Posted by: Ken Riter | January 23, 2013

Are Republicans Rigging Elections?


OMAHA, NE – The Republicans in the House managed to keep their majority, but not because people voted them in, but because the Republicans in various states gerrymandered their districts. In the Red Tsunami of 2010, Republicans gained control of numerous state governments, in many of those states they gained control of both legislative houses and the governorship. In 25 of those states, the Republicans gained control of both legislative houses.  Ten of those states were states that were scheduled to lose or gain US House seats.  Most this success is attributed, by a memo from the Republican State Legislative Committee (RSLC), to the REDMAP program, REDistricting MAjority Project.

In swing states like Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, there was a noticeable amount of Republicans representing those states in comparison to the amount of votes Republicans received.

Michigan felt the affects of the REDMAP most; the RSLC spent $1 million in Michigan’s legislative races in 2010. As a result, the GOP picked up 20 seats in the state house and majorities in both the state house, the state senate and the state governorship. This gave the GOP absolute control when it came to redistricting.  Although Michigan voters elected a Democratic Senator by 20 points and Obama by 10 points, the GOP maintained majorities in both state houses and sent a 9-5 GOP majority in 2012 to represent voters in the US House.

Ohio re-elected Obama by 2 points and a Democratic Senator by 5 points, yet the GOP maintained control of both state houses. In the 2010 elections, REDMAP alloted $1 million for the elections in the Ohio legislature resulting in GOP majorities in both houses and GOP control of the governorship. This gave the GOP complete control over redistricting and allowed them to send a GOP majority 12-4 to the US House in 2012, despite voters only giving them 52% of the vote for Congressional candidates.

Pennsylvania also felt the blow of REDMAP in their races as well.  The RSLC spent $1 million in Pennsylvania’s state house races that resulted in GOP control of both houses and GOP control of the governorship, also giving the GOP complete control over redistricting. Pennsylvania elected a Democrat for US Senate by 9 points and re-elected Obama by 5 points, yet they sent a 13-5 GOP majority to the US House.

Wisconsin elected a GOP majority in both house in 2010 after the RSLC spent $1.1 million. They also won the governorship, giving the GOP complete control in redistricting in yet another swing state. Wisconsinites got a bad taste of what bold conservative leadership is all about. The The state sent a Democrat to the Senate by 6 points and re-elected Obama  by 7 points. While the Democrats regained control of the state senate for a short period, the GOP regained control in 2012 and sent 5-3 GOP majority to the US House.

In the elections for the US House, Americans gave Democrats 1 million more votes than the Republicans, who now retain their majority in the US House by about 33 seats. Its not just about redistricting either, much of the money used by the GOP to fund these races is from Dark Money, dark money is from supposedly non-profits establish and millions from corporations who provide funds to groups like the RSLC to achieve GOP-map friendly election results.  Here is a chart detailing differences from 2010 to 2012.

There is big move in many states, swing states to be exact, by the GOP to change how the electoral college votes are given to candidates. The RNC chair, Reince Priebus, is urging Republican governors and legislators to change the rule in their states for the distribution of Electoral College votes. He wants the GOP in those states to change the distribution from winner takes all, to instead, grant the winner only the Electoral Votes from the District the candidate wins, namely the ones in the swing states, like Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Florida.  In contrast, the NEGOP has been trying to make Nebraska system winner takes all to keep the Democrats from getting any Presidential Electoral votes. The ranges in proposals would have given Obama a close victory, 270-268 or even a Romney victory of 280-258, even though Obama had a 5 million ballot margin, the largest since Eisenhower.

These results show that state elections can hold strong and powerful consequences on the national level. Voters need to understand their vote is in important in all races, not just Presidential elections.  In fact, your vote may have more weight when it comes to your local and state races.  State races are critical when it comes to redistricting.  You can bet that the RSLC knows that!  Their REDMAP program will have consequences this decade and decades to come.  Presidential elections aren’t the only elections that matter, ALL elections are important!  And losers like the GOP will rig them in all kinds of ways if normal tactics don’t work.

** Sources of information: Big thanks to the MaddowBlog!

Posted by: Ken Riter | January 15, 2013

GenderQueer Cystinosis Patient Seeks Kidney Transplant


GenderQueer Cystinosis Patient Seeks Kidney Transplant, please help if you can!

Posted by: Ken Riter | January 14, 2013

Civil Rights in Omaha: Employment Discrimination


OMAHA, NE – Less than a year ago, the Omaha City Council passed an ordinance passed an ordinance banning discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment and public accommodations.  The ordinance is currently in full effect, but literature from Omaha’s Human Rights and Relations Department is not yet updated to include sexual orientation and gender identity, so just because you don’t see it on the brochure doesn’t mean it isn’t covered. IT IS COVERED!

This is a basic overview of Civil Rights in Omaha dealing with Employment Discrimination.  What is employment discrimination?  Omaha law prohibits unfair or unequal treatment in employment practices and policies such as:

  • Job advertisement
  • Hiring practice (application forms, interviews, selection)
  • Referral by employment agencies
  • Salary, job classification, work duties, working conditions and fringe benefits
  • Promotion, demotion, suspension, layoff, recall or termination

*Exemptions include religious or denominational organizations who may give preference to individuals of the same religion for certain types of jobs.

The unfair act must be based on a person’s:  Race,  Sex,  National Origin, Creed, Religion, Disability, Color, Marital Status, Age, Retaliation, Sexual Orientation, and Gender Identity.

Who is regulated?

  • Employers, with six or more employees, located in the City of Omaha.
  • Employment agencies and placement services.
  • Labor organizations.

Job applications and interviews.  The law prohibits pre-employment practices or policies which:

  • Ask information from applicants (prior to employment) concerning the applicant’s race, sex, national origin, age, religion, color, creed, disability, marital status, sexual orientation and gender identity.
  • Result in the disproportionate screening out of members of such protected groups.
  • Are not relevant to successful job performance.

It is the employer’s right to establish job related requirements and to seek the most qualified individual for the job. Therefore, the employer should only ask those questions necessary to determine the applicant’s eligibility for employment. Examples of prohibited pre-employment questions include:

  • Are you married?
  • What church do you attend?
  • How many children do you have?
  • What year did you graduate from high school?
  • What is your native language?

Employees with disabilities.

The law requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for a qualified employee with a disability.  An accommodation is reasonable if it does not impose an undue hardship on the employer’s business.  Examples of reasonable accommodations are:

  • Job restructuring or job sharing.
  • Adjustments to the work environment, such as raising desks to accommodate wheelchairs.
  • Providing qualified readers, interpreters or assistants.

Pregnancy discrimination.

The law prohibits employers from a failing to hire an applicant because she is pregnant, or discharging or penalizing an employee  in the terms, conditions and privileges of employment because she is pregnant.

1. Employers must make “reasonable accommodations”  such as: allowing the pregnant employee to sit, instead of stand, while working; excusing from or providing assistance for lifting tasks; allowing time off for doctor’s appointments.

2. Employers are also required to provide leave, with or without pay, for a reasonable period of time for disabilities due to and resulting from pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.  A “reasonable period of time” is that determined by the employee’s physician with regard to her physical condition and her specific job requirements.

3. Such employees have return rights to their original jobs or to positions of comparable status and pay (without loss of accumulated service credits and privileges).

Religious accommodations.

The law requires employers to reasonably accommodate an employee’s religious practices unless an undue hardship would result. Two examples of accommodating religious practices are:

  • Allowing the employee to observe a religious holiday by trading work days with a voluntary, qualified co-employee.
  • Granting flexible work schedules.

Sexual harassment at the workplace.

The law defines sexual harassment as unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors or other visual, verbal, or physical conduct of a sexual nature. This may include many forms of offensive behavior such as:

  • Unwanted sexual advances Offering jobs, promotions or benefits in exchange for sexual favors.
  • Threatening to demote, fire or withhold benefits if an employee protests, refuses or ignores sexual advances.
  • Unwanted leering, making sexual gestures or displaying sexually suggestive objects, pictures, cartoons and posters.
  • Unwanted derogatory comments, slurs, jokes, suggestive or obscene letters or notes.
  • Unwanted touching, assault, impeding, or blocking of movement.

Employers are liable for acts of sexual harassment committed by themselves, their agents or supervisory employees. They are also liable for sexual harassment committed by other employees or non-employees, if they know, or should have known, of the conduct and fail to take immediate and appropriate corrective action.

**Most of the information in this article is taken directly from a pamphlet from Omaha’s Human Rights and Relations Department. I just included sexual orientation and gender identity because the current pamphlets are not yet updated.  However, if there are any inconsistencies, the rules, Omaha City ordinance and Nebraska law will control.

For more information on your rights and other aspects of employment discrimination you can contact the City of Omaha Human Rights and Relations Department  at 402-444-5055.

Omaha Douglas Civic Center
1819 Farnam St. Suite 502
Omaha, Nebraska 68183

Posted by: Ken Riter | January 13, 2013

Senator Deb Fischer’s Bipartisan Campaign? Really?


OMAHA, NE – According to a recent interview by the OWH, apparently Deb Fischer (R-NE) is a bipartisan freak and no longer a Tea Partying, petition signing nut! Its kumbaya with all her fellow female Senators!  *eye roll please*  I say once a Tea Party nut, always a Tea Party nut.  I don’t remember Deb Fischer running a bipartisan campaign in her run against Bob Kerrey. As I remember he was the one promising to reach across party lines, just like he once did as a US Senator.  She pledged to stick to rigid ideologies she endorsed by signing petitions for conservative zero, Grover Norquist.

In case you’re wondering where I get “Deb Fischer’s Bipartisan campaign, the culprit is an OWH article, here is the link. Deb Fischer tells the OWH, “she hopes that the bipartisan collaboration of the female senators will help make Congress more capable of addressing the nation’s pressing challenges than in recent years.”  Kumbaya folks!   I’m not too excited about her being the first female elected to a full term from Nebraska, she could be the most conservative in the Senate we have seen yet, and that doesn’t bode well for LGBT, women or other progressive issues. Deb Fischer also doesn’t have a reputation for being nice.  We will see just how bipartisan she really is or isn’t.

For your information, Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) is a strong supporter of LGBT protections, and she is also Deb Fischer’s (R-NE) mentor in the US Senate. (Al Franken D-MN even asked to be her mentor!)  Let’s hope some of that rubs off onto our Senator, Queer Nebraska!


OMAHA, NE – Progressive Oasis will be starting some new categories for the legislative session in 2013.  Introducing the Legislative Grind, which I hope to use to cover legislation being introduced and debated in the Nebraska Unicameral, Omaha’s City Council and the US Congress.  I also hope to cover some legislative news going on in neighboring states, especially Iowa and South Dakota. Here is the link for the Nebraska Legislature calendar.

The Omaha World-Herald reports 40 more bills being introduced in the Nebraska Unicameral, Friday, January 11th.  The most prominent so far is a bill to end state health insurance coverage for the governor and other statewide elected officials, including the Nebraska Unicameral.   This bill was introduced by state senator Jeremy Nordquist (LD7) and received national attention from the Huffington Post.

State senator Scott Lautenbaugh (LD18) introduced legislation that would make changes to the OPS school board. According the OWH, “Legislative Bill 125 calls for a nine-member board, with an election to be held this spring along with the city elections. The board now has 12 members.”  I’m sure this bill will cause at least some controversy, the last bill Lautenbaugh proposed concerning the OPS board was also controversial. According to another OWH article, there is broad support for Lautenbaugh’s latest proposal.

Here is a list on the Nebraska Legislature website of all the bills introduced so far in Nebraska’s 103rd Legislature.  If you have any questions about the legislation your state senator introduced you can find the contact information for their office here.  This is the link to the Unicameral Committees and which state senator belongs to which committee.

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Categories