Omaha Progressive

Daub Ready To Lose Another Election

2006-12-03T17:16:00.000-06:00

Former Omaha Mayor Hal Daub, who was defeated by Mike Fahey in 2001, is considering a run for office. The rumors have been flying since Fahey's 2005 reelection that Daub was considering a run for mayor in 2009, but today's Omaha World-Herald gives an indication that Daub may have his eyes set on another office: the U.S. Senate seat held by Chuck Hagel.

After winning a special election to succeed P.J. Morgan as mayor in 1995, then narrowly defeating Brenda Council in 1997, Daub saw his term in office marred by bickering and infighting with the Omaha City Council. In 2001, when Fahey defeated him, most of the Council was also swept out of office. If he tries to run against Fahey for mayor, I wonder if he would even have a chance.

In 2001, Fahey won largely because he promised to work with the City Council and restore civility in City Hall. In the last five years, he's done tremendous work with redevelopment in Omaha. His resounding victory in 2005 against a member of a prominent political family in Omaha gives an indication of just how much the people of this city appreciate Mike Fahey's leadership.

If he ran for an open Senate seat, Daub would likely face Jon Bruning, who faced no opposition in his race for Attorney General this year, in the primary. Rep. Lee Terry might also jump into the primary. Bruning would have to be the favorite to win the Republican nomination. On the Democrats' side, Fahey has expressed interest in running for Senate before, and Scott Kleeb is a favorite choice of many Democrats as well. The Democratic field for Senate, like the Republican field, will depend on whether or not Chuck Hagel decides to stroke his ego with a run for President. Either way, it seems, Hal Daub is giving the voters of Omaha, and Nebraska, yet another opportunity to reject him.

Lee Terry Thanks The Voters For Not Throwing Him Out Of Office

2006-11-29T14:35:00.000-06:00

After a near shock from the incredible grassroots effort of Jim Esch, Congressman Lee Terry has evidently decided to put more effort into his post-election campaign than he did in his real campaign. He bought 17 billboards around town that thank the voters for being just Republican enough to save him from a pissed-off electorate. Well, what they really say is "Thank You for Your Trust," but the message is loud and clear.

Terry has not accomplished anything as a member of the Republican majority, but that doesn't stop him from trying to explain what he's accomplished. You can hardly find an issue where Terry won't bring up a House bill he supported or "co-sponsored," and who can forget the comically bad issue ads Terry ran during the campaign: intellectual property and energy independence. Who knows what Democratic bills Terry will try to take credit for in 2008, but this election has shown that he can be held accountable. Will it mean anything to Terry? Time will tell. But unfortunately for everyone in the Omaha area, we have to see these billboards all over town for the next several weeks.

Why We Need To Get Out Of Iraq. Right Now.

2006-11-28T18:40:00.000-06:00

After months of skirting around the issue by calling the various factions engaged in violence in Iraq "insurgents," and the ongoing civil war "sectarian violence," the media has finally reached reality. The United States is an occupying force in between warring factions engaged in a civil war. There is no way that this ends well.

Many of you will recall last year's Tribute to the Fallen in April. We placed 2,390 flags, and read 2,390 names. That was April 25, 2006. Seven months and three days ago. The number of U.S. soldiers dead in Iraq is now at 2,883. 2,743 American soldiers have died since Bush staged his photo-op aboard the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln and declared "Mission Accomplished." That's not even counting the tens of thousands of Iraqis - civilians and military - who have died in the war.

The arguments about why we shouldn't be there aside, the question becomes: can we afford to leave? But, how can we afford not to leave? It's clear that we are not orchestrating a peaceful solution between warring factions. In fact, many of the Shiites hold significant stake in the nominal government of Iraq. Execution-style deaths and bombings are often carried out by men wearing the uniforms of Iraqi security forces. But it's not even that simple. The Bush administration, convinced that we would be greeted as liberators, and woefully ignorant of the sectarian rivalries brewing just underneath the surface, plunged us into a war of choice, that inevitably spiraled into a civil war.

The most recent and deadliest wave of violence began on Thanksgiving Day. The Shiite slum of Sadr City in Baghdad was attacked with car bombs and mortars, killing more than 200. Shiites retaliated by burning five Sunnis alive as they exited mosques. The violence is spiraling out of control, and our presence there is doing nothing to help. If this past weekend was any indication, the violence in Iraq is only going to get worse. John McCain and others believe that simply sending more American troops in to Iraq is going to make things better, but the only thing it will do is result in more American deaths. The longer we stay, the more our young men and women will be killed. I will not pretend that our exit will end the civil war that is already occurring. But I will not delude myself into thinking that staying will do us or the Iraqis any good.

3.0

2006-11-28T17:15:00.000-06:00

While I've been a vocal and outspoken commenter at the NDP blog & Daily Kos, and given guest posts at the UNO blog, I've been neglecting this blog. Now, generally, that's because no one's reading here. One thing that I think was missing from Nebraska this year was a real "netroots" presence. We had an incredible grassroots organization building from the ground up, but we didn't get much attention on the net until the very end. As much as I respect and appreciate the forum of the NDP blog, I do feel that independent blogs have more "cred" with the netroots crowd, and the more, the merrier. I'll be keeping this up and contributing to our blog at the UNO Democrats, hopefully helping to build up a progressive blogosphere that reflects the grassroots we've built here in Nebraska.

World-Herald Misses The Point Yet Again

2006-09-07T20:27:00.000-05:00

The Omaha World-Herald, in its attempt to pass the blame for an incompetent class of entrenched lawmakers who have done nothing right and everything wrong, sought to blame everyone in Congress for the fact that nothing is getting done. Then, they sought to explain why people are so pissed off at Congress right now.

But they missed the point. Badly. Hell, they didn't even get within a mile of it.

By blaming both parties and both houses, and saying that nothing will change if the party control of Congress changes, the World-Herald again misses the point. They are right that this entire Congress has done little if anything to tackle the pressing issues of the day. They are even right in some respects that Democrats are to blame, too. But beyond that, things are just plain wrong.

People are pissed off for a variety of reasons, true, but one of the foremost among those isn't even mentioned in the OWH editorial: Iraq. The editorial makes a passing mention to the "war on terror," but the writer believes that issue isn't as pressing a concern, or as illustrative of the failures of this Congress, as immigration.

It's typical of a partisan paper like the Omaha World-Herald to focus on this issue, and it certainly is something that voters in Nebraska are focused on, but it's not the most pressing issue, and certainly isn't more indicative of the failures of this Congress as the corruption issue, or the out-of-control budget - which the editorial did mention.

So, why are people pissed off?

People are pissed off because this Congress has become a rubber stamp for President Bush.
People are pissed off because this Congress is the most corrupt Congress we've seen in a long time.
People are pissed off because their tax dollars are going to wasteful spending projects and Congressional pay raises.
People are pissed off because their representatives would rather pose for the cameras than get things done.
People are pissed off because any semblance of compromise has been destroyed. Any memory of leadership is long since gone. There is no room for independent thought, and no place for outside-the-box thinking.
People are pissed off because almost 3,000 American lives have been lost, and the only line of thinking coming from Washington is "stay the course."
People are pissed off because their leaders have lost touch. With their constituents. With their base. With reality.

But where the World-Herald completely misses the point... They buy into a self-defeating concept of democracy that leads us to a 98% incumbency rate for Congress. They say that all of Congress has done a terrible job, but the challengers couldn't possibly do much better, so we might as well stick with what we've got. This is harmful logic, though certainly not unexpected coming from a conservative newspaper. It's a common tactic of the guilty party to use one form or another of the "everyone does it" argument. You know the ones: "All politicians are liars and crooks," "Congress never does anything right, anyway," etc. The problem is that these fallacies protect the guilty at the expense of democracy. We never know if we could build a better Congress, because we accept at face value the claim that we can't. I believe we can, and I believe that democracy deserves a hell of a lot better than excuses and this lack of accountability. That's what these elections are all about: accountability.

"Humane Care" Won't Make The Ballot

2006-09-01T20:45:00.000-05:00

The "humane care" petition - supported by many out-of-state interests who wanted to use Nebraska as a testing ground for a radically conservative agenda - failed to make the ballot today. Seeing Nebraska as a conservative enough state to push their agenda, the "humane care" people, with close ties to the group that is pushing the disasterous "SOS" amendment, thought it would be easy to fool Nebraskans into signing these petitions.

It's clear, given the out-of-state interests that have pushed themselves into this state's initiative process, a process that is meant to be a democratic tool, in the truest sense of the word, that we need a serious reform in our initiative process. Something that gives the power back to the people, and takes them away from shadowy organizations that do nothing but use Nebraska as a testing ground for bad ideas.

Rumsfeld's 'Arrogance' Provokes Esch

2006-08-31T00:14:00.000-05:00

From the "any press is good press" department, Jim Esch gets some coverage from the Omaha World-Herald for calling Donald Rumsfeld an "idiot" for his comments on Tuesday.

Esch, the Democrat seeking to unseat incumbent Republican U.S. Rep. Lee Terry in the Omaha-based 2nd District, posted his comments Wednesday on a campaign weblog that appears on his Web site, www.jimesch.org.

"It's time to abandon this failed policy in Iraq," Esch wrote. "I will not stand by and watch another U.S. soldier die, so idiots like Don Rumsfeld can rewrite history."

"Maybe it is a little strong," Esch said when asked about the posting. "But I was a little fired up this morning" after reading Rumsfeld's comments.

Rumsfeld delivered Tuesday what was viewed as one of the strongest Bush administration attacks on Iraq war critics, comparing them to Nazi-era appeasers. He suggested that critics of the war effort "seem to not have learned history's lessons."

Esch said he found those comments infuriating because they typified administration efforts to label anyone who questions the war as unpatriotic.

It's probably not smart politics to call the Secretary of Defense an "idiot." And for what it's worth, I don't think Donald Rumsfeld is an idiot. But there comes a point where you become so detached from reality that you are either a liar or a fool.

For four terms, Lee Terry has been a Republican lapdog in the House of Representatives. He has shown no leadership, no initiative, and no solutions. But he has never faced a legitimate challenge to his seat in Congress.

In 1998, Terry defeated Michael Scott for the open seat 65-34%.
In 2000, He defeated Shelley Kiel 66-31%.
In 2002, He defeated Jim Simon 63-33%.
In 2004, He defeated Nancy Thompson 61-36%.

No candidate challenged Terry on the issues. And, given the showing of the last four challengers that faced Terry, Esch can't help but do better. We are in an environment today where our candidates have to stand up to the Republican incumbents and explain why their policies have been disasters. So, calling Rumsfeld an "idiot" may not be the smartest thing, but it certainly grabbed the attention of the local press, and allowed Esch to speak directly to Rumsfeld's comments in the media.

Relaunch!

2006-08-30T23:39:00.000-05:00

So, after blogging a whole lot in the comments at the NDP's website, spending a bit more time at Daily Kos, and a reminder from Kyle a couple weeks back that I had let this place go unnoticed for a couple of months, I've decided to relaunch Omaha Progressive. Stay tuned.

Bush Protest A Success

2006-06-07T00:10:00.000-05:00

The Nebraska Young Democrats held a protest at 10th and Cuming St. as the Presidential motorcade arrived at the Omaha Hilton earlier today. A few dozen protestors managed to make sure the local news cycle included the message that Nebraskans do not support George W. Bush. Three of the four Omaha news stations prominently featured our protest, and the Associated Press also wrote about the protest. Democracy is a great thing, and we saw it in action again today.

In other news:

Jim Esch is getting some good press for his speech on Monday outside of the Juan Diego Center. Esch's message was generally supportive of the President's immigration policy, while critical of Lee Terry's support of the House bill that would make criminals out of millions of Americans. The full speech is available at Jim Esch's website.

If you want a model of what we need to do in Nebraska, just look at Montana. Tonight, Jon Tester ran away with the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate. Tester is a Democrat in the mold of Brian Schweitzer. The Democratic Party in Montana is seeing a huge resurgence as of late. Sure, in Presidential elections, they'll probably still go Republican, but the Montana Democratic Party is getting stronger on a state level. Hopefully the Nebraska Democratic Party can lay the groundwork for a similar rise in the next few years.

Still not any information on the race in CA-50, but hopefully that will come soon.

June 4 Update

2006-06-04T13:56:00.000-05:00

It's been a couple weeks since I actually updated this blog. Here's some of the news that I want to comment on:

Kos has returned, and highlights a couple of posts by Kyle that have great insight into the Republican and Democratic Parties on a local and national level. Progress, it seems, is being made. Ben Nelson seems willing to associate himself with the Democratic Party - though it doesn't mean we can't still feel betrayed when he goes against our core values. There are encouraging signs within the Nebraska Democratic Party - not the least of which is the youth movement that the Nebraska Young Democrats and UNO College Democrats have been largely responsible for.

In the next couple of weeks, we will continue with the county Democratic conventions - there are 61 this year - and hopefully see this progress in action. I will be attending the Douglas County Convention and hope to see as many people as possible there. This is a very exciting time to be a Douglas County Democrat, and a Nebraska Democrat. We have three excellent candidates for Congress, a popular United States Senator, and a candidate for Governor who is not afraid to speak his mind on the issues. Kyle's post said that Democrats need to "D-fine" themselves, embracing the "D" and making it mean something. I think that for the first time in a long time, we have candidates willing to do that.

Tuesday night and Wednesday morning, the city of Omaha will be visited by George W Bush, to speak about immigration. I fully expect some protests to take place. This isn't Bush Country anymore.

Bush Approval At 47% In Nebraska

2006-05-15T17:37:00.000-05:00

SurveyUSA's new 50 State Tracking Poll puts George W. Bush at a 47/51 Approval/Disapproval number in Nebraska. That's a net swing of 10 points from April, when Bush was at 51/45, and the first time the poll has put Bush's approval numbers lower than his disapprovals in Nebraska. Even the hardcore Republican base is starting to abandon this President, and his numbers are only going to plummet further the longer this disastrous administration continues to violate the law unchecked. If this means people are finally starting to wake up - than we can finally make progress in the next few years.

The End Of An Era

2006-05-14T23:59:00.000-05:00

The final episode of The West Wing aired tonight. Through the last 7 years, Jed Bartlet and his fictional presidency have been an escape from the cold reality of real-life politics. This was what we all wish politics would be. People are generally good - even most on the other side care about the country. It was funny, it was idealistic, and it was the height of what government could be. It is going to be different without the alternate reality of Jed Bartlet's America around anymore.
Idealism doesn't have to be a dream. The idea that issues should be presented front and center doesn't have to be a foolish fantasy. That Aaron Sorkin was able to create a universe where the President and his staff were great Americans who genuinely wanted to do good, and it was completely believable and realistic, not to mention one of the greatest television shows of all time, is a wonderful achievement.

But does it speak to something about America? We want more out of our politicians. We aren't all cynical, are we? We all wish we had someone like Jed Bartlet to lead this country, but is it simply a dream meant for television and movies? Will we ever have a truly great leader again, or are we destined for more mediocrity? I hope that 2008 yields something that is quite different from the bitter divisiveness that has plagued the Clinton and Bush terms. I want to believe that a great leader is somewhere in the Democratic Party. I hope that he or she comes forward soon.

Where Is The Democratic Party?

2006-05-11T23:32:00.000-05:00

I had a post written, but then thought better of it. What I want to say can be said simply:

We need Democrats to stand up for what they believe in.

I run hot and cold on Ben Nelson. He's not my favorite Democrat, but he is, I think, a Democrat.
I put together a long, ranting post on why the Nebraska Democratic Party is losing, but the truth is, I don't have a clue. This is a conservative state, but there are a lot of things that bother me.

What bothers me is a Democratic Party unwilling or unable to challenge the Bush administration.
What bothers me is a Democratic Party that seems to have lost sight of a significant number of minorities.
What bothers me is a Democratic Party that can't seem to get a cohesive message on anything.

And the problems with the Nebraska Democratic Party become somewhat clearer. They aren't just problems with the Nebraska Democratic Party. They are problems throughout the country. There is very little emphasis on party-building. There is almost no concern on a national level for anything besides reelection campaigns. Petty personal politics always come before the good of the party. Democrats are still afraid to speak the truth. Democrats are still unable to break out of Republican framing. Democrats are still unable to challenge the media. These are things that need to be fixed, or we cannot win.

We can't just hope for the Republicans to be so unbearably bad that we win by default. We need to win the hearts and minds of Americans - and Nebraskans - to build a permanent majority.

2 Days Out

2006-05-07T21:58:00.000-05:00

Finally have a bit of a lull, a busy Saturday behind us all. I didn't have a chance to go to the Morrison-Exon Dinner (check out Kyle's interview with Barack Obama if you have not seen it yet), but did get to see Obama speak at the rally Saturday afternoon. The people at Salem Baptist church loved it, and I think Obama's message is clear and to the point. This is a man who will one day be President of the United States. And the more we keep saying that, the more people will believe it.

We have an opportunity now to change things for the better, now. From your local school board races, to county offices. From your state legislature to the U.S. Congress. Every race is important. Every vote counts. If you can, get out there and get other people to vote. It may only be a primary, but it's very important. And in November, we can really make our voices heard. Loud and clear.

Omaha World-Herald Endorses... David Kramer?

2006-04-30T00:45:00.000-05:00

The Omaha World-Herald has endorsed David Kramer for Senate in the Republican Party. At last check, he was polling in the single digits. The Republican race for Senate doesn't leave a desirable candidate to choose from, but given the Herald's obvious leanings it's actually quite a surprise they picked Kramer. The Omaha World-Herald generally isn't a paper that will come out and make a statement with an endorsement of a candidate with no shot at winning - especially in a high-profile race like the U.S. Senate. It makes them look foolish and out of touch with Nebraskans in general.

There's very little ideological difference between the three Republicans running for Senate and Ben Nelson. Ricketts is obviously going to be more pro-business... Don Stenberg is going to be an extremist Theo-con. Where the potential candidates differ with Nelson is illustrated perfectly in the person of David Kramer, and it's telling that the World-Herald chose him as their GOP Senate candidate. David Kramer is a Republican. He's a party loyalist through and through. He's a former Republican state chairman, and everything in his political career so far has been closely associated with the party.

The difference between these three candidates and Ben Nelson is, simply, that Ben Nelson will actually work with Democrats in the Senate. I'm not thrilled with Ben Nelson as my Senator - he doesn't represent the interests of the Democratic Party well. But he isn't a Joe Lieberman, destroying our party from the inside out. He's simply doing what he thinks the people of Nebraska want. And it's working - he's the most popular Senator in the country among his constituents. And when the opponents are a religious wingnut, a corporate suit, and a party insider, there are worse things to be than a conservative Democrat.

Osborne Holds Slim Lead, Still Within Margins

2006-04-28T16:10:00.000-05:00

The Lincoln Journal-Star gives us another poll, this one from KMTV and a local research group. In it, Osborne holds a 44-41 lead over Dave Heineman. It's consistent with the other two polls, both of which had Osborne in the 43-44 point range. I don't think there's much you can draw from this poll because of that. Osborne hasn't made any gains, and Heineman's losses are so small that it's likely just the margin of error. In other words, this poll really just confirms that it's still anyone's race. I'm glad to see regular polling on the most hotly-contested primary in the country, but there's not much new information here.

I did finally turn in my early voting ballot yesterday. No, I did not switch parties - I don't ever want to be responsible for putting either Dave Heineman or Tom Osborne in the governor's seat. I'm disappointed in the lack of competitive races on our primary ballot. We don't have any candidates for Attorney General, State Auditor, or State Treasurer. Not even a write-in candidate, yet. The state party has made tremendous strides in the past couple of years - 2004 was a disaster. But there is still a long way to go. If there is a real 93-county strategy, I hope the party implements it. Because things need to improve a lot before we're a competitive force in this state again.

Ricketts Has Huge Lead; Governor's Race Still A Dead Heat

2006-04-27T01:06:00.000-05:00

Well, the Lincoln Journal Star has printed the results of Rasmussen's latest polling on the Nebraska primaries. The results are actually pretty much in line with Pete Ricketts' recent poll, which suggests that the former poll was fairly accurate.

In fact, the Rasmussen poll is even better for Ricketts, who breaks the 50% mark, doubling his nearest opponent, Don Stenberg. But the big story is for Dave Heineman. We had no reason to believe that the last poll for the governor's race was inaccurate, but a second poll confirming that the race is a dead heat is huge for Heineman. And, as much as it doesn't matter to the Democrats who wins the primary, I think from an issues standpoint, we'd rather face Heineman. Hahn can engage Heineman on the issues, particularly education, because that's all there is. If Osborne wins the nomination, I doubt we'll even have to see a campaign. You can't criticize Tom Osborne in this state - something Dave Heineman has hardly done at all in his campaign. No one will listen to the criticisms, however valid they may be.

New Poll Good News For Nelson

2006-04-26T14:10:00.000-05:00

A new Rasmussen poll released today shows Nelson just where he was against Ricketts several months ago, holding a comfortable 54-36 lead among Nebraskans. Where it gets interesting, though, is if Ricketts doesn't win the nomination. Nelson leads Don Stenberg 61-26, and David Kramer 64-24. Whie it's premature to actually call Nelson "safe," it's very good news for his campaign.

GOP Primary Polls

2006-04-20T23:57:00.000-05:00

Pete Ricketts released his internal polling to the press today. Take it with a grain of salt, since it is his poll...

Ricketts... 43%
Stenberg.. 33%
Kramer.... 7%

If the numbers are accurate, and we really have no way to know if they are until May 9, then Ricketts' strategy of spending a bunch of his money on stupid television ads is working. And I worry for the people of this state if that is the case. Please, for the love of all that is good and holy, save us from having to listen to six more months of "Pete, you forgot your hat!"

The more interesting polling from this set comes in the GOP Gubernatorial race. The poll confirms what most of the experts have been saying for a while now - this is a very, very close race. It would not be a shock if Heineman handed Tom Osborne his first political defeat. Osborne's campaign managers make some weak excuses in the article - that Osborne started his ads later than Heineman... as if Tom Osborne had any trouble with name recognition? I guarantee you that more people in this state know who Tom Osborne is than who Dave Heineman is. So, anyway, the numbers:

Osborne... 44%
Heineman... 43%
Nabity... 6%

Nabity refused in the article to be labeled as a spoiler. So, I suppose, he'd rather be labeled "fringe." He's probably the only candidate that David Hahn can beat, though I would enthusiastically support Hahn's campaign if Heineman wins the primary. With Tom Osborne, it's simple: we can't beat him. The only reason Heineman has a chance is because he's an incumbent Republican governor. David Hahn gets creamed against Tom Osborne. But against Heineman, he builds up the Democratic Party, even in defeat.

LB 1024 Passes

2006-04-13T18:18:00.000-05:00

LB 1024 passed today on the last day of the legislative session. I've beat this topic to death over the past week. What was a "compromise" spearheaded by Ron Raikes, LB 1024 turned into a disaster in the course of three days, thanks to the amendment offered by Raikes and Sen. Ernie Chambers. The compromise wasn't great, but it had some very small concessions to the OPS position. Namely, any student in the "learning community" could go to any school. In theory, that sounds great. In practice, it's nearly impossible. You combine it with the racially motivated OPS breakup plan, and you have a terrible piece of legislation, which will not pass the federal court test. Sixteen senators voted against this proposal on the final round of voting. In other words, it was a pretty healthy victory for the proposal. Heineman is expected to sign it, and the court battle will begin sometime in the next year. Based on past Supreme Court precedents, it's going to be difficult for the courts not to overturn this one. The boundaries of the districts are racially motivated, and that will be OPS' argument when this goes to court.

If I am to understand Sen. Chambers' argument correctly, he is saying that there is already segregation in our schools, and the only thing left to do is institutionalize and codify the existing segregation so that students in these schools have more control over their education. The intent behind this law may not be segregation - that's certainly not Chambers' intent, according to his statements. But that's what the end result will be. And I find it unfortunate that so many senators fail to recognize this. No plan would have been better than this plan, which is a rushed attempt to punish OPS for even bringing the issue up in the first place.

Hergert Impeached

2006-04-12T18:34:00.000-05:00

The unicameral voted today to impeach regent David Hergert. He will be tried before the Nebraska Supreme Court for violations of campaign finance laws. It was a close vote, that just barely got the 25 votes needed to impeach. The final vote on LB 1024 will be tomorrow, and it is expected to pass. Then it will go to the governor, who will probably sign it as a supporter of the Millard schools.

Heineman's support of suburban schools in this debate kills any argument for me among fellow Democrats that we should support him. This isn't about bipartisanship. Heineman's not a moderate, and he is a Republican. I don't care if you don't think David Hahn has a chance in hell of winning. You don't vote for the guy you think is going to win, you vote for the guy you want. Dave Heineman is running in the Republican primary, and Democrats would probably prefer to face him in the general. But I don't want to hear a Democrat saying they'd vote for Heineman in the general election. Because it's counter to what we want to accomplish here.

Tuesday Update

2006-04-11T23:12:00.000-05:00

LB 1024 cleared another hurdle today, passing second round approval with only two days left in the legislative session. This is the most important thing these senators are going to do before they retire, but we aren't getting any debate, simply a fasttracked bill that has virtually no chance of standing up in the courts. There are two days left in this legislative session, and then, barring a special session, twenty of these senators will be gone. Heineman has done very little of importance in his year and a half as governor. The one thing he will be remembered for, if he does lose to Osborne in the primary, is signing LB 1024 into law. Eventually, we'll have OPS v. Bruning or some similar suit overturn the law in federal court. It will cost taxpayers money to tell us what we already know: this law is grossly unconstitutional. And I can't honestly believe that a brilliant legal mind like Ernie Chambers doesn't know that. The mere presence of his amendment on this bill dooms it in the federal courts.

Duke Cunningham's seat is up for special election today. The votes are being tallied, and the only question is whether Democrat Francine Busby can get over the 50% needed to prevent a runoff election. An interesting sidenote, though, is just how low Republican turnout seems to be for this election. Granted, it's a special election in the middle of April, for a seat vacated by a confessed criminal... But you have to wonder how much of this Republican apathy will carry over to the general election in November. Chances are that it's not the case in Nebraska - the governor's race will get people to the polls either way. According to the folks at Kos, this will be going to a runoff.

Large Immigration Protest In Omaha

2006-04-10T19:14:00.000-05:00

Thousands marched in protest of immigration "reforms" proposed by Congress today in Omaha. It is encouraging to me to see so many people with passion and ready to be active. A lot of them are young. A large number of them are American citizens - born to immigrants in this country. Every time a conservative says that illegal immigrants have no right to use our schools, I remind them that many of the children of immigrants were born in this country. They are citizens. And the opposition to immigration thrown out by the right wing in the past month isn't about national security. It isn't about open borders. How many right wing conservatives are you hearing complain about the open Canadian border? It's about race. Nothing makes this more apparent than the controversy surrounding the Mexican flag at protests such as this one. Pundits and politicians alike don't believe that people have a right to celebrate their heritage. My family has been American for a few generations, and I don't feel a strong sense of identity for any other country, mainly because I have many different European ancestries. But I understand the importance of culture. You can't forget your roots, and it's ludicrous to say that someone can't be an American and a Mexican.

What's even more worrisome to me, though, is reading around the blogosphere. We have many self-proclaimed liberals who are very much anti-immigration. They make some legitimate arguments, but eventually those run out, and they resort to xenophobia. It's not exclusive to the Republican Party, in other words, and it's a huge concern to the Democrats for two reasons: 1) The obvious electoral concern. In a generation, the children of illegal immigrants will be legal, voting adults. Some of them already are. If the Democrats side with the Republicans on this issue, they will lose Hispanic Americans as a key voting bloc. 2) The moral obligation. The Democrats have been and should be about protecting those who are less fortunate. Many illegal workers are treated like slave labor. It's economic slavery, and it's wrong.

There's not an easy solution, but the root causes don't have anything to do with our borders or what happens when they get here. It's about our country's policies in Mexico, and the Mexican government's poor treatment of workers. That needs to be solved. Because nothing else will help both countries.

More Reaction From OPS Breakup Plan

2006-04-07T16:12:00.000-05:00

Many, including Mayor Fahey, are blasting the proposal offered by Sens. Chambers and Raikes for being segregationist in nature. They have a point. While I think OPS has gone too far in saying that it's an intentional act of segregation - particularly when Chambers is one of the sponsors of the amendment - this much is true... The plan, as constructed, would essentially isolate the communities. West Omaha, the white district. North Omaha, the black district, and Southeast Omaha, the Hispanic district.

I had a more optimistic tone, yesterday, looking for logic where there was none. The more I read about this plan, I'm baffled. It seems to be the precise opposite of one-city, one-district. It's something that clearly should be overturned by the courts. Kyle sums it up pretty well. They need to slow down, take a deep breath, and not make any rash decisions. That sentiment was shared by Sen. Gail Kopplin of Gretna, a suburban school supporter. Kopplin abstained from the vote on the amendment.

I'm a defender of Ernie Chambers, but I can't figure out where he's coming from on this. Why he would think it more likely for inner-city schools to get funding in this plan. OPS was looking for one-city, one-district. Instead, we have a plan with several cities, more than a dozen districts, and two counties in a so-called "learning community" that seems to only weaken the diversity of existing schools. I remarked yesterday that if a student could indeed go to any school within the community, perhaps that was a step forward. But, after taking a look at the plan in detail, there's very little that improves on the existing system, which I'm not much of a fan of, anyway. This proposal isolates the Hispanic and African-American communities in Omaha, and simply does not address the larger issues.

Perhaps the only thing to come out of this may be that it's such a bad law, the courts have no choice but to overturn it. As it is, though, it seems a rushed attempt at "compromise" that doesn't give much to Omaha's low-income and minority communities at all.

This is three days in a row I've talked about OCOD, and I'll probably continue with it until the end of the session. It will be interesting to see how the final vote shakes out, or if the session will expire before they can reach a resolution.

Is it a better plan?

2006-04-06T18:27:00.000-05:00

The Nebraska Legislature approved an amendment today to split OPS into three districts, offered by Ernie Chambers and Ron Raikes. After rejecting the integration amendment offered by Bourne, the body agreed to create a task force to study integration. I'm not entirely sure what this amendment does to favor the position of minorities. The current structure of the education system makes it likely that the less economically-viable districts will be largely ignored. Chambers is someone I trust on this issue, but I'm still skeptical, especially when the other leading proponents of the city in this matter voted against the amendment - offered in part by one of the leading opponents, Raikes.

There's no easy solution, but perhaps this is the best that they can do right now. Or, perhaps, it really is the best solution. If students are indeed allowed to go to any school within the so-called "learning community," then it's a small victory. I see many problems if the bill does pass, however. The administration costs of this endeavor are likely going to rise. Things will need to become more streamlined and efficient, but with the warring factions on each side, you have to wonder if that will actually happen.

I have to wonder, though, how Westside gets a pass. Though I don't agree with the suburban schools (Millard is not independent of Omaha, and the Ralston schools in question are in Omaha city limits), I can see their point somewhat. Westside schools have no ground to stand on, but no one has simply proposed that OPS absorb the Westside schools, which means that they will still remain their own district.

Welcome

2006-04-05T12:41:00.000-05:00

I'm Dave, a member of UNO College Democrats and this is my humble addition to the blogosphere. I'll offer my own rants and ramblings about the state of local and national politics from an Omahan's perspective. Real change begins now, 2006, and we have a number of exciting candidates for office, and a number of generally enthusiastic people dedicated to getting them elected.

With that, here's some news for today, Wednesday, April 5:

Governor Heineman signed into law today a bill that will allow Nebraskans to carry concealed weapons. It is unfortunate that this kind of thinking still prevails. For an example, the UNO Republicans recently placed fliers around campus asserting that "More Guns = Less Crime," the kind of laughable logic that can only exist in a right-winger's mind. After all, these are the same people who honestly still believe that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the 9/11 attacks, that there really were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, that George W. Bush is competent, and that Tom DeLay is innocent.

DeLay, of course, announced yesterday that he would retire from the House of Representatives. As one final act of circumventing the democratic process, DeLay - who already won the Republican primary for the Texas 22nd district - is changing his residency to Virginia so that he will not be eligible to run for reelection. This basically allows the Republican Party to handpick a candidate without the bother of an open primary. The Democratic nominee is former Congressman Nick Lampson, who was defeated in 2004 thanks to DeLay's gerrymandering of Texas.

Another racist Republican. Not a big surprise, and hardly a surprise either that the target of his racism is Sen. Ernie Chambers. John DeCamp is running in the crowded 30th district, against Tony Ojeda and two other Republicans. The Democrats in the race are Jana Hafer and Norman Wallman. The controversy stems from a remark DeCamp made about kicking Chambers' "black you-know-what" all over the Senate. Typical of a racist apology, DeCamp denied that he was a racist, because his kids are half-Asian, and his legal aide is black. Racism, though, isn't just about who your friends are. You can be a racist and associate with, even be friends with, or live with, yes, even marry, someone of a different skin color. Racism is about prejudice and making crude generalizations. It's about denying people economic freedom, or thinking less of someone, because of their skin color.

John DeCamp may love his wife, may think the world of her, but when he calls her his "war trophy," it's hard not for me to think that he's an asshole, and a misogynist. Just like it's hard for me to think that the senators who struck down an integration amendment opposed it for any reason other than opposing integration. It frightens me to think, that 50+ years after Brown, that this is still a controversial issue that didn't even get ten votes. Westside and Millard Public Schools operate within the city of Omaha, but outside of the authority of the Omaha School District. This is inequality, the seperate but equal standard that Brown struck down. Legally, morally, ethically, OPS is in the right here. People are very resistant to change.