If a moment comes in which we stop praising our Forefathers for their
brilliance and farsightedness, we might think about that world of the
1700S and the question of who should, and who should not be allowed to
vote. The Pillars of Colonial America would find today's voter
eligibility strange indeed. It was commonly accepted that Landowners
would guide the young nation best because they had the most at stake.
Women and Negroes would most likely vote as they were told to vote by
their husbands and Masters, thus giving certain States an advantage
over others. Indians were not considered Americans, and thus they
could not vote, even if the idea occurred to anyone.
The end result was the establishment of a Protected Class of People.
From the very beginning, this new free land was busy building and
protecting its
aristocracy. Down through the centuries, these, "Special People",
have maintained control over the nation. They set our goals and sent
our youth out to secure it for them. More land lay to the West, and
the battle was on as to who would control it. But the battle was
between factions within the Aristocracy not the members of the working
class. It's a hard pill to swallow, saying that there is a Class of
people within America, who see themselves as superior and privileged.
The Aristocracy did not willingly allow women and non-whites the vote.
But during troubled times when the members of the Aristocracy jockeyed
for position, some progressive legislation was passed. Today the
battle is over who can be removed from the lists of registered voters.
While there is pressure from grass root organizations calling for less
restrictive requirements, the Privileged People are totally opposed.
Carl Jarvis
On 11/15, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Froomkin writes: "So, while the Kochs and the liberal groups used similar
language in their critique of the criminal justice system, when it came
down
to actual legislation, the Kochs were focused on reducing criminal
prosecutions of corporations, not people."
Charles G. Koch. (photo: Mike Burley/AP)
Koch "Alliance" on Criminal Justice Reform Exposed as Trojan Horse
By Dan Froomkin, The Intercept
29 November 15
The New York Times on Wednesday reported the shocking news that the "rare
coalition" on criminal justice reform that included liberal groups and the
right-wing billionaire Koch brothers is falling apart.
But as The Intercept's Lee Fang wrote earlier this month, the ostensible
alliance over liberalization of America's criminal justice laws was based
on
a misunderstanding of the Koch brothers' fundamental political goal.
That goal is, quite consistently, to advance their own corporate interests.
So, while the Kochs and the liberal groups used similar language in their
critique of the criminal justice system, when it came down to actual
legislation, the Kochs were focused on reducing criminal prosecutions of
corporations, not people.
Koch and the House Republicans turned out to be pushing a bill that critics
describe as a "Get Out of Jail Free" card for white-collar criminals.
Members of Washington's elite media crave stories about bipartisanship, so
groups like the pro-Clinton Center for American Progress garnered positive
media attention for finding common ground with the Kochs earlier this year.
Now, CAP president Neera Tanden is issuing statements that "the bill is not
aimed at addressing the aspects of the criminal justice system that are the
drivers of mass incarceration and inequality and should not be part of any
genuine discussion of criminal justice reform." To the contrary, she says:
"The bill would make it much more difficult to enforce bedrock regulatory
safeguards - such as environmental, health, and consumer safety protections
- and leave communities of color disproportionately vulnerable to
unscrupulous, fraudulent, and predatory business practices that exacerbate
existing inequality in our communities."
There are some conservatives truly devoted to criminal justice reform - and
there's even a truly united left-right coalition on some specific criminal
justice issues, like prison rape.
But, as Fang wrote, even while the Kochs were talking criminal justice
reform, their money was notably continuing to finance election-year efforts
that promote tough-on-crime politics.
Of the 38 federal lobbyists employed by Koch, one is registered to work on
criminal justice issues; the rest work on projects more important to Koch
Industries.
And if that wasn't clear enough, Fang described how Koch's interest in
criminal justice reform was sparked not by the plight of overcrowded
prisons
or racial disparities in law enforcement, but by federal and state probes
of
the company's own environmental crimes.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not
valid.
Charles G. Koch. (photo: Mike Burley/AP)
https://theintercept.com/2015/11/25/koch-alliance-on-criminal-justice-reform
-exposed-as-trojan-horse/https://theintercept.com/2015/11/25/koch-alliance-o
n-criminal-justice-reform-exposed-as-trojan-horse/
Koch "Alliance" on Criminal Justice Reform Exposed as Trojan Horse
By Dan Froomkin, The Intercept
29 November 15
he New York Times on Wednesday reported the shocking news that the "rare
coalition" on criminal justice reform that included liberal groups and the
right-wing billionaire Koch brothers is falling apart.
But as The Intercept's Lee Fang wrote earlier this month, the ostensible
alliance over liberalization of America's criminal justice laws was based
on
a misunderstanding of the Koch brothers' fundamental political goal.
That goal is, quite consistently, to advance their own corporate interests.
So, while the Kochs and the liberal groups used similar language in their
critique of the criminal justice system, when it came down to actual
legislation, the Kochs were focused on reducing criminal prosecutions of
corporations, not people.
Koch and the House Republicans turned out to be pushing a bill that critics
describe as a "Get Out of Jail Free" card for white-collar criminals.
Members of Washington's elite media crave stories about bipartisanship, so
groups like the pro-Clinton Center for American Progress garnered positive
media attention for finding common ground with the Kochs earlier this year.
Now, CAP president Neera Tanden is issuing statements that "the bill is not
aimed at addressing the aspects of the criminal justice system that are the
drivers of mass incarceration and inequality and should not be part of any
genuine discussion of criminal justice reform." To the contrary, she says:
"The bill would make it much more difficult to enforce bedrock regulatory
safeguards - such as environmental, health, and consumer safety protections
- and leave communities of color disproportionately vulnerable to
unscrupulous, fraudulent, and predatory business practices that exacerbate
existing inequality in our communities."
There are some conservatives truly devoted to criminal justice reform - and
there's even a truly united left-right coalition on some specific criminal
justice issues, like prison rape.
But, as Fang wrote, even while the Kochs were talking criminal justice
reform, their money was notably continuing to finance election-year efforts
that promote tough-on-crime politics.
Of the 38 federal lobbyists employed by Koch, one is registered to work on
criminal justice issues; the rest work on projects more important to Koch
Industries.
And if that wasn't clear enough, Fang described how Koch's interest in
criminal justice reform was sparked not by the plight of overcrowded
prisons
or racial disparities in law enforcement, but by federal and state probes
of
the company's own environmental crimes.
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
