Last Call For Obama's Coaled Shoulder

Jazz Shaw figures that President Obama's EPA coal plant regulations are deader than dirt.

The writing should be on the wall for this one, particularly since the Democrats have essentially lost coal country entirely, as Ed pointed out this weekend. Energy – and the millions of jobs associated with it – was featured on the campaign trail and proved a winning issue for Republicans. And now, as reported by The Hill, the new GOP majority in the Senate is gearing up to finally do more than just talk about it.

The GOP Senate plans to defund the EPA so the new rules can't be enforced, setting up a potential budget shutdown situation, and that Obama will fold under pressure from 2016 candidates.

Of course, any of these measures would have to get past the President’s veto pen, but if the White House takes too strong of a stand on that they could be springing a terrible trap for Democrats. With both houses of Congress unified, the President would be essentially standing alone as the person blocking a path to cutting costs for consumers and the creation of more jobs. This sets up the GOP for 2016 with a new and potentially more salable message. Traditionally we’ve seen political combatants arguing that “the next president” will be the person selecting Supreme Court justices. It’s an important debate to be sure, but a more direct line to the voters will be to clearly explain that “the next president” will be staffing up the EPA and other regulatory agencies, and do you really want four more years of these policies? Voters also need to be reminded that these changes are largely cosmetic, feel good measures which are not only hugely expensive, but have no effect on the far dirtier energy policies of countries with vastly larger populations who will continue to do what they’ve always done.

Here's my response about this. First, yes, red state voters do want Obama's EPA regulations.

When asked flat-out whether they supported EPA regulations limiting carbon pollution, 67 percent of total voters said yes, while 26 percent said no. In the red states, 64 percent of voters supported EPA regulations to combat climate change, as opposed to 29 percent that did not.

And that's after having Shaw's arguments explained to them.

Second, the great part about the 2014 midterm losses is that the losses happened to Blue Dog, Red State Democrats.  Exactly who's left to complain in Coal Country?  West Virginia's Joe Manchin is about it, and he's not going anywhere.  He'll be a reliable vote for Senate action on the EPA for the GOP anyway.

And finally, tell me again how the Obama EPA regulations are costing jobs when President Obama has added millions since 2009.  And we can't take action because China or Inida won't?  What happened to "American exceptionalism"?

That leaves defunding the EPA as part of a larger GOP plan to shut down the government.  By all means, play that card again heading into 2016.

Too Turned Off To Turnout

The 2014 midterm election turnout results are grim indeed.  At 36.4%, it's the worst turnout since 1942.  No wonder Republicans did so well.  PBS Newshour:

Final numbers are still being tallied, but at this point it looks pretty clear that turnout in these midterms was the lowest overall in 70 years. Turnout of the voting-eligible population was just 36.4 percent, according to the projection from the United States Elections Project, run by Dr. Michael McDonald at the University of Florida. That’s down from the 41 percent that turned out in 2010. You have to go all the way back to 1942 for lower numbers when turnout in that midterm was just 33.9 percent. They had a pretty good excuse back then — many adult-age Americans were preoccupied with fighting in a world war.

States with competitive races saw increased turnout, but the rest of the country didn't bother to show up at all.

Turnout actually increased in 14 states, plus D.C., from 2010-2014. In 10 of the 14, there were competitive to potentially competitive Senate races. In nine of the 14, there were governors’ races. Here’s where turnout increased, ranked by biggest increase: 

1. Louisiana: +12.9% (38.9%-43.9%)
2. Nebraska: +10.1% (37.5%-41.3%)
3. Arkansas: +9.9% (37.5%-41.2%)
4. Wisconsin: +9.4% (52.0%-56.9%)
5. Maine: +7.4% (55.2%-59.3%)
6. New Hampshire: +6.8% (45.7%-48.8%)
7. Alaska: +6.6% (51.9%-55.3%)
8. Washington, D.C.: +4.8% (28.9%-30.3%)
9. Colorado: +4.7% (50.6%-53.0%)
10. Kentucky: +4.2% (42.4%-44.2%)
11. North Carolina: +3.8% (39.2%-40.7%)
12. Florida: +3.4% (41.7%-43.1%)
13. Kansas: +2.6% (41.7%-42.8%)
14. Iowa: +1.4% (49.9%-50.6%)
15. Oregon: +0.2% (52.6%-52.7%) 

It was down, though — and by a lot in many places — in 36 others. Here are the top 10 biggest decreases: 

1. Missouri: -27.4% (44.5%-32.3%)
2. Washington state: -27.3% (53.1%-38.6%)
3. Delaware: -27% (47.5%- 34.5%)
4. California: -25.5% (44%-32.8%)
5. Indiana: -24.5% (37.1%-28.0%)
6. Oklahoma: -23.2 (38.8%-29.8%)
7. Nevada: -23% (41.3%-31.8%)
8. Alabama: -22.1% (43%-33.5%)
9. Utah: -20.7% (36.3%-28.8%)
10. Mississippi: -19.7% (37%-29.7%) 

Significantly factoring into the overall decrease because of its population was California, which despite a governor’s race was off by a quarter of its 2010 participation. Also factoring in — Ohio (down almost 20 percent), as well as New York and New Jersey, which were both down about 17 percent. Even Georgia, despite its hotly contested Senate race, was down 14 percent. And for Democrats looking for what went wrong in blue states like Maryland and Massachusetts, turnout was down in those states by 10 percent as compared to 2010.

 The bottom line is no matter how you look at it, Democrats didn't show up to vote.

If that doesn't change in 2016 and 2018, this country's as good as done.

No Love For Mia

Mother Jones reporter and Utah native Stephanie Mencimer takes a look at newly minted Utah Rep. Mia Love, the first African-American Republican woman elected to Congress, and finds she's just part of a distressing a depressing trend of recent GOP Representatives who care more about the national spotlight than local constituents.

Of all the victories conservatives are crowing about this week, none seem as welcome as that of Utah's Mia Love, the first black Republican woman ever to be elected to Congress. She's been the subject of fawning profiles and officially dubbed a "rock star" by Michelle Malkin and other right-wing pundits. But Mia Love is a rock star mostly to people who don't live in Utah.

To a person like me, born and raised in Utah, Love's victory is a symbol of our trend toward nationalized elections. Her issues are generic, conservative hobby horses—defund Obamacare, abolish the Department of Education, etc.—the opposite of Tip O'Neill's old adage about all politics being local. She has adopted precisely one Utah-specific platform point from state conservatives—the demand that the federal government turn over to the state all the land it owns in Utah, a long-running and hopeless quest that is deeply opposed by the state's environmentalists. Beyond that, Love, a persona preternaturally well suited for Fox News, has an embarrassingly weak grasp of policy—particularly as it relates to her adopted home state.

Now there's a shocker.  A Republican who looks really good outside her state, but is dismal towards it.  Why does that sound familiar?

Love has made a big show of her concern for the Second Amendment and her fondness for packing heat—issues that sell well with both Utah and national conservatives. But the summer of 2012 saw a rash of costly wildfires in Utah, including a big one in Saratoga Springs that required the evacuation of 9,000 of Love's fellow residents. It was one of at least 20 fires attributed to outdoor target shooters, whom Utah's Republican governor was desperately trying to persuade to use indoor ranges instead. Not long after the governor made his appeal, Love made a big appearance on the Today Show, where she showed off her shooting skills—outside, in the dry brush.

Born in Brooklyn, Love first relocated to Connecticut before moving to Saratoga Springs in 1998 after converting to Mormonism. I spent some time in Saratoga Springs in 2012, and was struck by what a transient place it was. A new suburb of Salt Lake City, it didn't even exist until 1997, and everyone I met there had come from somewhere else. Few were Utah natives, and next to none of them had heard of Love, even though she'd been their mayor or a city councilwoman for several years. Even Saratoga Springs' congressional district was brand new, having been gerrymandered in 2012 by a state Legislature intent on ousting Matheson, the state's lone Democrat, from his perch in Congress. In some ways, it was the perfect place to launch a congressional career. Being the mayor of Saratoga Springs was like being the mayor of nowhere—or everywhere, depending on your perspective.

In other words, if if sounds to you like Mia Love is the perfectly manufactured candidate for the "post-racial" FOX News age of America, that's because she is.  She's being packaged and sold, a product for consumption by guilty GOP voters who feel better that a black Mormon woman supports what they stand for, and isn't one of those people.  How good of a product Mia Love is is pretty self-evident.  How good of a Representative she is to the people of Utah, well, that doesn't really matter, does it?

Ask Eric Cantor about that.

Absolution for sale.  Get it while it's fresh.

StupidiNews!

• Boko Haram militants are suspected to be behind Monday's bombing of a high school in northern Nigeria, killing at least 47 and injuring nearly 80.
• President Obama says he sees growing momentum behind a US free trade deal with Asia as he landed in China on the first day of an eight-day Asia tour.
• Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto is condemning violent protests against the state government of Gurerro over the massacre of 43 students ordered by a corrupt mayor and drug cartel.
• The G20 nations are looking to impose new capital requirements on the world's largest banks to prevent a repeat of the 2008 banking crisis.
• Multiple "darknet" sites connected to Silk Road 2.0 may have been seized by US and EU law enforcement after having their locations revealed by denial of service attacks.

Last Call For Misinformation Nation

Breitbart's clowns are screwing up everything they can find, as usual, and this time their stated mission of lying to America about the Obama administration is no different.

According to a November 8 Breitbart.com article by Warner Todd Huston, "few are talking about" the fact nominee Lynch "was part of Bill Clinton's Whitewater probe defense team in 1992." Huston pointed to a March 1992 New York Times article that "reported that Lynch was one of the Clintons' Whitewater defense attorneys as well as a 'campaign aide.'" And in a November 9 article Huston's colleague, Breitbart.com Senior Editor-at Large Joel Pollak wrote, "The connection to Whitewater ought to provide additional fodder for Republicans during Lynch's confirmation hearings".

Only one problem.  It's the wrong Loretta Lynch.

The Loretta Lynch referred to in the New York Times article is a California based attorney who has worked on several prominent political campaigns, not Attorney General nominee Loretta Lynch. Obama's nominee is shown on the right, while the Loretta Lynch Breitbart refers to is on the left:

These idiots can't even get the correct race of the actual person right, which is everything you ever need to know about Breitbart.com.  Of course that doesn't matter to the right, they'll find some other way to block Lynch.

The same day that President Obama nominated Loretta Lynch to be the next attorney general, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) signaled that it won't be an easy process.

"President Obama’s Attorney General nominee deserves fair and full consideration of the United States Senate, which is precisely why she should not be confirmed in the lame duck session of Congress by senators who just lost their seats and are no longer accountable to the voters," the senators said in a Saturday statement.

So yes, I expect the lame duck session will be about as productive as the rest of this dismal GOP-ruined Congress.  The threat is simple: if President Obama dares take executive action on immigration, Lynch is done.

Maybe if Obama was nicer to the GOP and resigned from office, he'd get Lynch through. 

Just a thought.

The Future Ain't What It Used To Be

Time for part two of our sci-fi weekend double feature review, and if Big Hero 6 represented a bright future here on Earth, then its opposite is Interstellar, a future for humanity so awful that we need to leave the planet behind.





The movie opens in a Midwestern farm state, sometime in the 21st century.  There are no more wars, it's true, but that's because Earth's crops are dying off one by one to a disease called Blight, and there's not enough food to feed the planet.  Huge dust storms ravage the skies, driving people indoors to seeks shelter.  Carrying masks and goggles on you at all time is just what people do.

And science and technology are the first casualties of this new order.  Cooper (Matthew McConaghey) is a washed up NASA test pilot without a NASA program, as the government apparently mothballed it a decade earlier.  He's turned farmer along with his wife's dad Donald (John Lithgow), who reminisces about the good old days of, well, today (my theory is that Donald is a grown Millennial, putting the story about 2050 or so) and his kids, son Tom (Timothée Chalamet) and daughter Murph (Mackenzie Foy).  Cooper is pissed to find out Murph has gotten into fistfights at school over bringing her dad's science textbook in and explaining to her classmates and incredulous teacher that the moon landings were real and not faked.

So yeah, super storms, dying crops, Luddite know-nothing nonsense and America isolated from the world?  It's Tea Party time!

But then things get weird.  A mysterious force is haunting Murph's bedroom, and somehow communicating with her (think Contact or Close Encounters) and when Cooper finally pays attention, he realizes he's getting coordinates to where NASA has gone, deep underground, off the radar, off the grid, and off the budget.  There he meets his old mentor Professor Brand (Michael Caine) and his equally brilliant daughter (Anne Hathaway) who tells him that somehow, a stable wormhole to another galaxy has been located off Saturn, and NASA has been shooting scientists into it, looking for a new home for humanity.  Somebody's put that wormhole there for a reason, and it's up to Cooper and the young Dr. Brand to find out why.

One final mission is being planned to find that new home, and that mission is where the movie really picks up and turns into a grand space exploration adventure, as Brand and Cooper have to leave everyone they love and know behind for the good of all mankind.

I loved this movie, frankly.  It's the first movie I've seen with Anne Hathaway in it in ages where I didn't immediately loathe her Manic Pixie Dream Girl act, maybe because she's playing a scientist and explorer instead of a piece of arm candy, and the fact that the real relationship here is between Cooper and his daughter Murph.

Besides, it's a breathtakingly beautiful film, with more than a few nods to Gravity, and TARS the robot is awesome.

Just trust me.  This one's going to win an Oscar or two.  Go see it.

Your Sunday Long Read

This week's Sunday Long Read is Joe Sonka's postmortem on the Grimes campaign, and how she lost by 16 points in the space of only a couple of weeks.

But at the very least, Grimes had an opportunity to make Tuesday’s election competitive, and the overarching reason she didn’t give herself that chance was the hermetically sealed bubble in which Grimes’ intellect and personality was locked by her campaign. Her campaign repeatedly touted how “disciplined” she was, never going off script and saying something that could end up in an attack ad. Some extent of discipline is needed for any campaign, but they took this to an extreme that ended up defining her as a candidate and left many wondering who she was, what she believed, and whether she was up for the job. And any young, relatively unknown candidate presenting herself as a mostly blank slate is especially vulnerable.

Do read the whole thing.   If you want to know exactly how Kentucky Democrats blew the best chance they ever had to unseat Mitch the Turtle, well, this is the best article I've read of its epitaph.  Grimes's refusal to say if she voted for Obama or not pretty much turned a six-point loss into a sixteen-point one.

And the best part is we get to go through all of this next year here as Gov. Dinosaur Steve's job is up for grabs in 2015 between Dem AG Jack Conway and GOP Ag Secretary James Comer.

I Am Satisfied With My Care

Let's talk movies today!

We've got a sci-fi double feature this weekend on ZVTS, and first up is Disney's Big Hero 6.





Loosely based on the 2008 Marvel comic series of the same name (and I mean loosely, the comic had Marvel's two iconic Japanese mutants, Silver Samurai and Sunfire, teaming up with these distinctly less-than-serious heroes) this film adaptation takes place in the metropolis of San FranSokyo, a very pretty mashup of San Francisco and Tokyo, which ends up being the 7th member of the team the way Gotham City is in any of Christopher Nolan's Batman films.

Right off the bat we meet Hiro Hamada, brilliant teenage robotic genius, doing what any robotics prodigy who graduated high school at a young age would do, which is hustling thugs in an underground robot fighting arena for scads of cash.  When the hustle goes bad, Hiro's bacon is pulled from the fire by his  college-age brother Tadashi, who is a robotics genius himself at nearby San FranSokyo Institute of Technology.

Tadashi promises their Aunt Cass, who has cared for them for the last ten years, to try to set young Hiro on the straight and narrow by showing off his latest invention at SFIT,  a goofily lovable heathcare robot named Baymax.  Meeting Baymax and Tadashi's college friends, extreme speed junkie and magnetics master Go Go, bubbly Latina and chemistry whiz Honey Lemon, neat freak and laser whiz Wasabi, and science fanboy and school mascot Fred, all mentored by robotics professor Dr. Robert Callaghan, is exactly what Hiro needs to put his mind towards a truly amazing invention that will change the world.

But we wouldn't have a super hero origin story without some grim tidings and heartbreaking loss, and that's exactly what happens to Hiro as he loses both his marvelous invention and his brother in a tragic accident.  It's up to Hiro, Baymax and their new friends to solve the mystery behind Tadashi's death and save San FranSokyo.

Personally, any hero team that's two-thirds people of color, with a terrifically endearing robot, and just one white guy is refreshing enough of a concept to warrant going to see this film.  Both the kids and the adults in the theater had a blast, and hopefully we'll be seeing more of these guys in the future.  It's a visually striking film and quite a lot of fun and I recommend at least a matinee ticket for the family.

Be on the lookout for a Stan Lee cameo, as always, and stick around for the post-credits scene.

Hail To The King Case, Or The Biggest Tax Hike In History

Greg Sargent doesn't sugar-coat what it means for SCOTUS to even take up King v Burwell. It means Obamacare could be in big trouble, and millions of Americans on federal exchange states could find their insurance too expensive to afford, which could wipe out the entire system.

To get caught up on the legal ins and outs of this challenge, read Jonathan Cohn’s piece. It turns on the claim that the plain wording of the law’s text shows Congress never intended subsidies to go to people in the three dozen states where governors refused to set up exchanges, requiring the feds to do so. If the subsidies are invalidated in these states, it could deprive millions of coverage, posing a dire threat to the law.

Multiple Democratic lawmakers who participated in the creation of the Affordable Care Act have explained that making subsidies available to people in all 50 states, regardless of who set up the exchanges, was always the intention. Staff members involved in the drafting of the law have said the same, and have carefully explained how the faulty language ended up as it did.

But SCOTUS could still rule against the administrative rule, anyway. Nicholas Bagley explains how the fact that SCOTUS has agreed to hear the case at all doesn’t bode well, and even increases the odds that the government will lose it.

So what if next June SCOTUS trashes the subsidies?  There's already four justices on record (Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Kennedy) who have gone on record as saying the entire law needs to be thrown out, so there's already four votes there I would think to scuttle it.   That would put pressure on Congress to fix the law, Sargent says.

So let’s say SCOTUS does strike down the subsidies. If so, it will create an interesting situation for Republican lawmakers. It will make it impossible for them to get away with the clever game they’ve been playing for some time on their true intentions toward the law.

As the Kaiser Family Foundation’s Larry Levitt explains it, a SCOTUS ruling gutting the subsidies could easily be rendered “moot” in one of two ways: Either Congress fixes the law, or governors in those states set up state exchanges to keep the subsidies flowing to their constituents. “A simple fix from either Congress or Republican governors would allow people to keep their benefits,” Levitt says.

As Brian Beutler has explained, the prospect of so many of each of these governors’ constituents losing insurance would theoretically put pressure on them to make things right. The same might be the case for GOP lawmakers in Congress. One possibility might be that the two parties use this as an occasion to enter into negotiations over the law’s future, in which Republicans try to leverage the need for the fix to get other changes to it they want — which could be dicey for the law but perhaps not too much of a threat to it.

Of course, these lawmakers would also face intense pressure from the right not to fix it. And for all I know, they might let the law’s subsidies disappear for millions.

Why wouldn't they?  Republicans aren't going to lift a finger to fix the law, they're going to say "this is your punishment for electing Democrats" and to blame Obama and company.  And judging from Tuesday's election results, that's an entirely viable plan heading into 2016.

Now, GOP governors *might* want to not be blamed for a massive premium hike on their constituents, especially those running in 2016 or considered veep prospects (Christie, Jindal, Walker, Martinez, Haley, etc)   Some of them may try to find a way to strike deals, and if they do, they will be the "heroes" that fixed what "Obama and the Democrats" messed up.  That could go a long way in 2016, but how would the national GOP base take it?

Answer: however FOX News tells them to.  Watch.

This will destroy Obamacare and Republicans know it.  If SCOTUS ulls the trigger, what will rise from the ashes?  What it will be replaced with?  Who knows? But millions of Americans will suffer as a result, and they'll all blame the black guy.

StupidiNews, Weekend Edition!

• President Obama will be sending 1,500 more soldiers to Iraq in order to train Iraqi and Kurdish forces to fight ISIS.
• Detroit has secured approval from US Bankruptcy Court for a plan out of the mess it's in, allowing it to shed $7 billion in debt and spend $1.7 billion in city improvements.
• Iran's stockpile of nuclear material is up to 8.4 tons of non-enriched uranium, a number that is expected to be cut in any nuclear deal with the West.
• The US Supreme Court will take up a case on Obamacare subsidies in federal exchange states, but states are expected to put workarounds in place if the subsidies are deemed illegal.
• New research shows that breakfast is the most important meal of the day for chimps, too, as researchers have found primates plan where to find breakfast even when food is scarce.

Last Call For Burying The Lede

Next time somebody yells LIBERAL MEDIA IS IN THE TANK FOR OBAMA let them take a look at this little bombshell that should have cost Joni Ernst the election.

Gretchen Hamel, a campaign spokeswoman for Joni Ernst's U.S. Senate campaign, was arrested on Oct. 29 for operating while intoxicated and resigned the morning after the incident.

West Des Moines police found Hamel passed out behind the wheel of her vehicle after crossing lanes and driving her car over a curb on the 6100 block of Beachtree Drive at about 10:30 p.m., according to a police report.

An Ernst campaign aide on Thursday said that Hamel resigned the morning after the incident.

"This is a personnel matter which we will not discuss in the press. We wish Gretchen nothing but the best and appreciate her efforts," said Ernst campaign manager Jon Kohan in a statement.

Hamel did not return multiple attempts to reach her Thursday.

So an Ernst campaign spokesperson gets a DWI on October 29th.  You know, before the election.  We're only hearing about it now, after the election.  Which means our "liberal media" sat on this story that could have damaged a Republican somehow for a week.

Funny how that works out.

Meet Loretta Lynch

President Obama's pick for Attorney General, replacing outgoing Eric Holder, is widely expected to be US Attorney Loretta Lynch, currently Brooklyn's federal prosecutor.

Ms. Lynch, a low-profile prosecutor, has risen to the top of the president’s short list in recent days, the officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the nomination publicly. Officials said that a formal White House announcement could come soon, although it is unlikely to happen before Mr. Obama returns to Washington on Nov. 16 after a trip to Asia.

A Lynch nomination might carry substantial political benefits for a White House recalibrating its strategy after Republicans took over the Senate. Indeed, Ms. Lynch is a two-time United States attorney who has twice been confirmed by the Senate by acclamation – in 2000 and again in 2010. She has no personal ties to Mr. Obama or his policies, freeing her of the political baggage that has weighed down other candidates once thought to have an edge in the process.

That means that the White House would not be nominating current Labor Secretary Tom Perez, who had a brutal fight against the GOP just to get there.  On the other hand, a lame duck nomination like this will almost certainly be held up until January and a new GOP Senate if the Republicans can find a way to do it.  My guess would be intense pressure on Democrats to delay the confirmation vote, citing "the will of the people" and whatnot, as if anything done in the lame duck session is somehow illegal.

If that happens of course, Eric Holder sticks around.  We'll see how much the GOP enjoys that.

And That's Why Benny Carson Is The First In The Clown Car

If there's anything the election turnout numbers this week prove, it's that America is pretty damn tired of 24/7/365 election mode.  Naturally this means the 2016 presidential contest starts...

...Now.

Yes, the 2016 race for the White House has already gotten started — and it looks like Dr. Ben Carson is first in the ring. 

Carson, a famous pediatric neurosurgeon and conservative political star, will air a nearly 40 minute-long ad introducing himself to the American people this weekend, an aide to Carson confirms to ABC News. 

The documentary titled “A Breath of Fresh Air: A New Prescription for America” will air in 22 states and Washington, DC. The paid video will detail some of his biography and family life, including his rise from being born to a single mother with a poor childhood in Detroit to director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins for almost 40 years, known for his work separating conjoined twins, to potential 2016 presidential candidate.

Ah yes, Ben Carson, the man who happily compared Democrats to Nazis, then threw a fit and said that anyone being angry at his comparison of millions of Americans to Nazis basically proved his point that they are Nazis.  I'm sure that'll get a whole lot of crossover voters.

This should be amusing at least.

New tags, kids. Ben "Dr Godwin" Carson, and 2016 Election.

You can thank him for those, you know.

StupidiNews!

• An Idaho National Guard helicopter crashed Thursday night south of Boise's airport during a training mission, killing both aboard.
• Home Depot now says 53 million email addresses were stolen in September along with the 56 million credit card numbers taken by hackers.
• House Speaker John Boenher says next year's Republican Congress will vote to fully repeal the Affordable Care Act, even if the bill can't pass a Democratic filibuster in the Senate.
• British PM David Cameron's latest troubles with the EU involves a $2.6 million bill that the UK owes Brussels by December 1.
• Several Colorado towns passed local measures that will allow public broadband to be offered to residents, as per a 2005 law prohibiting public broadband without a local ballot question.

Last Call For SCOTUS-Bound

In arguably the least surprising move ever, the 6th Circuit has now forced a Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage by reversing lower court rulings and finding same-sex marriage bans to be constitutional.  In fact, forcing a Supreme Court ruling is the entire basis of the ruling:

This case ultimately presents two ways to think about change. One is whether the Supreme Court will constitutionalize a new definition of marriage to meet new policy views about the issue. The other is whether the Court will begin to undertake a different form of change—change in the way we as a country optimize the handling of efforts to address requests for new civil liberties.

If the Court takes the first approach, it may resolve the issue for good and give the  plaintiffs and many others relief. But we will never know what might have been. If the Court takes the second approach, is it not possible that the traditional arbiters of change—the people— will meet today’s challenge admirably and settle the issue in a productive way? In just eleven years, nineteen States and a conspicuous District, accounting for nearly forty-five percent of the  population, have exercised their sovereign powers to expand a definition of marriage that until recently was universally followed going back to the earliest days of human history. That is a difficult timeline to criticize as unworthy of further debate and voting. When the courts do not let the people resolve new social issues like this one, they perpetuate the idea that the heroes in these change events are judges and lawyers. Better in this instance, we think, to allow change through the customary political processes, in which the people, gay and straight alike, become the heroes of their own stories by meeting each other not as adversaries in a court system but as fellow citizens seeking to resolve a new social issue in a fair-minded way.

For these reasons, we reverse.

I said last month that a circuit court ruling against same-sex marriage would force SCOTUS to act.  If they don't however, Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee will continue to be ruled by bigotry and hatred.  We'll see how it shakes out, but right now that circuit split means that most likey this is headed for SCOTUS after all.