Law and Legislation

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Will DeSantis Need to Resign as Florida Governor to Run for President?

      by

      Hours after filing federal paperwork declaring that he was running for president — and shortly before his plan for a Twitter livestream to launch his campaign went haywire — Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a Florida elections bill that cleared a potential hurdle.Florida’s so-called resign-to-run statute could have compelled Mr. DeSantis to resign after he sought the presidency, even though the legal questions surrounding the rule have never been fully settled.But state lawmakers clarified the law’s language late last month so that it no longer applies to elected officials running for president or vice president. Democrats accused Republicans in Tallahassee of doing a favor for the governor, though with Republican supermajorities controlling both chambers, there was little they could do to stop the measure. Republicans said the old law was vague, and legal experts were divided about whether it would have applied to Mr. DeSantis.The change to the resign-to-run statute was included in a broader elections bill. It also contains provisions restricting how third-party groups can register voters.Voting rights groups have criticized the bill. The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida said it would hurt voter-registration organizations “by dramatically increasing fines, implementing shorter deadlines on voter registration forms, and restricting who can assist with voter registration drives,” with a particular effect on efforts to sign up voters of color.Reflecting his now dual roles as presidential candidate and governor, Mr. DeSantis spent the morning in Tallahassee hearing clemency requests from people convicted of felonies. At 6 p.m. Eastern, he is expected to go on Twitter and join Elon Musk, the platform’s billionaire owner, to discuss his candidacy. More

    • 75 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      The Republican Presidential Plot Is Thickening

      by

      Bret Stephens: Hi, Gail. It looks like we’ll be getting two new campaign launches soon in the race for the Republican presidential nomination: Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina and Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida. Any free advice you want to offer them on how they can beat you-know-who?Gail Collins: Gee, Bret, I guess they could both could use a little help being faster on their feet when they’re surrounded by curious reporters. But it’s not like I’m rooting for either of them. I’ve already told you — with multitudinous qualifications — that if I was locked up in a room and forced to choose between DeSantis and Trump, I’d beat my head against the wall and then pick The Donald.Bret: Gail! No! No no no no. You’re reminding me of the old “Bad Idea Jeans” skit from “Saturday Night Live,” in which a bunch of middle-aged guys bat around some really, really terrible brainstorms: “Well, he’s an ex-freebase addict and he’s trying to turn his life around, and he needs a place to stay for a couple of months ….”What about Tim Scott?Gail: Scott hasn’t been a serious enough possibility for me to worry about. Give me a little more time to judge what looks like it will be a growing throng.You’re the one who’s in charge of Republicans. Nikki Haley was your fave — is she showing any serious promise? Who’s next on your list?Bret: Scott has a $22 million campaign war chest, which alone makes him a potentially serious contender. He speaks the Reaganesque language of hope, which is a nice contrast to the vituperative and vengeful styles of Don and Ron. He’s got an inspiring, up-from-poverty life story that will resonate with a lot of voters. He has the potential to attract minority voters to the G.O.P., and, as important, appeal to middle-of-the-road voters who might be persuaded to cast a ballot for a Republican provided they won’t feel guilty or embarrassed by it.Charlie Neibergall/Associated PressRebecca Blackwell/Associated PressAll he needs is to work on his answers to those pesky questions about his position on abortion. As for DeSantis, he needs to stop coming across as a colossal, monomaniacal, humorless, lecturesome and tedious jerk, the Ted Cruz of this campaign season.Gail: Well, your recipe for Scott certainly does seem more doable. Sorta depressing though, that we judge potential candidates for the highest office in the land by their ability to raise money, a lot of it from special interests. Sure there are folks out there planning to send Tim $10 online, but we’re basically talking about big money donors.Bret: Sorry, but is it any different than Democrats? Didn’t President Biden just headline a $25,000-a-plate fund-raiser at the home of a former Blackstone exec? Our standards have become so debased in the last few years that I’m grateful for anything that passes as politics as usual.Gail: Sigh. Moving on — I guess we should talk about the debt limit negotiations. Any deep thoughts?Bret: Not sure if they’re deep, but the Republican insistence on capping spending at 2022 levels is going to cripple military spending in the very decade in which we face serious strategic competition. I’m all for budget discipline, but the G.O.P.’s rediscovery of fiscal purity is fundamentally at odds with its tough-on-China stance. It also reminds me of the composer Oscar Levant’s quip: “I knew Doris Day before she was a virgin.”Gail: I always love your quotes but fitting in Oscar Levant may be a new high.Bret: All joking aside, I think the Biden administration would be smart to make a few concessions on spending, both because it’s the right thing to do and because it will help pin the blame on Republicans in the event we end up in default and possibly recession. Your thoughts?Gail: Biden’s clearly ready to go there. What we’re watching is a dance to see who gets the most credit for avoiding default while avoiding super-outrage from the base.Bret: Big problem here is that too much of the Republican base is basically unappeasable. They’d rather put the nation’s finances in a wooden barrel and send it hurtling over Niagara Falls than be accused of compromising with Democrats.Gail: One of the Republicans’ big yelling points has been a stricter requirement that able-bodied people who get federal aid should do some kind of work for it.Most people aren’t against that in theory, but the enforcement is a big, potentially expensive, pain that could lead to deserving people getting cut off by bureaucratic snafus, and causing big trouble for some single mothers. Without any real turnaround in the status quo.I find it deeply irritating, but I’m kinda reconciled to the idea that something will happen. You’re a big supporter, right?Bret: The work requirements of the 1996 welfare reform bill were one of the best achievements of the decade — and helped make Bill Clinton a two-term president. Even if enforcement is difficult, it’s politically, financially and morally preferable to subsidizing indolence.Switching subjects, Gail, Democrats were enraged when DeSantis and the governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, started busing migrants north to New York City and other self-declared sanctuary cities. Now the mayor of New York, Eric Adams, is declaring a crisis and busing some of those same migrants out of the city, often to the consternation of nearby smaller cities like Newburgh that are straining under the weight of the new arrivals. Are you ready to denounce Adams?Gail: Not quite the same thing, Bret. States like Texas have a permanent relationship with countries across the border — it’s part of their economy. In times like this, the rest of the country should offer support — from good border enforcement to services for the needy. And of course to accept these folks if they come to our states of their own volition.Bret: Not quite sure why some states should bear a heavier share of the immigration burden just because they happen to be next to Mexico, particularly when immigration enforcement is primarily a federal responsibility. I think we in the nonborder states have so far sort of failed to appreciate the scale of the crisis and the burden it has imposed on border towns.Gail: We know Texas has been mass-shipping immigrants to places like New York to make a political score, not solve a problem.Bret: Well, both are possible.Gail: Adams isn’t the best-organized mayor in history, but I don’t think even a great administrator could have successfully coped with all of this. There just aren’t enough places in the city for these people to go. And Gov. Kathy Hochul had big plans for expanding housing around the state, which were killed off by nonurban lawmakers.It’s true some of the smaller cities have also been flooded with needy newcomers. But there are plenty of wealthier suburban and rural communities who could do a lot more. Having spent part of my career covering state government for suburban papers, I can tell you there’s nothing that a lot of those towns hate/fear/oppose more than programs that bring in lower-income would-be residents.Bret: As a matter of moral conviction, I believe we ought to be welcoming to strangers. And I’m mindful that my mother arrived in this country as a refugee, albeit one who waited year after year for a U.S. visa.But as a matter of politics, the Biden administration’s performance has been disastrous. In the next New York City budget, emergency migrant aid is projected to cost more than the city’s Fire Department. Every government has a far greater responsibility toward its own citizens — especially the neediest — than it does to people who arrive here in violation of the law. And if President Biden doesn’t get an effective handle on the border, he’s going to turn the entire country against immigrants in a way that will permanently damage our spirit of openness.Gail: This is going to require a lot more arguing in the future.Bret: We’ll put it aside for now. In the meantime, the most profound, meaningful and soul-rending article in The Times for as long as I can remember is our colleague Sarah Wildman’s essay about the loss of her daughter Orli, at age 14. Where there are no words, Sarah found the words:Recently, several people quietly told me that she had helped them in some way, inspired them or helped them with their pain. If she could continue to engage, to be concerned beyond herself, they could, too. Her instinct was always to assist, to write to the kid on the other side of the country struggling with chemo-related hair loss, to find out if a friend’s sibling headed to the hospital needed advice on how to navigate hospital time, to see if a newly diagnosed child wanted tips on making life in cancer care more bearable, or even to encourage someone going through a divorce to dance. And so, even when I’m crushed with grief, Orli continues to teach me. Some of the lessons are basic but worth repeating: It matters to reach out, over and over, even in minor ways. It matters to visit. It matters to care.May Orli’s memory always be for a blessing.Gail: Bret, this one is so moving I have to throw in one last comment: Agreed, agreed.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 113 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      DeSantis Avoids Talk of Abortion Ban on the Trail

      by

      The Florida governor is reluctant to talk about the restrictive law he signed as he seeks to attract support from across the Republican Party.Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida could not have asked for a friendlier venue to highlight the sweeping six-week abortion ban he signed last month: an annual gala hosted by a deeply conservative Christian group that welcomed him with a sustained standing ovation and provided a bagpiper in full Highland regalia playing “Amazing Grace.”But instead of taking a victory lap on Saturday, Mr. DeSantis breezed through his remarks on Florida’s abortion law, one of the most restrictive in the nation. His rhetoric was far less soaring than that of other speakers, including one who compared abortion to slavery, suggesting it was an evil that should be totally eliminated.“We believe that everybody counts, everybody is special, and our Heartbeat Protection Act shows that we say what we mean and we mean what we say,” said Mr. DeSantis, referring to the law, which he was initially slow to back.He then pivoted to familiar talking points, including his handling of the coronavirus pandemic, his opposition to defunding the police and his signing of a law prohibiting gender-transition care for minors.During the primary, Mr. DeSantis will need to court conservative voters without alienating centrists — all while fending off allegations from Republican rivals who could argue he is too extreme on abortion. Cristobal Herrera-Ulashkevich/EPA, via ShutterstockMr. DeSantis’s brief comments on abortion underscore his general hesitancy to speak about the issue in visits to key states ahead of his upcoming presidential run. On the trail, his remarks about the ban are usually limited to a single line in his roughly 45-minute stump speech, placed alongside a laundry list of his other legislative accomplishments.The reluctance to highlight abortion — even when speaking on his home turf to grateful Christian conservatives — reflects a careful calibration that could be crucial to his campaign for the Republican nomination.Although many evangelicals and hard-core party activists favor abortion bans like the one he signed in Florida, moderate Republicans are less inclined to support them. During the primary, Mr. DeSantis will need to court those conservative voters without alienating centrists — all while fending off allegations from Republican rivals who could argue he is too extreme on abortion. He will also need to avoid delivering any sound bites to Democrats that could become fodder for attack ads in a general election. Other Republican contenders for president, including Nikki Haley and Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina, have offered less strident views on abortion. Ms. Haley has declined to support a federal abortion ban at a specific number of weeks of pregnancy. And Mr. Scott, who is expected to declare his candidacy on Monday, has said he would back a 20-week federal ban. Former President Donald J. Trump, who is fighting to retain the backing of the anti-abortion movement, has criticized Florida’s six-week law without saying what restrictions he might support, leading Mr. DeSantis to punch back over his reluctance to take a position. The comments, one of his most direct public challenges to the former president so far, demonstrated how Mr. DeSantis could use his record, which anti-abortion activists praise, to distinguish himself.“He’s giving us action, and that’s what I’m interested in,” said John Stemberger, president of the Florida Family Policy Council, the nonprofit group that hosted Mr. DeSantis’s speech on Saturday. “He’s been stellar and historic.”Democrats ran heavily on abortion rights in last year’s midterms with unexpected success. That has left some Republicans unsure of how to address the issue in 2024.As Mr. DeSantis is hitting the trail and visiting early nominating states, he is talking little about his abortion legislation. When he does, he does not explicitly tell audiences that the law prohibits the procedure after six weeks.“We enacted the Heartbeat Protection Act to promote life,” Mr. DeSantis said without elaborating as he addressed a crowd of voters in Iowa earlier this month. He sandwiched his comment between brief statements on his tax relief efforts and a law that allows Floridians to carry concealed weapons without training or permits. Speaking at Liberty University, another friendly setting, the day after he signed the ban, Mr. DeSantis almost entirely avoided the subject.And during a discussion with state lawmakers in New Hampshire on Friday, the governor did not mention abortion at all. Privately, lawmakers from the moderate state, which limits abortions after 24 weeks of pregnancy, said they thought Mr. DeSantis’s abortion law was too extreme for voters in New Hampshire. Many women do not realize they are pregnant at six weeks.Last spring, Mr. DeSantis and Republican lawmakers in Florida limited access to the procedure after 15 weeks, with exceptions for fatal fetal abnormalities or to save the life of the woman. That legislation is being challenged in front of the Florida Supreme Court.The six-week ban, which includes additional exceptions for rape and incest, is not yet in effect and will hinge, in part, on the court’s decision over the existing law. Women in Florida have suffered serious complications from dangerous pregnancies since the 15-week ban was passed, according to news reports. The state previously prohibited abortions after 24 weeks of pregnancy.For many conservatives, the governor is fulfilling a mandate from voters after a nearly 20-point re-election in November.“His leadership helped push that through,” Chris Jessee, a Florida pastor who came to Orlando to hear Mr. DeSantis address the Florida Family Policy Council, said of the six-week ban.Still, Mr. Jessee noticed that the governor did not seem to adjust his usual script much for the event, even though the group’s annual gala was its first since Roe v. Wade was overturned.“I really felt like I’d heard that speech before,” he said.Bret Hayworth contributed reporting from Sioux Center, Iowa. More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Why the Supreme Court Is Blind to Its Own Corruption

      by

      The scandal surrounding Justice Clarence Thomas has further eroded the already record-low public confidence in the Supreme Court. If Chief Justice John Roberts wonders how such a thing could have happened, he might start looking for answers within the cloistered walls of his own courtroom.Over more than two decades, the Supreme Court has gutted laws aimed at fighting corruption and at limiting the ability of the powerful to enrich public officials in a position to advance their interests. As a result, today wealthy individuals and corporations may buy political access and influence with little fear of legal consequences, either for them or for the beneficiaries of their largess.No wonder Justice Thomas apparently thought his behavior was no big deal.He has been under fire for secretly accepting, from the Republican megadonor Harlan Crow, luxury vacations worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, a real estate deal (involving the home where his mother was living) and the payment of private school tuition for a grandnephew the justice was raising. Meanwhile, over the years, conservative groups with which Mr. Crow was affiliated filed amicus briefs in several matters before the Supreme Court.That sounds like the very definition of corruption. But over the years, many justices — and not just conservatives — have championed a different definition.The landmark case is the court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. A five-justice majority — including Justice Thomas — struck down decades-old restrictions on independent campaign expenditures by corporations, holding that they violated the companies’ free speech rights. It rejected the argument that such laws were necessary to prevent the damage to democracy that results from unbridled corporate spending and the undue influence it can create.The government’s legitimate interest in fighting corruption, the court held, is limited to direct quid pro quo deals, in which a public official makes a specific commitment to act in exchange for something of value. The appearance of potentially improper influence or access is not enough.In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens accused the majority of adopting a “crabbed view of corruption” that the court itself had rejected in an earlier case. He argued that Congress has a legitimate interest in limiting the effects of corporate money on politics: “Corruption operates along a spectrum, and the majority’s apparent belief that quid pro quo arrangements can be neatly demarcated from other improper influences does not accord with the theory or reality of politics.”Citizens United opened the floodgates to unlimited corporate spending on behalf of political candidates and to the influence that spending necessarily provides. But the decision didn’t come out of nowhere: The court has often been unanimous in its zeal for curtailing criminal corruption laws.In the 1999 case of United States v. Sun-Diamond Growers of California, the court unanimously held, in effect, that it is not a violation of the federal gratuities statute for an individual or corporation to have a public official on private retainer. The court rejected a theory known as a “status gratuity,” where a donor showers a public official with gifts over time based on the official’s position (that is in contrast with a more common gratuity, given as a thank you for a particular act by the official). The quite reasonable rationale behind that theory was that when matters of interest to the donor arose, the past gifts (and hope for future ones) might lead the official to favor his or her benefactor.That actually sounds a lot like the Crow-Thomas relationship. But the court held that such an arrangement is not unlawful. The gratuities law, the court ruled, requires that a particular gift be linked to a particular official act. Without such a direct link, a series of gifts to a public official over time does not violate the statute, even if the goal is to curry favor with an official who could act to benefit the gift giver.In the wake of Sun-Diamond, federal prosecutors increasingly turned to a more expansive legal theory known as honest services fraud. But in Skilling v. United States, the court ruled that theory is limited to cases of bribes and kickbacks — once again, direct quid pro quo deals. Three justices, including Justice Thomas, wanted to go even further and declare the statute that prohibits honest services fraud unconstitutional.The court proceeded to limit its “crabbed view of corruption” even further. In the 2016 case McDonnell v. United States, the court held that selling government access is not unlawful. Gov. Bob McDonnell of Virginia and his wife, Maureen, accepted about $175,000 in secret gifts from the businessman Jonnie Williams, who wanted Virginia’s public universities to perform research studies on his company’s dietary supplement to assist with its F.D.A. approval. In exchange, Mr. McDonnell asked subordinates to meet with Mr. Williams about such studies and hosted a luncheon at the governor’s mansion to connect him with university health researchers.A jury convicted the McDonnells on several counts of corruption. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit — hardly known as a bastion of liberalism — unanimously affirmed the convictions. But the Supreme Court unanimously reversed, holding that the things Mr. McDonnell did for Mr. Williams did not qualify as “official acts” under federal bribery law. Selling official access may be tawdry, the court held, but it is not a crime.Those who think Justice Thomas may be guilty of corruption may not realize just how difficult the court itself has made it to prove such a case. Now only the most ham-handed officials, clumsy enough to engage in a direct quid pro quo, risk prosecution.Viewed in light of this history, the Thomas scandal becomes less surprising. Its own rulings would indicate that the Supreme Court doesn’t believe what he did is corrupt. A powerful conservative with interests before the court who regularly provides a justice with vacations worth more than his annual salary is, as the court said in Citizens United, merely the “appearance” of potential corruption. In the court’s view, the public has no reason to be concerned.But the public clearly is, and should be, concerned over the ability of the rich and powerful to purchase access and influence unavailable to most citizens. Unfortunately, Citizens United is here to stay without a constitutional amendment or an overruling by the court, neither of which is very likely.But it’s still possible for the rest of the country to move past the court’s naïve and inadequate view of corruption. Congress could amend criminal corruption laws to expand their scope and overturn the results in Sun-Diamond, Skilling and McDonnell. It could increase funding for enforcement of the Ethics in Government Act and increase the penalties for filing a false financial disclosure form (or failing to file one at all). Beefed up disclosure regulations could make it more difficult for officials to hide financial interests and could make it clear there are no disclosure exceptions for enormous gifts of “personal hospitality,” contrary to what Justice Thomas claims he believed. And Congress could pass legislation like the proposed Disclose Act, to require transparency regarding who is behind political donations and spending.Congress so far has shown little interest in passing such reforms. But that’s where the remedy lies. It’s time for Congress to act.In his Citizens United dissent, Justice Stevens observed, “A democracy cannot function effectively when its constituent members believe laws are being bought and sold.” That’s exactly how it now appears to the public — and that applies to Supreme Court justices as well as to politicians.Randall D. Eliason is the former chief of the fraud and public corruption section at the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and teaches white-collar criminal law at George Washington University Law School. He blogs at Sidebarsblog.com.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Remember When Trump and DeSantis Loved Each Other? Neither Do They.

      by

      Our topic for today is — who’s worse, Donald Trump or Ron DeSantis?Nonononofair! There is no way I’m ever going to vote for either one of them! Why should I care?Hey, knowledge of public affairs is always important.DeSantis made headlines this weekend when he showed up to campaign in Iowa while Trump canceled a rally because of bad weather.“Iowa is the Florida of the Midwest,” the governor of Florida claimed at one point in his burger-flipping, speech-giving trek. Now this was clearly intended as a compliment, but Iowans, do you actually want to be the Florida of the Midwest? The weather is certainly great in January, but there’s plenty of downside. Do your Midwestern neighbors ever mutter, “What our state needs is a heck of a lot more floods and sinkholes …”?DeSantis and his wife/political adviser, Casey, have three small children, who once starred in a gubernatorial election ad in which he demonstrated his devotion to President Donald Trump by showing one of his daughters how to build a toy wall and reading his son “The Art of the Deal.” (“Then Mr. Trump said, ‘You’re fired.’ I love that part.”)You may be seeing a lot more of little Madison, Mason and Mamie DeSantis in the months to come. But no one’s going to be reading from Trump’s collected works.Trump has five children counting Ivanka, who’s sorta cut herself off from the clan. And Tiffany, who everybody, including her father, seemed to have forgotten for a very long stretch. And Eric, whom we mainly hear about during riffs from the late-night comics. And Barron, the youngest at 17, who lives quietly with his mom.Donald Jr. is truly his dad’s kid. He’s off this summer to Australia for a speaking tour blasting “woke identity politics.” Ranting against “woke” is sort of a DeSantis thing, but give Junior a break. He’s spent his entire life trying to please a father who was absent for most of his childhood and who is said to have resisted having his firstborn named after him, in case the kid turned into a “loser.”Now Don Jr. has five children too! And he’s not shy about putting them in the news either. A while back he posted an Instagram photo of the kids publicizing a Trump-branded leash. (“You can get yours at the Trump Store too.”) Before that, Dad once tweeted that he planned to confiscate half of his then-3-year-old daughter’s Halloween candy “to teach her about socialism.”Hard to imagine the Trump and DeSantis families getting together for a cookout. But the gap between the two men grows much wider when you look at personal behavior. Only one of them just lost a $5 million verdict from a jury that found he sexually abused a woman in a department store dressing room.Trump has been trying to insinuate that DeSantis had some shady doings with high school girls in his far, far distant past. And running an ad reminding the world that his probable Republican opponent has a history of eating pudding with his fingers.But what about the issues? Sorta hard to pin down since Trump is given to, um, free-associating on this stuff. But he certainly has been running to DeSantis’s left, accusing the Florida governor of wanting to slash Social Security and Medicare benefits.When he was in Congress, DeSantis did vote for Republican proposals along that line. He’s on the no-changes-no-how bandwagon now. But let’s look at abortion — much easier to pin down. DeSantis, as governor, just signed a bill he supported that will bar abortions in Florida after six weeks. By which time many, many women — particularly the very young, very poor, very traumatized — have no idea they’re pregnant.DeSantis has at least been consistent. A devout Catholic, he’s had the same position for his entire political career. Trump, on the other hand, um, adapts.Trump made a huge impact by appointing three anti-choice judges to the Supreme Court. But now he’s noticed that voters are coming down very strong in favor of abortion rights, and he’s switched right around. He claims “many people within the pro-life movement” found the new Florida law “too harsh.”Our bottom line here, people, is that you have two top candidates for the Republican presidential nomination. DeSantis adheres to a strong, faith-based social conservatism. He’s pro-gun, opposed to diversity and inclusion programs in public colleges. And currently having a big fight with Disney, one of Florida’s top employers, over a comment from a Disney C.E.O. that criticized a DeSantis bill to prohibit classroom discussions of sexual orientation in the early grades.Hard to imagine a Gov. Donald Trump taking the same road.Unless it would somehow win him an election. Trump’s politics are deeply, deeply pragmatic. If an angel appeared promising him another term in the White House if he killed every puppy in America, those doggies would be toast.(That is an imperfect example since The Donald hates dogs anyway, but bear with me.)The bottom line: Would you rather see the Republicans nominate a candidate who had an exemplary family life and an agenda based on longstanding, extremely conservative beliefs? Or a guy with a sleazy personal history who’d probably go anywhere the votes were?Some days it pays to be a Democrat.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      DeSantis Signs Tall Stack of Right-Wing Bills as 2024 Entrance Nears

      by

      The Florida governor is making a grab for national attention ahead of his expected presidential campaign rollout.Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, an all-but-declared presidential candidate, has stepped up his headline-hunting travel and events ahead of an official announcement, traversing the state and trying to hoover up national attention as he signs the sharply conservative legislation he believes can propel him to the Republican Party’s nomination.On Wednesday, Mr. DeSantis signed a slew of measures that hit all the culture-clash notes his base has rewarded him for, including bills banning gender-transition care for minors, preventing children from attending “adult live performances” like drag shows and restricting the use of preferred pronouns in schools.“We need to let our kids just be kids,” Mr. DeSantis said at a Christian school in Tampa. “What we’ve said in Florida is we are going to remain a refuge of sanity and a citadel of normalcy.”It was his third consecutive day of holding public bill-signing ceremonies across the state. The ceremonies, which he hosts in his official capacity as governor, allow Mr. DeSantis to promote his political message in settings that he carefully stage-manages as a veritable M.C., calling up additional speakers and then thanking them for their contributions. These events sometimes take on the feel of political rallies.Such a platform gives Mr. DeSantis an advantage over his potential rivals for the presidency — many of whom are either out of office or hold legislative roles — as he sprints toward declaring his candidacy, which is likely to happen by the end of the month.On Monday, his signing of a bill defunding diversity and equity programs at public colleges and universities drew a robust round of news coverage — as well as loud protesters. He and other Republicans who shared the stage mocked the demonstrators, many of them students at New College of Florida, a public liberal arts school in Sarasota that the governor has sought to transform into a conservative bastion.The signing of bills aimed at the L.G.B.T.Q. community on Wednesday was “an all-out attack on freedom,” Joe Saunders, the senior political director of Equality Florida, an advocacy organization, said in a virtual news conference. He noted that Mr. DeSantis had already signed a six-week abortion ban as well as bills that allowed physicians to decline to provide care based on moral or religious grounds.Mr. DeSantis sees freedom “as a campaign slogan in his bid for the White House,” Mr. Saunders said. “The nation should be on high alert, because, today, we are all Floridians.”Some centrist Republicans say the way Mr. DeSantis has pushed Florida to the right on social issues is a potential weakness in a general election. Representatives for Mr. DeSantis did not immediately respond to requests for comment.As he travels the state, the lines between Mr. DeSantis’s roles as governor and potential presidential candidate can sometimes seem blurred.On Tuesday, after he signed several bills near Fort Lauderdale aimed at curbing human trafficking, an issue that the right has tried to weaponize in national politics, Mr. DeSantis received a boost from Florida’s two top Republican legislative leaders, Kathleen Passidomo, the Senate president, and Paul Renner, the House speaker.After the signing concluded, Ms. Passidomo and Mr. Renner stepped up to a lectern — embossed with Florida’s state seal, rather than the “Stop Human Trafficking” sign that the governor had used moments earlier — to endorse Mr. DeSantis for president, an office he is not yet formally seeking.Katie Betta, a spokeswoman for Ms. Passidomo, said that the endorsement was a matter of convenience because the governor and legislative leaders had not been together since the lawmaking session ended on May 5. “It was a good opportunity to answer a question they have both been getting from the press since the day they were sworn in last November,” Ms. Betta wrote in an email, referring to Ms. Passidomo and Mr. Renner.On Wednesday, the main super PAC backing Mr. DeSantis unveiled endorsements from nearly 100 state lawmakers. Behind the scenes, the governor’s allies and political operatives have been jostling with former President Donald J. Trump’s team to secure those pledges. At the federal level, members of Florida’s congressional delegation have swung heavily for Mr. Trump.Mr. DeSantis has now held an official event on every weekday this month. He spends his weekends on political travel, including to the crucial early-voting state of Iowa last Saturday.Since winning re-election in a rout in November, Mr. DeSantis has regularly faced questions at state events about his national political ambitions. For months, he usually fended them off with quips about how he was not interested in petty infighting and how it was too soon to be talking about future campaigns with the annual lawmaking session pending.No more. On Tuesday, Mr. DeSantis jumped at the chance to call out Mr. Trump for dodging a question about abortion. The former president had criticized Florida’s six-week ban as too harsh while remaining noncommittal about what restrictions he might support.“I signed the bill. I was proud to do it,” Mr. DeSantis told reporters. “He won’t answer whether he would sign it or not.”This time, it was the swipe at Mr. Trump that made headlines. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      A Crucial Question in Thailand’s Election: Can You Criticize the King?

      by

      Liberal voters have intensified their scrutiny of the Thai monarchy in recent years. Conservatives have responded with a campaign to defend the institution at all costs.When Thais go to the polls on Sunday, they will be voting in a closely fought election that is seen, in part, as a referendum on whether it is illegal to criticize the Thai monarchy.Thailand has one of the world’s strictest laws against defaming or insulting the king and other members of the royal family. Once considered taboo, the topic of the monarchy was brought to the forefront after tens of thousands of protesters took to the streets and called for checks on the institution’s power in 2020.The protests represented two sides of an impassioned struggle to determine the role of the crown in modern Thailand. The election could determine whether the Southeast Asian nation of 72 million will revive its once-vibrant democracy or slide further toward authoritarian rule, with royalists firmly in power.On one side of the debate are conservative political parties whose standard-bearer is Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha, the general who has governed Thailand for nine years after seizing power in a coup. He and his supporters argue that amending the law could lead to abolishing the monarchy altogether, and have vowed to defend the royal family.On the other side is the progressive Move Forward Party, which is polling in second place and argues that the law needs to be amended because it is being used as a political weapon. Several young people who participated in the 2020 protests are now running as candidates with the Move Forward Party.Anti-government protesters flashing a three-fingered salute, a sign of resistance, at a demonstration in Bangkok in 2020.Adam Dean for The New York Times“Perhaps one of the deepest fault lines in Thai society is about the monarchy,” said Sunai Phasuk, a senior researcher on Thailand for Human Rights Watch.Paetongtarn Shinawatra, the youngest daughter of the ousted former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and the front-runner for prime minister, is treading carefully. Her father, a populist billionaire, is one of the most divisive political figures in Thailand. He lives in self-exile after being ousted in a coup in 2006 and can only return to Thailand with the king’s permission.Royalists have consistently accused Mr. Thaksin of wanting to overthrow the monarchy, a charge that he denies. Ms. Paetongtarn has said her party, Pheu Thai, would not abolish the law protecting the monarchy from criticism, but that the issue of reform must be openly discussed in Parliament.King Maha Vajiralongkorn greeting his supporters in Bangkok during a ceremony in remembrance of his father, King Bhumibol Adulyadej.Adam Dean for The New York TimesOpinion polls show that the party of Mr. Prayuth, United Thai Nation, is trailing in third place behind Pheu Thai, which has topped the polls. In recent weeks, there has also been a surge in support for the Move Forward Party, which is polling a close No. 2.Move Forward is the largest party pushing to amend the law, irking conservatives who have accused it of undermining the monarchy. The party wants to cut the jail terms of violators of the law and designate the Bureau of the Royal Household as the only agency allowed to file lawsuits. (Any Thai citizen is able to file complaints under the current version of the law.)Conservative politicians have threatened to disband Move Forward. The party’s previous iteration, the Future Forward Party, was dissolved in 2020 by the Constitutional Court. In a sign of how sensitive the topic of reform has become, Move Forward has attempted to moderate its position, saying reform would not take precedence in its campaign.For decades, the monarchy and the military have had a symbiotic relationship, with the army frequently reminding the public that it is the true guardian of the Thai crown. Thais are taught from a young age that they have to love the king and that any criticism of the monarchy is strictly forbidden.But today, many Thais no longer stand at attention when the royal anthem is played in public spaces such as movie theaters. Royalist Marketplace, a Facebook group set up to satirize the monarchy, had more than 1 million members before Facebook blocked access to it in 2020, citing a Thai government request.The law criminalizing criticism of the monarchy carries a minimum sentence of three years if violated — the only law in Thailand that imposes a minimum jail term — and a maximum sentence of up to 15 years. After the 2020 protests, the authorities charged at least 223 people, including 17 minors, for violating the law, known as Article 112.In the area around the Grand Palace in Bangkok, posters of the king and queen are ubiquitous.Adam Dean for The New York TimesTantawan “Tawan” Tuatulanon, a 21-year-old law student, was accused of violating the rule in 2022 after she and her friends conducted a poll asking whether the royal motorcade was an inconvenience to Bangkok residents.In recent weeks, she has been pressing political parties on whether they would amend the law — which she is in favor of abolishing — after the election. On Wednesday, Ms. Tantawan was arrested after she called for the release of a 15-year-old charged with violating the rule.“I feel we don’t need any law that specially protects anybody or any family,” said Ms. Tantawan, who mounted a hunger strike earlier this year in protest against the government. “He is a person like us, not a god or a demigod.”King Maha Vajiralongkorn Bodindradebayavarangkun, who ascended the throne in 2016, is not as beloved as his father, King Bhumibol Adulyadej, who reigned for 70 years. While King Bhumibol was revered in Thailand, his son used to spend most of his time in Germany, though he has been seen more often in public since the 2020 protests.In the wake of the protests, Mr. Prayuth instructed all government officials to “use every single law” to prosecute anyone who criticized the monarchy. Royalists stepped up their campaign against people they accused of insulting the crown, filing more complaints and attacking anti-monarchy activists.In 2021, Warong Dechgitvigrom, a former doctor, founded Thailand’s first far-right party, Thai Pakdee, in response to what he called the “Three Fingers Mob,” referring to the three-finger salute adopted by young Thais as a symbol of resistance during the 2020 protests.A supporter holds up a poster of King Bhumibol Adulyadej during a rally for Thai Pakdee, a right-wing party that is centered on defending the monarchy against criticism.Jorge Silva/ReutersHe now says the current law protecting the monarchy does not go far enough, as it is limited to shielding four key members of the royal family. Former Thai kings, princes, princesses and the word “monarchy” itself should also be protected, he said.Although Mr. Warong’s views are considered extreme, he says he has collected about 6,000 to 7,000 signatures for his proposal, and that he is confident he can gather the 10,000 signatures needed for the House of Representatives to consider passing the bill.Mr. Warong says people need to understand that the Thai monarchy is unique. He recalled France’s former monarchy as one characterized by the oppression of its people. “But ours is like father and children,” he said. “We have good feelings together, there are no bad feelings.”Those views are at odds with how many young people feel about the king. During the 2020 demonstrations, protesters questioned the wealth of the royal family, which is one of the richest in the world.Protesters in 2020 at a pro-democracy rally in front of the Siam Commercial Bank, demanding that the king return royal assets to the people and reform the monarchy.Adam Dean for The New York TimesKasit Piromya, a former foreign minister, said it would be challenging for Mr. Warong and his party to lead a successful campaign backing the constitutional monarchy because many young people “don’t see what is in it for them.”“If you cannot speak this in the open, then it gives more room and ammunition to the students, to the Thaksin supporters to say, ‘We are more democratic,’” Mr. Kasit said, referring to calls to reform the monarchy.Arnond Sakworawich, an assistant professor of statistics at the National Institute of Development Administration, said that preserving Article 112 was necessary because the king and the royal family do not defend themselves against criticism.“It’s a different culture, because in Thailand, people believe that the king is their parent, and parents never hurt their children,” said Mr. Arnond, who is known for his royalist views. “So there must be some people to protect the king.”In their zeal to defend the monarchy, many royalists may ultimately end up hurting the institution more than they protect it.Siripan Nogsuan Sawasdee, the head of the department of government at Chulalongkorn University, said it was “very precarious and risky” for parties such as Thai Pakdee to use the monarchy as a campaigning platform.“Even though the monarchy is above politics, it’s now drawn into the divide,” she said. “It will polarize the voters and parties into two camps, inevitably.”Young protesters flash the three-fingered, anti-government salute at a pro-democracy rally at Democracy Monument in Bangkok.Adam Dean for The New York TimesRyn Jirenuwat More

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Texas Republicans Push New Voting Restrictions Aimed at Houston

      by

      The bills propose limits on polling places, tougher penalties for illegal voting and a way for the Republican-led state to order new elections in its largest city.HOUSTON — Across Harris County, an emerging Democratic stronghold in reliably red Texas, roadside signs posted last November urged harried drivers to vote Republican. A celebrity furniture salesman, beloved by many Houstonians, cut ads with the Republican candidate for the top county administrator’s post.The 2022 races for local judges and county leaders were among the hardest fought and most expensive yet seen in the sprawling county of 4.8 million, which includes Houston, as Republicans looked to capitalize on crime concerns to make headway in the state’s largest urban area.But they fell short.Now, the county is in the cross hairs of the Republican-dominated state Legislature, which is trying to exert more control over voting there. Lawmakers are pushing dozens of new election bills, including limits on polling places, felony penalties for illegal voting and a mechanism for the state to order new elections when voting problems occur in Texas counties with more than 2.7 million people, a category that includes only Harris County.At the same time, more than a dozen election challenges have been filed by losing Republican candidates in the county who have argued that significant problems at a limited number of polling places on Election Day, including insufficient supplies of ballot paper, were enough change the outcomes of races. While local leaders acknowledge issues, evidence has not been presented that they affected the results.Still, the two-front fight, both in the courts and in the State Capitol, highlighted just how important it is for Republicans to keep Harris County in play and not let it become another strongly blue urban center along the lines of Austin or Dallas. As recently as 2014, the party controlled the county, whose Republican top official was re-elected in a landslide. But it has been moving left ever since.“I tell people, we could be the reason we lose Texas, just because of our size,” said Cindy Siegel, the chair of the county Republican Party, sitting in her office under a painting of George W. Bush with smoke rising from Lower Manhattan after Sept. 11, 2001.“We’re the wall,” she added. “And they say, so goes Texas, so goes the country. So Harris County is the battleground.”Harris County, an area larger than the state of Rhode Island, includes the reliably Democratic city of Houston.Tamir Kalifa for The New York TimesThe election bills aimed at the county are part of a broad effort by Republican state leaders to increase their control over Texas’ Democratic-run urban areas. They include bills prohibiting local governments from adopting certain local ordinances, including over worker pay or hours, and allowing for the removal of elected local prosecutors who refuse to enforce certain laws, such as those banning abortion. The approach mirrors those in other red states with large blue cities, such as Tennessee and Florida.Republican lawmakers in Texas passed an overhaul of election rules just two years ago in a bitter fight with Democrats. They returned to the subject this session in large part to address the results in Harris County in November.The election there provided a contentious backdrop because there were real issues during the vote. Some polling places opened late, while others struggled with enough paper to accommodate the two-sheet ballot printouts needed for the county’s huge list of races. The local district attorney, a Democrat, opened an investigation last year.“The legislative push is to make sure that this never happens in any county in Texas,” said Senator Paul Bettencourt, a Houston Republican and the sponsor of several of the bills. “I believe the lack of ballot paper is voter suppression.”But county officials said the election bills do not address the issues that arose in Harris County. Instead, they said, the proposed laws could dampen turnout by limiting voting options and would give a partisan secretary of state, an official appointed by the governor, the power to overturn results and order a new vote if ballot paper issues arose again.Christian Menefee, the Harris County attorney, said the election challenges appeared to try to lay the groundwork for giving Republicans more control over the elections in a Democratic county. “It is a solution in search of a problem that’s not widespread,” he said.“As a Black man whose grandfather paid a poll tax, this whole ordeal is infuriating,” said Mr. Menefee, a Democrat. “It’s a complete misuse of the word disenfranchisement from people who, by the way, are still working to disenfranchise folks.”The scale of the problems on Election Day — which featured new voting machines and a lengthy ballot that required two pages of paper per voter — remain a matter of dispute, both in court and before the Legislature. But they do not appear to have affected the vast majority of the county’s 782 polling locations.Election workers organized ballot machines and results at NRG Arena in Houston on Election Day in 2022.Annie Mulligan for The New York TimesAt a hearing before a State House committee in March, the head of the secretary of state’s elections division said that despite logistical problems, the 2022 election “was one of the best elections we’ve seen” in several years in Harris County, though he acknowledged it was a low bar given the roundly criticized primary election earlier in the year.Republicans have said the November results were indeed affected because, they have argued, the ballot issues arose in precincts where their voters turn out in large numbers. Democratic county officials have said the problems occurred in other areas as well and were limited in scope: A postelection report by the election administrator, Clifford Tatum, found that 68 polling places reported running out of paper on Election Day, and 61 said they later received additional paper.County officials have resisted releasing documents and other information about the handling of voting issues on Election Day in response to public information requests, citing the ongoing litigation. Among Senator Bettencourt’s election bills is one that would remove the “litigation exception” for requests for certain election records.With that backdrop, the State Senate has advanced more than a dozen election bills, explicitly or implicitly aimed at Harris County, an area larger than the state of Rhode Island that includes not only the reliably Democratic city of Houston but also some of its more moderate suburbs.The county since 2016 has shifted ever more firmly into the Democratic column in presidential races and local ones as well, as formerly conservative neighborhoods and growing Houston suburbs have grown more diverse and trended blue. The political make-up of the five-member commissioners court, which administers the county, has gone from a three-two Republican majority in 2014 to a four-one Democratic majority now.Republicans are hoping, if not to reverse that trend, then at least to keep the contests close and, sometimes, winnable.“The Texas Legislature will ensure that there are consequences for Harris County’s failure to run elections,” said Senator Mayes Middleton, a Houston-area Republican and the sponsor of the bill to allow the secretary of state to order new elections in certain cases of ballot paper problems. “Disenfranchising voters is unacceptable,” Mr. Middletown said, in a statement.Also of concern to Democrats and advocates of expanding access to the polls is another bill, which passed the State Senate last month, that would limit voters to their assigned polling place. Some counties, including Harris County, currently allow voters to cast a ballot anywhere in the county.“It’s definitely one of the most damaging,” said Katya Ehresman, the voting rights program manager at the advocacy group Common Cause Texas, because by limiting voters’ options it could decrease turnout. The bill, like others that have made it through the Senate, must still pass the more moderate, Republican-controlled State House.In the last election, voters whose polling places ran out of paper were able to go to another location in the county, though some gave up without voting.Twenty-one Republican candidates have filed election challenges, including Alexandra del Moral Mealer, who lost the Harris County judge race by 18,000 votes.Annie Mulligan for The New York TimesMany of the legal challenges to the November election in Harris County involve voters who were unable to cast ballots.Leila Perrin said she had gone to vote in a more conservative section of West Houston shortly before the polls closed on Election Day and encountered a chaotic scene. “I went to get out of my car, and these people were leaving and they said, ‘Don’t bother,’” she recalled. “I said ‘Why?’ And they said, ‘They don’t have any paper ballots.’”Ms. Perrin, 72, had planned to vote against the top county official, the Democratic county judge Lina Hidalgo. So she drove to another polling site nearby and found the same situation. By then it was 10 minutes before the polls closed. “So I just went home. I was furious,” she said.Twenty-one Republican candidates have filed election challenges including Ms. Perrin’s favored candidate, Alexandra del Moral Mealer, who lost to Ms. Hidalgo by 18,000 votes. The first trial is set to begin in June.Some voters also found themselves unable to vote in predominantly Democratic precincts temporarily on Election Day, though no Democratic candidates have filed challenges. For example, voters were turned away from one such location that did not open for hours. All polls in the county were ordered to stay open an extra hour under an emergency court order, but then voting was halted by the Texas Supreme Court after an appeal from the Republican attorney general.“Issues don’t mean conspiracies,” said Representative John Bucy, a Democratic member of the Texas House elections committee. “Our elections are run effectively in the state of Texas. Nothing is perfect, but they’re effective.”At a hearing of the elections committee last month, an election judge in Harris County said he had run out of paper by 6 p.m. on Election Day despite flagging the issue several times during the day.“We had about 40 people in line, most of whom left to find another polling place,” said the judge, Christopher Russo. Those who stayed would be able to vote, he said he told them, but he could not guarantee how long it would take to get the paper.“I finally received ballot paper at 9:05 p.m.,” he said. By that time, only four people remained in line. More