Saturday, November 16, 2024

The future of the Democratic Party could be written in upcoming gubernatorial races

August 6, 2017 by  
Filed under Lingerie Events

Comments Off

When West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice announced that he was leaving the Democratic Party and returning to the Republican Party, the move highlighted once again the dominance of the GOP at the state level — and signaled to beleaguered Democrats the importance that the 2018 gubernatorial elections could play in starting a comeback.

With Justice’s switch, announced Thursday at a rally with President Trump, Republicans now hold 34 of the 50 governorships, tying the record for the most ever for the GOP. Democrats, who at the beginning of the Obama presidency held 28 governorships, have seen their ranks dwindle to just 15. At some point over the past decade, according to the Republican Governors Association, there has been a Republican governor in 46 of the 50 states.

Republican control of the states is even more lopsided when the partisan balance of state legislatures is included in the statistics. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, Republicans now hold the governor’s office and control of the legislature in 25 states. Democrats enjoy total control in just six, with 18 states having split control. (Nebraska has a Republican governor and a unicameral, nonpartisan legislature.) Eight years ago, Democrats held the upper hand, controlling 17 states to nine for the Republicans.

For Democrats, the rapid loss of power in the states is both cause for alarm and some reason for hope. Republicans posted enormous gains in the states and in Congress in the midterm elections of 2010 and 2014. If it happened for the GOP, Democrats ask, why couldn’t it happen for them?

Midterm elections for a new president generally result in losses, sometimes substantial losses, and Trump currently suffers from the lowest approval ratings of any new president at this point in a first term. That’s compounded by the fact that the president and congressional Republicans have so far failed to enact a health-care bill, which could dampen enthusiasm among many GOP voters.

GOP strategists believe they must prepare for a political climate like that of 2006, when Republicans lost the House and surrendered their majority among governors.

A year from now, the atmosphere might look better, if the economy continues to expand and Congress enacts major legislation. If not, look for Republican gubernatorial candidates to distance themselves from Washington.

Democrats plan to make an issue of Trump in the state races. They also hope to see more intraparty turmoil over allegiance to the president in Republican gubernatorial primaries. That was a feature of the Virginia GOP primary earlier this year.

Even if there are favorable conditions for the Democrats, it is difficult to overstate the significance of these 2018 contests for their longer-term implications for the party. Winning more governorships offers at least two potential dividends. First, it could bring new faces to a party desperately in need of a reinvigoration through fresh, younger talent. Second, it could give Democrats more power in the redistricting battles that will take place after the 2020 Census and that will affect the shape of the House for a decade.

“The future of the Democratic Party really is at stake in these gubernatorial elections,” said Elisabeth Pearson, executive director of the Democratic Governors Association.

Over the next 15 months, there will be 38 gubernatorial races, starting this November with contests in Virginia and New Jersey. Democrats are heavily favored to pick up New Jersey, where current Gov. Chris Christie (R) has an approval rating in the teens. In Virginia, currently in Democratic hands under Gov. Terry McAuliffe, the race will be closer, but Democrats rate a narrow advantage.

The real test will come in November 2018, with the Republicans having to defend 26 states to just nine for the Democrats. Of those 26 Republican-held seats, about half will feature incumbents running (although several were appointed since 2014 and will be running on their own for the first time) while the remainder will be open seats and therefore potentially more attractive targets.

But here’s just one example of the challenge for Democrats. Republicans currently hold the governorships in Maryland, Massachusetts and Vermont, all deep-blue states presidentially. Yet the incumbents — Larry Hogan in Maryland, Charlie Baker in Massachusetts and Phil Scott in Vermont — are among the most popular governors in the nation. In a wave election, one or more could be vulnerable, but Democrats can’t count on easy pickups in states where their presidential candidates won by big margins last year.

Their best hopes in blue states will be in Maine, where outgoing Republican Gov. Paul LePage has been a source of constant controversy, and in Illinois, where Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner, a businessman who had never held office until he was elected four years ago, has been in a multiyear war with Democrats in the legislature. Meanwhile, Democrats could find themselves on the defensive in at least one other blue state, Connecticut.

Nor can Democrats look to many deep-red states for easy pickups. The nonpartisan Cook Political Report list of solid or likely Republican gubernatorial seats includes a dozen or so of these red states. Democratic strategists say they will not write off those states, arguing that they are determined to go after seats in all areas of the country.

As is so often the case in politics, the Midwest looms large in the gubernatorial elections. To mount a serious comeback, Democrats will need to show strength in the region that gave Trump the presidency over Hillary Clinton. In Wisconsin, Gov. Scott Walker (R) will be trying for a third term. Since winning the office in 2010, he has survived a recall election and a reelection campaign. Walker remains a polarizing figure, but the Democratic bench is not strong there.

Three Midwestern states will have open races: Michigan and Ohio, currently held by Republicans, and Minnesota, now in Democratic hands. Ohio went strongly for Trump, and Democrats have struggled in most statewide races in recent elections. Michigan narrowly backed Trump and probably will see a fierce battle for the governorship. Minnesota backed Clinton by a surprising small margin, and the gubernatorial race next year will be crowded and competitive. In Pennsylvania, incumbent Gov. Tom Wolf is seen by Republicans as vulnerable, and Democrats recognize he will have a serious challenge.

Other traditional presidential battlegrounds present opportunities for the Democrats, including Florida, New Mexico and Nevada, where Republican governors Rick Scott, Susana Martinez and Brian Sandoval are term-limited. Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) also is term-limited, giving Republicans an opportunity in a purple state.

The overlay of the coming redistricting battles adds an extra element of importance to 2017 and 2018 gubernatorial races. In 28 of the 38 states with elections this year or next, the governor has the power to veto a redistricting map produced by the state legislature. For Democrats, that provides the easiest route to check the power of Republican-held legislatures to draw maps favorable to their party — and vice versa.

Outside money will probably be pouring into many of these contests. Democrats have set up an operation aimed specifically at winning back House seats through more balanced congressional district lines, and that has heightened attention on the gubernatorial races. “Normally, our people are focused on federal races,” Pearson said. “This year, it feels like the difference between night and day.”

Next year’s congressional elections will draw outsized attention for the possibility of Democrats regaining control of the House and putting a huge roadblock in front of Trump and the GOP. But no one should lose sight of the longer-term importance of the gubernatorial races and what they will say about the rebuilding efforts of the Democratic Party.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

United Nations bans key North Korea exports over missile tests

August 6, 2017 by  
Filed under Lingerie Events

Comments Off

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) – The United Nations Security Council unanimously imposed new sanctions on North Korea on Saturday that could slash by a third the Asian state’s $3 billion annual export revenue over its two intercontinental ballistic missile tests in July.

The U.S.-drafted resolution bans North Korean exports of coal, iron, iron ore, lead, lead ore and seafood. It also prohibits countries from increasing the current numbers of North Korean laborers working abroad, bans new joint ventures with North Korea and any new investment in current joint ventures.

“We should not fool ourselves into thinking we have solved the problem. Not even close. The North Korean threat has not left us, it is rapidly growing more dangerous,” U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley told the council.

“Further action is required. The United States is taking and will continue to take prudent defensive measures to protect ourselves and our allies,” she said. Washington would continue annual joint military exercises with South Korea, Haley said.

North Korea has accused the United States and South Korea of escalating tensions by conducting military drills.

China and Russia slammed U.S. deployment of the THAAD anti-missile defense system in South Korea. China’s U.N. Ambassador Liu Jieyi called for a halt to the deployment and for any equipment in place to be dismantled.

Liu also urged North Korea to “cease taking actions that might further escalate tensions.”

U.S. President Donald Trump hailed the vote in a Twitter message on Saturday evening.

“The United Nations Security Council just voted 15-0 to sanction North Korea. China and Russia voted with us. Very big financial impact!” Trump wrote.

Trump “appreciates China’s and Russia’s cooperation in securing passage” of the resolution, the White House said in a later statement. The U.S. president “will continue to work with allies and partners to increase diplomatic and economic pressure on North Korea to ends its threatening and destabilizing behavior,” it said.

  • U.S., South Korea foreign ministers say U.N. sanctions on North Korea ‘good outcome’

U.S. PRESSURE ON CHINA

Russia’s U.N. Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said he hoped recent remarks by U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson “were sincere – that the U.S. is not seeking to dismantle the existing situation or to forcibly unite the peninsula or to militarily intervene in the country.”

While the Security Council has been divided on how to deal with other international crises like Syria, the 15-member body has remained relatively united on North Korea. Still, negotiating new measures typically takes months, not weeks.

North Korea has been under U.N. sanctions since 2006 over its ballistic missile and nuclear programs. The new measures came in response to five nuclear weapons tests and four long-range missile launches.

The United States negotiated with China for a month on the resolution, then expanded negotiations to the full council on Friday.

Washington, frustrated that China has not done more to rein in North Korea, has threatened to exert trade pressure on Beijing and impose sanctions on Chinese firms doing business with Pyongyang.

“We had tough negotiations this week,” Haley told reporters. “I think that the Chinese realized that the United States was going to push, but they responded and we appreciate how they cooperated with us during these negotiations.”

Liu, asked about U.S. negotiating pressure, said China has been consistent on trying to achieve denuclearization, peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and “to re-launch negotiations to achieve this end.”

He told reporters China was “opposed to any unilateral sanctions outside the agreed framework set by the U.N. Security Council resolutions.”

RUSSIA/U.S. COOPERATION

It had been unclear whether strained U.S.-Russia relations would hamper negotiations on North Korean sanctions. On Wednesday, Washington imposed unilateral sanctions on Moscow to punish Russia over accusations of interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea.

“We are not hostages to our relations when we have to work together on issues which are far more important,” Russia’s Nebenzia told Reuters.

The new U.N. resolution adds nine individuals and four entities to the U.N. blacklist, including North Korea’s primary foreign exchange bank, subjecting them to a global asset freeze and travel ban.

“I would think China and Russia signed on the sanctions hoping that they would force North Korea back to the negotiating table,” said Thomas Byrne, president of the New York-based Korea Society. “However, North Korea will try to evade the new sanctions.”

The new resolution completely bans North Korean exports of coal. In November, the Security Council capped the North’s coal exports at $400 million annually. China, its largest buyer, halted imports in February.

A U.N. diplomat said North Korea had been expected to earn an estimated $251 million from iron and iron ore in 2017, $113 million from lead and lead ore, and $295 million from seafood. The diplomat said it was difficult to estimate how much North Korea was earning from sending workers abroad.

A United Nations human rights investigator said in 2015 that North Korea had forced more than 50,000 people to work abroad, mainly in Russia and China, earning between $1.2 billion and $2.3 billion a year for the government.

Joseph DeThomas, a former State Department official who worked as an adviser on Iran sanctions and on previous rounds of North Korea sanctions, said freezing foreign labor would be difficult to enforce.

“Overall I doubt that $1 billion number. I doubt it will hit that hard in terms of economic damage,” he said. “You cannot expect North Korea to buckle for anything less than the sanctions imposed on Iraq in 1990.”

These sanctions, he said, remain “a very long way” from there.

Reporting by Michelle Nichols,; addtional reporting by David Brunnstrom and Valerie Volcovici; Editing by David Gregorio and Paul Tait

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS