Blue Inequality

 From The New York Times:

It’s easy to blame the other side. And for many Democrats, it’s obvious that Republicans are thwarting progress toward a more equal society. But what happens when Republicans aren’t standing in the way? In many states — including California, New York and Illinois — Democrats control all the levers of power. They run the government. They write the laws. And as we explore in the video above, they often aren’t living up to their values. In key respects, many blue states are actually doing worse than red states. It is in the blue states where affordable housing is often hardest to find, there are some of the most acute disparities in education funding and economic inequality is increasing most quickly. Instead of asking, “What’s the matter with Kansas?” Democrats need to spend more time pondering, “What’s the matter with California?”

1988

Lloyd Green at The Guardian:

Looking back, 1988 was a turning point. It would be the last time any presidential candidate broke 400 votes in the electoral college, the last time California, New Jersey and Illinois went red. What was up until then viewed as the Republican lock would give way in four short years.

After that night, no non-incumbent Republican would again lead the popular vote. The Democratic party would capture a plurality in six of the next seven presidential elections. Flyover country would emerge as a contiguous Republican bastion, Democrats relegated mostly to the coasts. Another realignment was under way.

...
 Back in the day, the president’s father was a senator from Connecticut and a golf partner to President Eisenhower. Now, the Nutmeg state’s entire congressional delegation is Democratic. Ned Lamont, governor-elect, played golf at the country club where George met Barbara Bush.

No Republican has carried these states since Bush in 1988:

• California
• Connecticut
• Delaware
• Illinois
• Maine
• Maryland
• New Jersey
• Vermont

Firearms and Political Influence

Previous posts have discussed how businesses can play states against one another.  The New York Times reports that the political influence of the firearms industry came to light when Connecticut's legislature considered a bill to require new markers on guns.

The Colt executive, Carlton S. Chen, said the company would seriously consider leaving the state if the bill became law. “You would think that the Connecticut government would be in support of our industry,” Mr. Chen said.

Soon, Connecticut lawmakers shelved the bill; they have declined to take it up since. Now, in the aftermath of the school massacre in Newtown, the lawmakers are formulating new gun-control measures, saying the state must serve as a national model.

But the failed effort to enact the microstamping measure shows how difficult the climate has been for gun control in state capitals. The firearm companies have played an important role in defeating these measures by repeatedly warning that they will close factories and move jobs if new state regulations are approved.

The companies have issued such threats in several states, especially in the Northeast, where gun control is more popular. But their views have particular resonance in Connecticut, a cradle of the American gun industry.

...

Colt, based in Connecticut since the 1800s, employs roughly 900 people in the state. Two other major gun companies, Sturm, Ruger & Company and Mossberg & Sons, are also based in the state. In all, the industry employs about 2,000 people in Connecticut, company officials said.

...In several states, the gun companies have enlisted unions that represent gun workers, mindful that Democratic lawmakers who might otherwise back gun control also have close ties to labor.

In Connecticut, the United Automobile Workers, which represents Colt workers, has testified against restrictions. The union’s arguments were bolstered last year when Marlin Firearms, a leading manufacturer of rifles, closed a factory in Connecticut that employed more than 200 people. Marlin cited economic pressures, not gun regulation, for the decision, but representatives of the gun industry have said the combination of the two factors could spur others to move.

The Center for Responsive Politics reports:

The National Rifle Association accounts for about 60 percent of what gun rights interest groups spent on lobbying in 2011 and the first three quarters of 2012. The other gun rights advocates include the Gun Owners of America; the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms; The National Shooting Sports Foundation; Safari Club International; Boone & Crockett Club, a group that aims to preserve a "hunting heritage"; and The Ohio Gun Collectors Association.

The NRA alone has spent more than ten times as much as gun control interest groups on lobbying in 2011 and the first three quarters of 2012.

Since 2006, 15 different organizations have mentioned the words "gun control" in their lobbying reports. Smith and Wesson, one of the nation's largest firearms manufacturers, has done so most frequently, mentioning the term 115 times. The National Rifle Association has the second-most mentions at 68.

The Center also reports on the overlap between Congress and interest groups:

The National Rifle Association has a very large board of directors, and two members of Congress are included on the list.

Alaska Republican Rep. Don Young -- who was re-elected with 65 percent of the vote in November -- and Oklahoma Democratic Rep. Dan Boren -- who will retire after the 112th Congress -- are both members of the NRA's board, according to the Center for Responsive Politics' personal finance data.

The President as Consoler

After the Connecticut massacre yesterday, an emotional President Obama made a statement on national television:

Other presidents have consoled the nation in times of grief:  Ronald Reagan after the Challenger disaster in 1986, Bill Clinton after the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, and George W. Bush after 9/11.   President Obama himself did so after the Tuscson shootings in 2011.

But Americans have not always expected their president to play this role.  On August 1, 1966, a disturbed ex-Marine murdered his wife and mother, then mounted a tower at the University of Texas at Austin, where he went on a shooting rampage that slew 14 more.  Although the killings happened in President Johnson's home state, he did go on live television to console the nation.  Instead, his press secretary read a brief statement calling for stricter control of firearms. (LBJ later repeated it for broadcast.)

The following year, the space program endured its first deaths in the line of duty. During a routine ground test on January 27, 1967, an Apollo spacecraft suddenly caught fire, killing astronauts Gus Grissom, Edward White, and Roger Chaffee. The White House Press Office issued this statement: "Three valiant young men have given their lives in the Nation's service. We mourn this great loss. Our hearts go out to their families."  That was it:  the president did not make an address to the nation, though he did attend funeral services.

More on Sandy and Turnout

As previous posts have noted, Hurricane Sandy may have some effect on voter turnout  in the New York metropolitan area. There is no chance that New York, New Jersey, or Connecticut will switch from Obama to Romney, but their overall vote totals may be down, which in turn could affect the president's national vote margin. There is some talk of invoking a New York law allowing for a second day of voting, but because a presidential election is taking place, there would be serious constitutional questions about such a move.

From NBC, an estimate of the vote drop that is less conservative than mine:

President Obama stands to lose as many as 340,000 votes as a result of Hurricane Sandy, not enough to affect the outcome in heavily Democratic Northeastern states, but something that could make a difference in the popular vote if the results of Tuesday’s presidential race are as close as polls indicate, a First Read analysis finds.

“Sandy has the potential to reduce Obama's national popular vote share by depressing turnout in highly Democratic areas along the Eastern Seaboard,” Dr. Michael McDonald of George Mason University, who studies turnout, told First Read. “The storm is unlikely to change the Electoral College outcome, as Obama is heavily favored to win the affected states. A turnout drop could be the difference in a close national election, and thus could shape the political discourse over important policy issues in a possible Obama second term.”

For example, assuming 2008 vote totals and a 15 percent reduction in turnout in the coastal counties most affected by Hurricane Sandy in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Rhode Island, Obama would lose a net of 340,000 votes, including 247,000 out of New York, 60,000 from New Jersey, 29,000 from Connecticut, and 3,600 from Rhode Island.

From The New York Daily News:

Voting will take place on Tuesday, Nov. 6, as scheduled, but scores of polling stations will likely be moved or operating off generators, election officials said. In New Jersey, paper ballots will be used and military trucks will serve as polling sites in some areas. New Yorkers are dealing with a “fluid” situation, said John Conklin, spokesman for the New York State Board of Elections.

“We are doing an assessment of power, safety, and the ability to get voting machines in and out of the facilities,” Conklin told the Daily News on Friday. “We will decide if and when to move a polling station once that is done,” he said.

In areas of Staten Island and Queens, flooding was so severe that some sites might not be accessible. The Staten Island Board of Elections office had to close. So too did the Manhattan office, which is now sharing space at the Borough's Voting Machine Facility.

There’s no set timeline as to when a polling station will be moved ahead of Tuesday, Conklin said. He stressed conditions are “constantly changing. It’s a fluid situation.”

From WCBS in New York:

Connecticut state officials from Gov. Dan Malloy on down are denying rumors that the election has been cancelled.

About 50 polling locations in Connecticut lack power and more than a dozen are so badly damaged that there is no way voting can take place there.

In Greenwich, Republican Registrar of Voters Fred DeCaro said there are blocked driveways and roads.

“Accessibility is still an issue for people to get out from their house,” he told WCBS 880 reporter Paul Murnane.

Connecticut Secretary of the State Denise Merrill was reluctant to move too many voting locations.

“Really, people get so confused and they’re already under all this stress. So, that, I think would help to depress turnout, I’m afraid,” she said. 

From The Philadelphia Inquirer:

With an untold number of residents displaced because of Hurricane Sandy and problems with power outages at polling places, some voters will face added challenges in exercising their basic right.

The Christie administration's answer: Vote early.

The state has ordered county election offices to remain open through the weekend so anyone with concerns about voting on Tuesday can cast a paper ballot in advance.

After receiving reports from the state's 21 counties, Gov. Christie said Friday that it appeared only 10 polling places statewide would be entirely inaccessible Tuesday.

Officials did not say how many other sites might be affected by other problems, such as loss of power.

In some cases, the governor said, voters will go to their usual polling locations to find trucks or trailers where they can vote "old school" by paper ballot.

"Everybody in New Jersey will have a way to vote," he said. "It will probably take us longer to count the votes, but it will be a late night anyway."

As for voters who have relocated far from their home counties and do not plan to return by Tuesday, they are out of luck, unless they have posted mail-in ballots

Noncitizen Voting in New Haven?

Our chapter on political participation notes that a number of states once allowed noncitizens to vote, and that a small number of municipalities currently let them vote in local elections. New Haven Mayor John DeStafano has proposed allowing noncitizens to vote  in city elections, regardless of legal status. The New Haven Register editorializes:

New Haven Mayor John DeStefano Jr.’s trial balloon about letting citizens of other countries vote in his city’s elections appears to have been pricked as soon as it was publicly floated.

The proposal grows out of the fact that City Hall estimates there are 10,000 to 12,000 undocumented immigrants in New Haven. The mayor has attempted to involve undocumented immigrants in the city’s life, in part to encourage their cooperation with police in the investigation of crimes.

 The reaction to allowing such immigrants to vote was quick and probably fatal to the mayor’s proposal. Gov. Dannel P. Malloy — who supported in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants at state universities — said he didn’t like it. “There are obligations that run with citizenship and there are privileges that run with citizenship. It’s not something that I’m inclined to support.”

Malloy’s comments were followed by Secretary of the State Denise Merrill pointing out that the state constitution specifies that only citizens who are 18 or older may vote. Amending the constitution to allow DeStefano’s proposal to become law would be a difficult, lengthy and almost certainly impossible political task, given the hostility to the proposal from outside New Haven, and doubts among city residents.