Today on The BradCast, important, helpful advice for progressives in California’s Gubernatorial recall, and we win a first court victory against Georgia’s new anti-voting and anti-press freedoms law! [Audio link to full show is posted below this summary.]
But first, Desi Doyen joins us for the latest on the record-smashing deluges in both Tennessee, where at least 22 are dead following 17 inches of rain in less than 24 hours, an all-time record and triple what had been forecast — and on the Northeastern Seaboard where Hurricane (turned Tropical Storm, Turned Tropical Depression) Henri is wreaking absolute havoc. All just the latest examples of our worsening climate change emergency, as Desi explains.
Next, we had a court victory in Georgia on Friday! The first one, in fact, to knock down a provision of the state Republicans’ abhorrent anti-voting bill, SB 202. And, I’m proud to say, it happens to be one of the provisions on which I am the named plaintiff representing the media. The lawsuit, filed by the Coalition for Good Governance (CGG), is one of eight suits currently challenging various provisions of the law. CGG’s suit, among other things, challenges a number of anti-First Amendment press freedoms jammed into the statute, along with the voter suppression stuff and the provisions which allow the state to take over county boards of elections and subvert election results.
The specific provision struck down by the federal court [PDF] on Friday, criminalized all photography of voter ballots by the public and/or media. Given the state’s new, huge touchscreen voting systems, it’s now almost impossible to not see a voter’s ballot when media or the public attempt to observe voting inside of Peach State precincts. Unfortunately, in addition to striking that one down, the judge allowed several other provisions in this early challenge to stand, though CGG Director (and frequent BradCast guest) Marilyn Marks told me over the weekend there will be much more to come in this case, as they are deciding whether to pursue reconsideration and/or appeal of several parts of the judge’s early ruling. While a small victory, for now, it also establishes that the Coalition has standing to sue in this case and that, too, is encouraging good news.
Next, it’s on to the ongoing, idiotic — but deadly serious — California Gubernatorial recall, in which Republicans, unable to win regular elections, are hoping to unseat popular progressive Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is otherwise up for reelection next year anyway. Vote-by-Mail ballots have been sent to all registered state voters (at the cost of hundreds of millions of dollars, thanks to those “conservative” Republicans), but, curiously, while Newsom and the Democrats are calling on voters to vote NO on the ballot’s first question (“Should Newsom be recall and removed from office?”), they are calling on voters to leave the second question (“Who should replace him, if he loses on Question 1?”) completely empty! “Vote No and go!,” Newsom and state Dems have recommended.
As our guest today, ERNEST A. CANNING, a longtime progressive Democrat, both writes at The BRAD BLOG and explains on today’s show, that strategy may be extraordinarily ill-considered and could backfire on Dems. Instead, after culling through the records (or lack thereof) of every non-Republican, non-Libertarian candidate on question two of the recall ballot (there are 46 candidates in total), Canning, in his “One Progressive’s Guide to the CA Recall,” explains why he believes the best strategy for progressives is to vote for the Green Party’s Dan Kapelovitz on question two.
Both of the leading party candidates (far-right talk radio host Larry Elder for the Republicans and 29-year old real estate mogul and YouTube sensation Kevin Paffrath for the Dems), among other things, oppose Newsom’s common-sense, life-saving mask and vaccine mandates and vow to lift them if elected.
Kapelovitz, on the other hand, a criminal defense attorney, both supports the Governor’s science-based mandates that have been so successful in the state, and opposes the recall of Newsom itself on question one. He says he’s running to stave off a worst-case scenario, according to Canning, should the currently “dead heat” first question result in the unthinkable removal of the Governor.
We also discuss the questionable Constitutionality of CA’s more than 100-year old recall process (built into the state constitution by an anti-corporate Republican-turned-Progressive Party Governor in 1911) which could allow a new Governor to be elected to the nation’s most populous state with far fewer votes than the current Governor actually receives to stay in office on the very same ballot. And, there’s also the troubling matter that this election could have serious national ramifications. California’s 88-year old U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein may need to be replaced at some point before her current term ends in 2024. If a Republican, like Elder, becomes Governor and appoints a fellow Republican to her seat, control of the U.S. Senate would immediately revert to Mitch McConnell and the GOP.
So, yes, this CA Recall, as dumb as it is, matters. And it’s important for progressive voters to pay attention, fill out a hand-marked paper ballot, and hopefully deliver it in person to a polling location or a drop-box by September 14th.
Finally, speaking of rightwing talk radio hosts, we’ve been reporting on a number of them who used our public airwaves to spread disinformation about COVID deniers and its vaccines, before finding themselves hospitalized or killed by the disease in recent weeks. One of them we’ve covered since his hospitalization in mid-July is Nashville’s popular, nationally-syndicated Phil Valentine. After spending months mocking the seriousness of the virus and making fun of the life-saving vaccines, Valentine was announced dead over the weekend, after weeks on a ventilator, on what was reportedly his 62nd birthday…
(Snail mail support to “Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028” always welcome too!)
|
Does anyone around here know the source of the rumor a right-wing friend is spouting that the mail-in ballot envelopes in California have a window on them that reveals “whether the ballots inside has a ‘yes’ vote on it”? He cites no source, not even Breitbart or Tuckums. The fact that it is utterly ridiculous does not faze him.
Hey, CK!
The source of the false rumor was a viral video on social media.
The California Sec. of State’s office says this:
“The vote-by-mail envelope being mailed to all Californians includes punched holes that will help guide visually impaired voters where the signature is needed.”
The L.A. County Registrar posted this statement: “This has been part of the envelope design for years. The holes serve both an accessibility purpose and a quality assurance purpose after the fact to validate no voted ballots are left unprocessed; an established, recommended practice. The commonly used envelope design does not interfere with postal or sorting equipment.”
Weird how that’s been part of the envelope design for years, yet Republicans and rightwing media failed to notice until now. Hope the info helps…
Bless you. I found a story with pictures of ballot return envelopes and pointed out that you’d have to fold the ballot to put it in the envelope. And, because the return address is printed on the envelope, I could not come up with a mechanism to force voters to fold the ballot so that the vote would be in the exact position needed for it to line up with the window and then force them to insert the ballot correctly to line it up. This is additional ammunition. He’s been conspicuously silent on the picture of the envelopes, and I don’t imagine this additional information will make him more talkative, but I’ll enjoy it.
Cambridge @1 and 3 and Desi @2. It’s important to note that the envelopes in question are the ones that are mailed to the voters; not the return envelope. The window on the envelopes sent to voters contains a bar code that aids in the avoidance of mailing more than one ballot to the same voter. They do not reflect how someone subsequently voted.
While the covering of the window on the envelope in which I received my ballot was partially torn, that in no way suggests some deep conspiracy. All ballot envelopes that the State sends out through the mails pass through high-speed flat-mail sorters at USPS.
Finally, my completed ballot was placed inside a sealed return envelope, and I personally deposited my mail-in ballot in an official, secure drop box. There would be no possible way for CA election officials to KNOW how I voted before I placed my ballot inside the return envelope.
Just another utter nonsense right wing conspiracy theory.
CK, Desi and Ernie –
Not sure what, at least Desi and Ernie are going by, but I just checked my LA County ballot and envelope and, indeed, the viral video in question appears to be accurate.
If my ballot is folded, as per the original folds and placed into the return envelope with the Question 1 part of the ballot facing the direction of the holes in the envelope (that are said to be there to help blind voters know where to sign, and to help election officials know if a ballot has been removed from the envelope), it can show a YES vote on Q1, if the ballot is all the way on one end of the envelope.
Easy cure is to assure that the Q1 part of the ballot is facing the other way when it’s placed into the envelope. But most folks, of course, won’t know to do that.
Contrary to Desi’s statement above, the YES vote CAN be seen (presuming the ballot is placed in that certain way.) Contrary to Ernie’s statement, the envelope in question IS the return envelope, not the one that is sent to voters.
Now the ballot/envelope designs all may be different in each county. But, in LA County, at least, I can confirm that the ballot can be put into the return envelope in a way in which someone could be able to tell if the voter voted YES on Q1.