Connect with us

Politics

Nixon backing group mulling possible third party presidential ticket

Published

on

[ad_1]


Former Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon was having a busy political retirement as a partner with the Dowd Bennett law firm — and hiking trails around the world — when he chose to immerse himself in the hornet’s nest that is presidential politics by becoming a key figure in a national group mulling whether to field a third-party presidential ticket.“It deeply, deeply troubled me that we were in a situation where you had folks working against the public’s ability to get things on the ballot,” Nixon said. “That has been vital. It’s a pillar of democracy.”

Former Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon explains why he’s joining No Labels

Nixon is pushing back against primarily Democratic efforts to kick a third party presidential ticket off of 2024 ballots.

Nixon, who is not being paid for his role with the group called No Labels, will help push back against primarily Democratic efforts to prevent a “unity presidential ticket” from making the ballot in certain states. While No Labels hasn’t committed to actually fielding a bipartisan presidential ticket, the prospect of a third candidate in next year’s election is raising alarms among some Democrats.One of the biggest detractors of No Labels is also a highly visible Missouri political figure: former U.S. House Majority Leader and Democratic presidential candidate Richard Gephardt. Gephardt is part of a group known as Citizens to Save Our Republic that is fighting No Labels’ efforts. The group argues that propelling a third-party candidacy in a race that includes President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump could backfire.“Our view is that in these difficult times, No Labels should not be doing this,” Gephardt said.

Carolina Hidalgo | St. Louis Public Radio

A battle over the ballotNo Labels is an organization of largely centrist political figures who are pushing back against what they contend is extremism in both political parties.Besides Nixon, prominent members of the group include former Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, former North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory and former Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan. West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin spoke at a No Labels function recently, spurring speculation that he may be a part of a ticket with a Republican like former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman.For Nixon, joining No Labels is not about distaste for Biden, but rather what he sees as an unfair effort to deprive a possible ticket from the ballot.“I think the key to a successful democracy from elected officials is not the ability to agree, but to disagree,” Nixon said. “And these days for a myriad of reasons — the hyper partisanship, the resources that attack people for taking positions — we’re not getting action from our government, especially in D.C., that reflects the needs and the issues of our country.”Arizona Democrats have sought to force No Labels to disclose its donors or lose its status as a political party. Nixon and other No Labels backers have said the group is not a political party, so it is not held to the same campaign finance rules as the Republican or Democratic parties.And Hogan and others say the efforts to keep No Labels off the ballot are undemocratic and are depriving voters of another option next year.“Even if you’re not in agreement with the mission of No Labels, you have to be in agreement with fundamental rights that people have,” Hogan said at a town hall this week with Nixon. “When we’re talking about the hypocrisy of people talking out of both sides of their mouths and attacking a nonpartisan citizens group that’s just trying to unite people.”

Joe Angeles | WUSTL photos | 2013

Former U.S. Rep. Richard Gephardt, shown at an event at Washington University in 2013, is pushing back against No Labels’ efforts to help a presidential ticket.

A ‘dangerous’ gambitGephardt stressed that he generally agrees with the concept of No Labels and that he usually wouldn’t be up in arms over a third party or independent candidacy.But he said his group’s polling shows that a third ticket in a race with Biden and Trump could allow the former GOP chief executive to return to the White House. Gephardt said that’s unacceptable, especially after Trump falsely claimed he won the 2020 election and egged on what ended up being a violent insurrection in the U.S. Capitol.“Donald Trump is still maintaining that the election was stolen,” Gephardt said. “Our view is that in these difficult times, No Labels should not be doing this. Because all the polling that we’re able to see — and we commissioned our own poll nationally and in seven swing states, indicates that if the two candidates are Biden and Trump and No Labels goes ahead with this — that it will elect Donald Trump. The math is quite simple to understand.”Other polls, including one from Monmouth University, showed Biden still ahead of Trump if Manchin and Huntsman were running on an independent ticket. But Gephardt said if there is another option, people who detest both Biden and Trump will gravitate to what he sees as an “off-ramp.”“And when people say to me: ‘Why can’t the Democrats get Biden out of the race? Then we won’t do this.’ Well, I ran for president twice. Nobody asked me to run for president. And nobody told me I couldn’t run for president. That’s not the way this works. Anybody can run for anything,” Gephardt said, referring to his unsuccessful 1988 and 2004 presidential campaigns. “But in this case, and it’s only about Trump, this is a dangerous, risky thing for them to do. And we’re hoping to be able to convince them not to do it.”While a unity ticket may be appealing to Republicans like Hogan who refuse to support Trump if he becomes the GOP nominee, it’s less clear how many Democrats would vote for it — especially in a possible Biden-Trump rematch. Most polls show Democratic voters universally opposed to Trump returning to the White House even if they are not enamored with Biden serving a second term.“There’s a lot of voters that don’t like Joe Biden, and they don’t like Donald Trump, and they don’t want to be faced with that choice again,” Gephardt said. “But I’ve learned a long time ago that in life, you sometimes don’t get two good choices, or even one good choice. Sometimes you’re faced with two choices you really don’t like, but you have to make a choice.”

Brian Munoz

/

St. Louis Public RadioSome Democrats fear a No Labels unity ticket could help usher Donald Trump back into the presidency.

Third-party candidates have poor track recordAmericans have rarely provided significant support for presidential candidates who are not members of the two dominant political parties.The most successful third-party bid happened in 1912 when former President Theodore Roosevelt ran on the Progressive Party ticket. While Roosevelt actually received more support than incumbent Republican President William Howard Taft, the split among Republicans effectively handed the election to Democrat Woodrow Wilson — the exact scenario that Gephardt and others are worried about.No Labels has not committed to putting a presidential candidate forward. The organization has said it won’t go forward with a ticket if it doesn’t have a clear pathway to victory or if the Democratic and Republican candidates aren’t universally loathed among voters.Nixon, though, said what he sees as corrosive political discourse could provide an opening to a presidential ticket that emphasizes dialogue and compromise.“I’m not saying that this is … ‘oh, my gosh, the worst time Americans ever had,’” Nixon said. “But I do think politically we are extremely gummed up.”

[ad_2]

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Poll: Support for Missouri abortion rights amendment growing

Published

on

[ad_1]


A proposed constitutional amendment legalizing abortion in Missouri received support from more than half of respondents in a new poll from St. Louis University and YouGov.That’s a boost from a poll earlier this year, which could mean what’s known as Amendment 3 is in a solid position to pass in November.SLU/YouGov’s poll of 900 likely Missouri voters from Aug. 8-16 found that 52% of respondents would vote for Amendment 3, which would place constitutional protections for abortion up to fetal viability. Thirty-four percent would vote against the measure, while 14% aren’t sure.By comparison, the SLU/YouGov poll from February found that 44% of voters would back the abortion legalization amendment.St. Louis University political science professor Steven Rogers said 32% of Republicans and 53% of independents would vote for the amendment. That’s in addition to nearly 80% of Democratic respondents who would approve the measure. In the previous poll, 24% of Republicans supported the amendment.Rogers noted that neither Amendment 3 nor a separate ballot item raising the state’s minimum wage is helping Democratic candidates. GOP contenders for U.S. Senate, governor, lieutenant governor, treasurer and secretary of state all hold comfortable leads.“We are seeing this kind of crossover voting, a little bit, where there are voters who are basically saying, ‘I am going to the polls and I’m going to support a Republican candidate, but I’m also going to go to the polls and then I’m also going to try to expand abortion access and then raise the minimum wage,’” Rogers said.Republican gubernatorial nominee Mike Kehoe has a 51%-41% lead over Democrat Crystal Quade. And U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley is leading Democrat Lucas Kunce by 53% to 42%. Some GOP candidates for attorney general, secretary of state and treasurer have even larger leads over their Democratic rivals.

Brian Munoz

/

St. Louis Public RadioHundreds of demonstrators pack into a parking lot at Planned Parenthood of St. Louis and Southwest Missouri on June 24, 2022, during a demonstration following the Supreme Court’s reversal of a case that guaranteed the constitutional right to an abortion.

One of the biggest challenges for foes of Amendment 3 could be financial.Typically, Missouri ballot initiatives with well-funded and well-organized campaigns have a better chance of passing — especially if the opposition is underfunded and disorganized. Since the end of July, the campaign committee formed to pass Amendment 3 received more than $3 million in donations of $5,000 or more.That money could be used for television advertisements to improve the proposal’s standing further, Rogers said, as well as point out that Missouri’s current abortion ban doesn’t allow the procedure in the case of rape or incest.“Meanwhile, the anti side won’t have those resources to kind of try to make that counter argument as strongly, and they don’t have public opinion as strongly on their side,” Rogers said.There is precedent of a well-funded initiative almost failing due to opposition from socially conservative voters.In 2006, a measure providing constitutional protections for embryonic stem cell research nearly failed — even though a campaign committee aimed at passing it had a commanding financial advantage.Former state Sen. Bob Onder was part of the opposition campaign to that measure. He said earlier this month it is possible to create a similar dynamic in 2024 against Amendment 3, if social conservatives who oppose abortion rights can band together.“This is not about reproductive rights or care for miscarriages or IVF or anything else,” said Onder, the GOP nominee for Missouri’s 3rd Congressional District seat. “Missourians will learn that out-of-state special interests and dark money from out of state is lying to them and they will reject this amendment.”Quade said earlier this month that Missourians of all political ideologies are ready to roll back the state’s abortion ban.“Regardless of political party, we hear from folks who are tired of politicians being in their doctor’s offices,” Quade said. “They want politicians to mind their own business. So this is going to excite folks all across the political spectrum.”

[ad_2]

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Democrat Mark Osmack makes his case for Missouri treasurer

Published

on

[ad_1]


Mark Osmack has been out of the electoral fray for awhile, but he never completely abandoned his passion for Missouri politics.Osmack, a Valley Park native and U.S. Army veteran, previously ran for Missouri’s 2nd Congressional District seat and for state Senate. Now he’s the Democratic nominee for state treasurer after receiving a phone call from Missouri Democratic Party Chairman Russ Carnahan asking him to run.“There’s a lot of decision making and processing and evaluation that goes into it, which is something I am very passionate and interested in,” Osmack said this week on an episode of Politically Speaking.Osmack is squaring off against state Treasurer Vivek Malek, who was able to easily win a crowded GOP primary against several veteran lawmakers including House Budget Chairman Cody Smith and state Sen. Andrew Koenig.While Malek was able to attract big donations to his political action committee and pour his own money into the campaign, Osmack isn’t worried that he won’t be able to compete in November. Since Malek was appointed to his post, Osmack contends he hasn’t proven that he’s a formidable opponent in a general election.“His actions and his decision making so far in his roughly two year tenure in that office have been questionable,” Osmack said.Among other things, Osmack was critical of Malek for placing unclaimed property notices on video gaming machines which are usually found in gas stations or convenience stores. The legality of the machines has been questioned for some time.As Malek explained on his own episode of Politically Speaking, he wanted to make sure the unclaimed property program was as widely advertised as possible. But he acknowledged it was a mistake to put the decals close to the machines and ultimately decided to remove them.Osmack said: “This doesn’t even pass the common sense sniff test of, ‘Hey, should I put state stickers claiming you might have a billion dollars on a gambling machine that is not registered with the state of Missouri?’ If we’re gonna give kudos for him acknowledging the wrong thing, it never should have been done in the first place.”Osmack’s platform includes supporting programs providing school meals using Missouri agriculture products and making child care more accessible for the working class.He said the fact that Missouri has such a large surplus shows that it’s possible to create programs to make child care within reach for parents.“It is quite audacious for [Republicans] to brag about $8 billion, with a B, dollars in state surplus, while we offer next to no social services to include pre-K, daycare, or child care,” Osmack said.Here’s are some other topics Osmack discussed on the show:How he would handle managing the state’s pension systems and approving low-income housing tax credits. The state treasurer’s office is on boards overseeing both of those programs.Malek’s decision to cut off investments from Chinese companies. Osmack said that Missouri needs to be cautious about abandoning China as a business partner, especially since they’re a major consumer of the state’s agriculture products. “There’s a way to make this work where we are not supporting communist nations to the detriment of the United States or our allies, while also maintaining strong economic ties that benefit Missouri farmers,” he said.What it was like to witness the skirmish at the Missouri State Fair between U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley and Democratic challenger Lucas Kunce.Whether Kunce can get the support of influential groups like the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which often channels money and staff to states with competitive Senate elections.

[ad_2]

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

As Illinois receives praise for its cannabis equity efforts, stakeholders work on system’s flaws

Published

on

[ad_1]


Medical marijuana patients can now purchase cannabis grown by small businesses as part of their allotment, Illinois’ top cannabis regulator said, but smaller, newly licensed cannabis growers are still seeking greater access to the state’s medical marijuana customers.Illinois legalized medicinal marijuana beginning in 2014, then legalized it for recreational use in 2020. While the 2020 law legalized cannabis use for any adult age 21 or older, it did not expand licensing for medical dispensaries.Patients can purchase marijuana as part of the medical cannabis program at dual-purpose dispensaries, which are licensed to serve both medical and recreational customers. But dual-purpose dispensaries are greatly outnumbered by dispensaries only licensed to sell recreationally, and there are no medical-only dispensaries in the state.As another part of the adult-use legalization law, lawmakers created a “craft grow” license category that was designed to give more opportunities to Illinoisans hoping to legally grow and sell marijuana. The smaller-scale grow operations were part of the 2020 law’s efforts to diversify the cannabis industry in Illinois.Prior to that, all cultivation centers in Illinois were large-scale operations dominated by large multi-state operators. The existing cultivators, mostly in operation since 2014, were allowed to grow recreational cannabis beginning in 2019.Until recently, dual-purpose dispensaries have been unsure as to whether craft-grown products, made by social equity licensees — those who have lived in a disproportionately impacted area or have been historically impacted by the war on drugs — can be sold medicinally as part of a patient’s medical allotment.Erin Johnson, the state’s cannabis regulation oversight officer, told Capitol News Illinois last month that her office has “been telling dispensaries, as they have been asking us” they can now sell craft-grown products to medical patients.“There was just a track and trace issue on our end, but never anything statutorily,” she said.

Dilpreet Raju

/

Capitol News IllinoisThe graphic shows how cannabis grown in Illinois gets from cultivation centers to customers.

No notice has been posted, but Johnson’s verbal guidance comes almost two years after the first craft grow business went online in Illinois.It allows roughly 150,000 medical patients, who dispensary owners say are the most consistent purchasers of marijuana, to buy products made by social equity businesses without paying recreational taxes. However — even as more dispensaries open — the number available to medical patients has not increased since 2018, something the Cannabis Regulation Oversight Office “desperately” wants to see changed. Johnson said Illinois is a limited license state, meaning “there are caps on everything” to help control the relatively new market.Berwyn Thompkins, who operates two cannabis businesses, said the rules limited options for patients and small businesses.“It’s about access,” Thompkins said. “Why wouldn’t we want all the patients — which the (adult-use) program was initially built around — why wouldn’t we want them to have access? They should have access to any dispensary.”Customers with a medical marijuana card pay a 1% tax on all marijuana products, whereas recreational customers pay retail taxes between roughly 20 and 40% on a given cannabis product, when accounting for local taxes.While Illinois has received praise for its equity-focused cannabis law, including through an independent study that showed more people of color own cannabis licenses than in any other state, some industry operators say they’ve experienced many unnecessary hurdles getting their businesses up and running.The state, in fact, announced last month that it had opened its 100th social equity dispensary.But Steve Olson, purchasing manager at a pair of dispensaries (including one dual-purpose dispensary) near Rockford, said small specialty license holders have been left in the lurch since the first craft grower opened in October 2022.“You would think that this would be something they’re (the government) trying to help out these social equity companies with, but they’re putting handcuffs on them in so many different spots,” he said. “One of them being this medical thing.”Olson said he contacted state agencies, including the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, months ago about whether craft products can be sold to medical patients at their retail tax rate, but only heard one response: “They all say it was an oversight.”This potentially hurt social equity companies because they sell wholesale to dispensaries and may have been missing out on a consistent customer base through those medical dispensaries.Olson said the state’s attempts to provide licensees with a path to a successful business over the years, such as with corrective lotteries that granted more social equity licenses, have come up short.“It’s like they almost set up the social equity thing to fail so the big guys could come in and swoop up all these licenses,” Olson said. “I hate to feel like that but, if you look at it, it’s pretty black and white.”Olson said craft companies benefit from any type of retail sale.“If we sell it to medical patients or not, it’s a matter of, ‘Are we collecting the proper taxes?’ That’s all it is,” he said.State revenue from cannabis taxes, licensing costs and other fees goes into the Cannabis Regulation Fund, which is used to fund a host of programs, including cannabis offense expungement, the general revenue fund, and the R3 campaign aiming to uplift disinvested communities.For fiscal year 2024, nearly $256 million was paid out from Cannabis Regulation Fund for related initiatives, which includes almost $89 million transferred to the state’s general revenue fund and more than $20 million distributed to local governments, according to the Illinois Department of Revenue.Medical access still limitedThe state’s 55 medical dispensaries that predate the 2020 legalization law, mostly owned by publicly traded multistate operators that had been operating in Illinois since 2014 under the state’s medical marijuana program, were automatically granted a right to licenses to sell recreationally in January 2020. That gave them a dual-purpose license that no new entrants into the market can receive under current law.Since expanding their clientele in 2020, Illinois dispensaries have sold more than $6 billion worth of cannabis products through recreational transactions alone.Nearly two-thirds of dispensaries licensed to sell to medical patients are in the northeast counties of Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake and Will. Dual-purpose dispensaries only represent about 20 percent of the state’s dispensaries.While the state began offering recreational dispensary licenses since the adult-use legalization law passed, it has not granted a new medical dispensary license since 2018. That has allowed the established players to continue to corner the market on the state’s nearly 150,000 medical marijuana patients.But social equity licensees and advocates say there are more ways to level the playing field, including expanding access to medical sales.Johnson, who became the state’s top cannabis regulator in late 2022, expressed hope for movement during the fall veto session on House Bill 2911, which would expand medical access to all Illinois dispensaries.“We would like every single dispensary in Illinois to be able to serve medical patients,” Johnson said. “It’s something that medical patients have been asking for, for years.”Johnson said the bill would benefit patients and small businesses.“It’s something we desperately want to happen as a state system, because we want to make sure that medical patients are able to easily access what they need,” she said. “We also think it’s good for our social equity dispensaries, as they’re opening, to be able to serve medical patients.”Rep. Bob Morgan, D-Deerfield, who was the first statewide project coordinator for Illinois’ medical cannabis program prior to joining the legislature, wrote in an email to Capitol News Illinois that the state needs to be doing more for its patients.“Illinois is failing the state’s 150,000 medical cannabis patients with debilitating conditions. Too many are still denied the patient protections they deserve, including access to their medicine,” Morgan wrote, adding he would continue to work with stakeholders on further legislation.Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service covering state government. It is distributed to hundreds of newspapers, radio and TV stations statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation, along with major contributions from the Illinois Broadcasters Foundation and Southern Illinois Editorial Association.

[ad_2]

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending