Daily Presidential Update
National Tracking Polls via Real Clear Politics:
Swing state polls from the last two days:
Tuesday, Oct. 30:
Florida (SurveyUSA) – Romney 47, Obama 47
Monday, Oct. 29:
Ohio (Rasmussen) – Romney 50, Obama 48
Florida (CNN/Opinion Research) – Romney 50, Obama 49
Colorado (ARG) – Romney 48, Obama 47
North Carolina (Elon University) – Romney 45, Obama 45
Alabama Politics
AL.COM: AEA plays bigger role in politics than teachers unions in most other states, study finds
Alabama’s teachers union plays a larger role in state politics than its counterparts in nearly every other state, according to a new study the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute released today.
The Alabama Education Association’s contributions to political candidates and issues was greater than any other source, leading Alabama to tie with Hawaii and South Dakota for having the most involved teachers unions in the study.
“There are some eye-popping numbers coming out of Alabama,” said Amber Winkler, vice president for research for the Fordham Institute, which has butted heads with teachers unions, politically, in the past.
“They are able to exert and influence power in ways that are unseen in other states,” Winkler said.
Henry Mabry, AEA’s executive secretary, said he agrees with the study’s finding that the organization is involved in politics. But he said he’s not certain how that compares to other states.
“Because of the political attacks against public education, we have no choice,” Mabry said. “We have no choice but to be involved and to work for change. It’s a matter of survival.”
Alabama’s numbers in the study more closely resemble states known for having strong unions, such as Ohio and Michigan, than states like itself that allow, but do not require collective bargaining.
AL.COM: A score of 61 gets a B? Yes, and Gov. Robert Bentley gets both from D.C. think tank
If you have kids in school or remember your own school days, you probably never received a score of 61 on a test or paper and found the letter grade of “B” next to it.
But, in the world of Washington D.C. think tanks and complicated fiscal policies of the various states, Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley has posted just such a score.
The score and grade were given by the CATO Institute, a libertarian think tank headquartered in Washington, D.C. CATO is known for studying policy questions from budget issues to social security, monetary policy, military spending, and government regulation, among many others.
MONTGOMERY ADVERTISER: Alabama Voices: Protect use of secret ballots
If Alabama wants to stay competitive when it comes to creating jobs and attracting new businesses to the state, we need to vote yes on Amendment 7.
Amendment 7 is a proposed state constitutional amendment defending people’s right to cast secret ballots when voting on whether to organize their workplace or elect someone to public office — or even approve a ballot measure like Amendment 7.
The Legislature overwhelmingly approved Amendment 7 a year ago because the unions are campaigning to replace secret ballots with a process called “card check.”
Today, federal law requires employees to cast secret ballots on the question of whether to organize their workplace. The unions don’t like that. Union bosses want to know how each and every worker votes.
The unions want the option of bypassing secret ballots to organize a workplace simply by persuading a majority of workers to sign union authorization cards. Workers would be asked to sign cards in the presence of union bosses and co-workers who support the union. Workers could be approached in the parking lot or even at home.
The pressure for them to sign the union cards would be tremendous. It would be like going to the polls on Election Day and allowing the candidates to look over your shoulder as you vote. It would be incredibly unfair and intimidating.
It wouldn’t matter that Alabama is a right-to-work state. Once a majority of workers sign cards, the workplace would be unionized.
National & International Politics
BREITBART: “Sandy Stole the Election”: Left, Media Prepare to Delegitimie Romney Victory
In 2000, it was hanging chads and the Supreme Court. In 2004, it was electronic voting machines. Now, the left and the mainstream media are busily spinning another narrative to get them through the years ahead in the event that Mitt Romney unseats President Barack Obama next week: Superstorm Sandy stole the election.
Both Politico and CNN are wondering openly whether the storm, which made landfall Monday in New Jersey as a hurricane, could or should force the postponement of the election. The dramatic flooding in coastal areas from the mid-Atlantic to New England, and the unseasonally early snowfall in the Appalachians, are causing transportation problems today that could persist for several days in some areas, especially in New York City.
That could make it more difficult for some voters to get to the polls–but would have almost no impact on the election, as much of the storm’s worst damage was done in states that are a virtual lock for Obama in November. More damage could yet affect other areas in the coming days, as swollen rivers flood and rain and wind move west through Pennsylvania and Ohio. Still, barring further major disaster, voting could likely proceed as planned almost everywhere, and provision is likely possible even for voters in flooded districts.
WEEKLY STANDARD: Botching the Debates. How Biden and Obama blew it.
Joe Biden was forewarned. When he did a walk-through at the site of his debate with Paul Ryan, he asked if there might be double screens when the debate was broadcast. Yes, indeed, he was told, though it would be up to each TV network and cable channel whether to show both candidates at once on a split screen.
Biden may have ignored how he might appear on one screen while Ryan was speaking on the other. Or he may have purposely run the gamut of disdain from mockery to disgust as he listened to Ryan. Either way, he played the fool—to the detriment of the Obama campaign.
That the debates have dominated the presidential race as never before is indisputable. And what’s most striking about them is how well Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan performed and how thoroughly President Obama and Vice President Biden misunderstood what was required to appeal to the broad audience of voters.
Without the debates, Romney would be on his way to losing the election. With them—and especially the first and third presidential debates—he now has a 50-50 or better chance of winning the presidency.
MALKIN: NYT: Big storm requires big government
Just a couple of days ago, the New York Times endorsed Barack Obama for re-election. Hurricane Sandy has given the Times a rare opportunity for a follow-up endorsement while pointing out how dangerous Romney/Ryan could be at times like these. Here’s the title of yesterday’s NYT editorial:
“A Big Storm Requires Big Government”
Forget that we don’t even know the extent of the loss and damage from this storm yet, or what the federal government’s role will end up being or even how effective (or not) it will prove to be — bring on more big government.
But big government can also be a huge hindrance to local efforts. Don’t take my word for it though, ask President Obama, who, during hurricane prep, offered to briefly loan local officials the key to temporarily unlock the rules & regs handcuffs that inherently accompany big-government and bloated federal bureaucracy:
“My message to the governors as well as to the mayors is anything they need, we will be there, and we will cut through red tape,” Mr. Obama said. “We are not going to get bogged down with a lot of rules.”
There will be plenty of time to get back to being bogged down by a lot of rules and red tape later. More rules and red tape if the New York Times gets its way — and those usually aren’t assets when it comes to emergency response.
One of the many problems with the “big government” that the Times has endorsed is that it doesn’t just sit in the bullpen waiting to be called in when a “big storm” hits. It needs things to do in the meantime — lots of things. Big government likes to stay occupied.
**Written by Doug Powers
The point is, Alabama’s history of trying to nullify Federal laws is not exactly a positive thing. I fail to see why we should adopt this or Amendment 6 when they cannot be implemented. Alabama state government has already alienated a large chunk of our state by establishing an all white commission on “state’s rights”. It seems foolish to aggravate the concerns of our African-American fellow citizens about the willingness of state government to address their concerns by reviving discredited tactics used by the segregationists in the 1950′s and 1960′s when it will not accomplish anything substantive.
I agree with you to a point. I do not see this as a civil rights issue though, which, to me anyway, is what the ‘states rights’ issue was all about. It got hijacked by racist who were looking for anything to impede the progress of equal rights. But, I think that states do have an interest in keeping the feds in check. Alabama is a Right to Work state and in my view, this half-measure, is one of the few ways the state can help protect itself from the influence, whether good or bad, of Unions in politics. To be clear, I am not saying that Unions should stay out of politics. I am saying that historically elections, even before the deep pockets of the current political process (Soros, Koch, Adelson, etc.) arrived, the Unions have had huge war chests and voter blocs with which to work. Now I grant Unions are not what they used to be. One need only look at national membership rosters to see that. But this isssue was brought forward by the Unions even though a majority of Union members wanted to keep secret ballot (2004 survey) and this Amendment is a direct response to that action.
Amendment 7 is not worth the paper it is printed on. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that federal law trumps state law. If the Federal government decides to expand the use of card check, there is nothing that Alabama can do about it.
Beau, you miss the point. With multiple states passing this law, Congress will never bring card-check back up again. They tried and failed. The feds do not want to start a legal fight between the states and themselves on an issue that has so little support. The Dems had two years with complete control and failed to act. The president even came out in favor of card-check and was unable to push it through, basically throwing the Unions under the bus after promising to fight for Union issues when running for office, also abandoning them in the Wisconsin recall election fight. With Union friends like that, who needs enemies?
Hopefully Amendment 7 will pass easily. I believe Unions can be a positive in a workplace but not if it becomes seen as an intimidating force there. Management or workforce, if a worker feels like he is being stalked all the time for support by either one, why would good people work there? Enforce the laws on the books with regards to voting for Union representation and that is enough. The Unions started the card-check in reaction to plummeting Union membership. Give workers a better reason to be in a Union and you will not need card-check.
Bentley deserves a 61…with the correct letter beside it. When you’re ONLY economic development strategy is throw money at any company who’ll take it, you deserve an F.
FINALLY something I can agree with