservative allegation that Democratic voters commonly commit in-person voting impersonation fraud to qualify to vote.

Van Jones Calls For Progressive Push Back Against Tea Party

Van Jones, president of the progressive organization Rebuild the Dream, joins The Last Word to discuss what Washington should be doing about jobs. Jones calls the US' deficit problem "phony" and made up.

Van Jones

"Hold on to your hats, we're going to have an October offensive to take back the American dream and rescue America's middle class," Jones told MSNBC's "The Last Word."

Jones is talking about the Take Back the American Dream conference, organized by the Campaign for America's Future with support from Rebuild the Dream, will be happening on October 3 - 5 in Washington, DC. Find out more and register online.

Jones was President Obama's "green jobs czar" until he resigned in fall of 2009.

Transcript below:

CNN Poll: Tea Party Unfavorability Up 27 Points Since January 2010

The Tea Party movement has had some PR problems since the almost-default of the summertime debt fight.

TPM has reported on the increasingly negative view of the conservative movement Americans have taken, and on Tuesday there was more bad news: CNN polling, which has tracked the Tea Party’s popularity since January 2010, shows that a majority of Americans now views it unfavorably.

The poll shows that only 28 percent of Americans do view the Tea Party favorably, versus a full 53 percent who don’t. The poll shows that less than twenty percent don’t have an opinion of Tea Partiers, which is the lowest yet — an issue on polling the movement has been that many Americans simply didn’t know enough about it. That has clearly changed since the beginning of last year.

In January 2010, the Tea Party was actually viewed favorabilty by a plurality in the CNN poll, with 33 having a positive view against 26 percent. That unfavorable number continued to grow through out the midterm elections of 2010 (in which a number Tea Party endorsed candidates won) and started to really climb during the period which the Tea Party contingent in Congress has had an effect on policy. Throughout 2011 their unfavorability has been in the high forties and now the fifties.

CNN is not the only organization to find that the Tea Party brand is suffering. A recent AP poll found a similar trend, although the CNN survey showed unfavorability within the same time period to be higher.

The news comes as GOP presidential candidates are trying to vie for the conservative base of the Republican Party, which contains the Tea Party advocates, while still maintaing their viability within a general election. But the more unpopular the Tea Party becomes, the larger the gulf between the primary audience and the general election electorate becomes.

The Tea Party, Right-Wing Media and the Dog That Didn't Bark