Iowa Disaster

We are now a week removed from the Iowa caucuses, and the Democrat party has yet to declare a winner. What we know now is in terms of delegates and popular vote there seems to be two different winners (sound familiar?). Iowa has 41 delegates to award for the Democrat convention. As of now the delegate count stands at Pete Buttigieg 13, Bernie Sanders 12, Elizabeth Warren 8, Joe Biden 6, and Amy Klobuchar 1. There is still a single delegate to be allocated which will go to the overall winner of Iowa. This will not be decided until after the re-canvass requested by the Sanders and Buttigieg campaigns (Associated Press 2020). In the Iowa caucuses there were two votes taken. There was an original vote and then there was a second vote when voters who where there for candidates that did not reach a designated threshold could then go and support a different candidate. In the first vote the totals were Bernie Sanders 24.72%, Pete Buttigieg 21.26%, Elizabeth Warren 18.44%, Joe Biden 14.93%, and Amy Klobuchar 12.74%. On the second vote it was Bernie Sanders 26.54%, Pete Buttigieg 25.04%, Elizabeth Warren 20.2%, Joe Biden 13.72%, and Amy Klobuchar 12.26% (Scott 2020). Buttigieg was able to edge out Sanders in the delegate count by winning 60 counties compared to 16 for Sanders (Associated Press 2020).

Now, we can look at the total failure of the Iowa Democrat party on election night. The first thing that went wrong was the fact that the app the the Iowa Democrats were using failed for nearly all of the 1,700 Iowa precincts. After the app failed, precinct leaders started to call their results in, but phone lines got backed up. This led to many of those who were supposed to report their results to leave. This led to the party having to call all those people throughout the next few days (Merica & Zeleny 2020). This led to the final results finally being finished yesterday, an entire week after the caucuses.

The caucus was held on February 3 and in the late afternoon on February 4 the Democrat party decided to release partial results which led to even more confusion. The Democrat part released about 50% of the vote which showed Bernie Sanders leading in raw votes, but Pete Buttigieg was leading in the delegate count. These early results led to many believing that the Democrats were once again rigging the election against Bernie Sanders. The Iowa Democrats, instead of fixing the problem by releasing partial results, made their problems much worse.

With all of the problems in Iowa the typical surge that the winner gets going into New Hampshire was taken away. Bernie Sanders and Pete Buttigieg would have went into the next primary with a lot of media attention were it not for the fumble by the Iowa Democrats. There was still a major winner and a major loser in the Iowa caucuses.

Joe Biden is the big loser of Iowa. He came in third-place and Amy Klobuchar was close behind him. This was a gut punch for Joe Biden. He is now staring down a fifth place finish in New Hampshire after leaving for South Carolina midday before any results were announced. Going into Nevada and South Carolina, if Joe Biden does not have two huge wins his campaign will be written off before Super Tuesday (Terris 2020).

The big winner in my book is Amy Klobuchar. She had a very strong fourth place finish in Iowa. Klobuchar went on to have a very strong debate performance. These strong performances were rewarded with strong poll results heading into the New Hampshire primary. With Joe Biden dropping like a brick, Amy Klobuchar could take the moderate lane.

If Iowa was any indication of how the rest of the primary process will go it will be very interesting. Iowa was supposed to help clear the field which did not happen. It looks like New Hampshire will be the nail in the coffin for many candidates that are hanging on by a thread. Heading into Nevada and South Carolina it looks like a five person race and six when you add Mike Bloomberg. I have no idea at this point how this will end. There are so many scenarios that can play out in the coming weeks and months. I am excited to see how the rest of the process plays out.

Sources

Associated Press. (2020, Feb 10). Final results from Iowa caucuses were released. Here’s why the AP still hasn’t called the winner. Retrieved from https://www.chicagotribune.com/election-2020/ct-nw-cb-iowa-caucus-results-explained-20200210-gtsyurbmcvd5zm5fdxkfo5emta-story.html

Gabbatt, Adam. (2020, Feb 11). Amy Klobuchar makes late surge as New Hampshire votes. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/feb/11/amy-klobuchar-new-hampshire-surge-voters

Merica, Dan; Zeleny, Jeff. (2020, Feb 4). How jammed phone lines and a failing app created chaos in Iowa. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/04/politics/iowa-caucuses-what-happened/index.html

Riccardi, Nicholas. (2020, Feb 5). What happened in Iowa and what’s next after caucus mess. Retrieved from https://apnews.com/0fe3fad38fb174de808553293c06bbe8

Scott, Dylan. (2020, Feb 9). With all the votes counted, Pete Buttigieg won the Iowa caucuses — but Bernie Sanders is challenging. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/2/9/21125703/iowa-caucuses-2020-final-results-pete-buttigieg-wins

Terris, Ben. (2020, Feb 11). After a ‘gut punch’ in Iowa, a surreal feeling surrounds Biden’s campaign. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2020/02/11/trail-with-joe-biden-what-happens-when-electability-candidate-starts-lose/

The State of Our Union

Summary of President Trump’s State of the Union Address

President Donald Trump gave his State of the Union address on Tuesday, February 3rd. The night before the final impeachment vote in the United States Senate, the President laid out his successes over the past three-years of his term and his future plans for the final year of his term. President Trump made his case for reelection in front of the entire legislative body (almost). There were a few Democrats that decided against attending i.e. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The one thing that was clear, President Trump delivered a message that indicated the state of our union is strong.

The President started the night with cheers from the Republicans in the room. When President Trump got to the podium, it seemed as though he could not bear to even look at Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi when handing her a copy of the State of the Union speech. It looked as if the President snubbed a handshake from the Speaker.

President Trump stated the night speaking on the state of America. He spoke of how America is strong on both the economic and defense fronts. The President spoke about how under his administration America is no longer apologizing to the world, but standing up to it. The President spoke of how America is no longer downsizing like under the previous administration. He ending his opening statement by asserting that America will no longer go back to how it was in past administrations.

President Trump spoke highly of the economic state that America is in. The successes of cutting regulations, and cutting taxes were touched upon. President Trump spoke about how his policies are pro-worker. The historically low unemployment rate was touted by President Trump as he pointed out the fact that the unemployment rate is at a 50-year low, and under his administration the African-American, Mexican-American, and Asian-American unemployment rates are at the lowest point in history. The average unemployment rate under this administration is the lowest in history as well. President Trump went on to list all notable groups that have record low unemployment rates. President Trump talked about the number of people who are no longer on food stamps and welfare. He spoke of the rise of the average American’s income, along with the rise of the stock market, benefiting 401k’s and saving plans. President Trump spoke about the investment pouring into communities that have been left behind by past administrations. The factory boom that America is having was touched upon, with President Trump calling it a blue-collar boom.

President Trump spoke of criminal justice and the reforms that he pushed through in 2019. The Second Chance Act was the first criminal justice reform act in decades. The Second Chance Act will help reintegrate those that have been incarcerated back into society and the workforce. The reform act had bipartisan support and it will be a staple of President Trump’s reelection campaign.

President Trump spoke about his international economic policies. This includes both his Mexico United State and Canada Agreement and Phase One of the China trade deal. President Trump spoke about how his tariffs on China worked. It forced China to come to the table, and the United States and China have a better relationship because of it. President Trump spoke about his policies in Central and South America. He spoke out harshly against Venezuela and even had the opposition leader of Venezuela, Juan Guaido, at the State of the Union. President Trump cemented his attacks on Venezuela, and the Democrat party, when he called out socialism.

President Trump then touted his defense achievements. The President spoke about the record increase of funding for the military. The creation of the Space Force was spoken about as a major defense achievement of the Trump administration. The President talked about his peace through strength response to international conflicts. The fact the you can pull troops out of certain countries and respond to conflicts with strength as necessary. He spoke of his victories over ISIS and the elimination of two top level terrorists. President Trump then turned his attention to a military family who he helped surprise by bringing their soldier back home to reunite them

President Trump made sure to add his America First slogan to his State of the Union speech.

When speaking on education, President Trump touched on school choice. This is the idea that parents can send their children to any public, charter, or private school. The family can then receive an opportunity scholarship voucher to go to the school of the child’s choice. President Trump even gave out an opportunity scholarship to a student in attendance. President Trump called on Congress to pass the Opportunity Scholarship Act. The Be Best initiative of Melania Trump was also talked about. This initiative focuses on well-being for youth, and advocating against cyber bullying, and drug use.

President Trump touched upon healthcare. His goals of protecting Social Security and Medicare and providing price transparency in healthcare were talked about. President Trump then attacked the Democrats and their universal healthcare plan. President Trump spoke about how this plan would provide free healthcare to illegal immigrates and raid Social Security and Medicare. On more of his healthcare successes and plans, he spoke of drug innovation and the fall of drug pricing and his goal to lower prices further.

President Trump spoke of his pro-life policies. He was the first president last month to speak at the March for Life. He is arguably the most pro-life president in history. With this in mind, President Trump spoke about his goal of banning late-term abortions. He called on Congress to finally pass legislation that will do so.

Finally, President Trump spoke about the staple of his plans since the beginning which is border control. He spoke of the need to finish the wall. The fact that since construction of the wall started that border crossing have been down was echoed by the President.

Overall, it was a well delivered speech. Obviously, Nancy Pelosi did not think so as she ripped up her copy of the State of the Union on national television after it was over. She said after, “it was the courteous thing to do considering the alternatives.”

I believe President Trump during his address gave a strong argument for reelection. I believe on the other hand, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi showed why democrats do not deserve to be voted into office. In a moment where she could have been the bigger person, Speaker Pelosi decided to pull a childish stunt. I believe that it will not do her or the Democrats any favors. President Trump just needs to treat everyday like he did last night, and he will be well on his way to reelection.

Why I’m a Christian Conservative Republican

When I look deep into myself, I realize that I am first and foremost a Christian. Christian, or more specifically Lutheran, will always be my first label in life. When the world seems to be caving in, when I fail in life, or when this life ends the one thing that will always be left will be my faith. My faith has been the basis of everything I have done in my life. It is sometimes the only thing that keeps me going through this life. My faith, and this Christian label, has been what has modeled my political beliefs the most.

My faith has influenced much of what people see as social issues. The two social issues that I see as giving myself my social conservative label are abortion and marriage. I believe, as I stated in my last post, that life begins at conception. I am pro-life from the womb to the tomb. I believe that all life is God given and it should be protected at all stages of life. I believe that as Christians we need to defend those who can’t defend themselves. There is even a constitutional argument in the fact that the constitution protects life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The question needs to be addressed on the idea of when life begin. There is a scientific argument that can be made that shows there is life in the womb. This is an issue where I don’t need religion to be my basis. It is not only abortion that I am worried about. I believe that we should invest more in those with mental illnesses. I think there should be increased funding for rehabilitating those that are in prison and those that are on drugs. The second issue that my faith has influenced is the idea of a family with two parents, one man and one woman, who are married. There has been so much research that has shown how successful children are who come from households like this compared to children who came from other types of households. There will be those that say it would be unconstitutional to deny the right to marry to certain types of couples. The counter argument that I would make is the fact that the government makes laws on marriages all the time. The government sets age limits and family relationship limits. It would not be beyond the government’s power to set other limits. I do not hate anyone who is gay, bisexual, transgender, or any other label that a person gives themselves. I believe everyone is made in the image of God. In my beliefs though, these things that I have listed are sins. It needs to be understood though that these sins are no worse than any sin I commit each and every day. The question does need to be asked though; does the government has a non-religious basis to legislate same-sex-marriage? These are two of the major issues that my Christian label has helped to label myself as a social conservative.

On the policy side, I am a constitutional and fiscal conservative. I have a strict reading when it comes to the constitution. I believe the framers knew what they were doing when they wrote the constitution . This is the exact reason why I support placing constitutional minded judges on the bench. When looking at the national debt, it has gotten to a point that is unsustainable. The federal government should not be in the business of spending money when they do not have it. This money comes from the people in the form of taxes. If the government does not have this money, that means we have not given them permission to tax us because we would vote them out of office, so they should not be spending this money. The federal government has become too bloated to sustain. I believe that much of the power that the federal government has should be given back to the states. This would allow more localized taxing and spending, which works better than on a national scale. These issues again help me to define myself and a both a constitution and fiscal conservative.

Finally, there are some principles that the Republican party stand for that helps to give me that label. I believe, like the Republican party, that with hard-work you can accomplish anything. In America, we can celebrate those that work hard without looking down at those that may need a helping hand. Those that work hard deserve to be where they are, and we need to help others along the way by teaching them this work ethic. The Republican party also believes in a strong national defense. America is the world’s greatest superpower. I believe that to keep peace in the world. America having military might is vital. Finally, I believe that the Republican party is a party for everyone. In the Republican party we do not care what race, religion, or gender you are. In the end, all that matters is that you are willing to work hard to build a better life for yourself. In turn this helps to build a better life for the entire county. These are the principles that help to give myself the Republican label.

There are many that will see the labels that I have given myself and think that I am a bigot. This could not be further from the truth. I believe that no matter your beliefs that you are created in the image of God. Everyone deserves the same protections under the law. I just believe that it is the choices that we make that dictate where we will end up in life. It comes down to the idea of personal responsibility.

This is all combined to help me, in the end, define myself as a person. The principles and beliefs that I have stated help to define me as a Christian Conservative Republican.

September 23rd: National Dogs in Politics Day

When I started writing Pawlitics two whole posts ago, I was just doing this for fun and to “bond” with Kegan. But being me, I couldn’t just stop there. After talking to my Honors Program Director, Dr. Rebekah Dement, we decided that I could research how dogs affect politics as an independent study for honors credit within the Indiana University Southeast Honors Program. This means I will be developing a research paper, presenting at the Indiana University Southeast Student Conference (hopefully), and spending hours devoted to researching dogs.

“What does that mean for the blog?” you may ask. Well, I still want to talk to political pet owners and get the scoop on how their particular pup is staying politically involved. That’s going to be part of my primary research. But to do this project justice, I need to also do some background research about dogs in politics. That’s when I learned about Checkers.

Checkers was Richard Nixon’s cocker spaniel. During the 1952 election, Nixon was the vice-presidential candidate for Dwight Eisenhower. However, Nixon had found himself in trouble. He was accused of taking $18,000 of campaign contributions for personal use (AP Archive, 2016).  

During the 1950s, television was beginning to take a more significant role in American culture. Nixon’s speech on September 23rd, 1952 would save his chances of staying on Eisenhower’s ticket. During his speech, Nixon spoke about how his children had wanted to get a dog. National Today, which keeps track of unofficial holidays, such as National Dogs in Politics Day, explains that “by alluding to his children and the family dog, a black and white cocker spaniel named Checkers; Nixon touched a public nerve, making him seem more personable” (“National Dogs in Politics Day,” 2020). “The kids, like all kids, love the dog,” Nixon said, “and I just want to say this, right now, that regardless of what they say about it, we’re going to keep it.”

Television allowed voters to see emotion, facial expressions, and nonverbal communication from candidates in ways they hadn’t seen in many past elections. Nixon’s wife makes a brief appearance in the speech, right before he begins telling the story about how the family got Checkers as a gift. These details mattered to voters and began the crazy media storm we now know of as a presidential election process.

Checkers mattered; on November 4th, the voters elected Eisenhower and Nixon to serve as president and vice-president: “The speech revolutionized how politicians connect with voters, helped usher in a new era in political speech-making and showed how television could be effectively used in politics. And it was Checkers who started it all” (“National Dogs in Politics Day,” 2020).

Click the link to see a shortened version of Nixon’s “Checkers Speech”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCkPXzkne-U

Dogs in Politics Day was assigned to September 23rd in honor of the “Checkers Speech” and in memory of how a once ordinary cocker spaniel influenced a presidential election.

Ironically, September 23rd was the day we put down Roscoe. (Blog drinking game: drink every time I find a way to make a post about Roscoe). Roscoe was in no way a political Yorkie (though he used to bark every time Bill O’Reilly would come on the TV screen back before that sexual harassment scandal ended his FOX news career). But do you ever feel like the universe is telling you that you are right where you were meant to be at a specific moment in time? That’s kind of how I feel about this whole thing. I know not everyone believes in that coincidental philosophy, but it makes me feel like I’m doing what I should be right now. For me, days don’t just align like that without divine intervention.

If you ask me, it’s a pretty good feeling.

Sources

AP Archive (2016, September 22). Richard Nixon’s “Checkers” Speech – 1952 | Today in history | 23 Sept 16. Retrieved January 22, 2020, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCkPXzkne-U

National dogs in politics day. (2020, January 10). Retrieved January 22, 2020, from https://nationaltoday.com/national-dogs-politics-day/

47 Years Later

Examining How We Can Start to Limit Abortion Without the Supreme Court

Roe v Wade (1973) was decided 47 years ago today. This decision was based on the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court ruled that a woman’s choice on whether or not to have an abortion is a fundamental right of privacy which is inherent in the Due Process Clause. The Court ruled in this decision that this is balanced along with the government’s interest in protecting women’s health and protecting the potential of a human life. Within the decision the Court laid out how states can limit abortion throughout the stages of a pregnancy. In the first trimester, the Court ruled that a state can not restrict abortion in any way. In the second trimester, the state can restrict abortion when related to maternal health. Finally, in the third trimester, the state can restrict abortion as long as there are exception to the life of the mother (Oyez n.d.). In 2017, 18% of pregnancies ended in abortion. That comes out to 862,320 abortions (Guttmacher Institute 2020). Roe v Wade (1973) has resulted in the loss of almost an entire generation.

It is no surprise that as a Christian Conservative Republican I am adamantly against abortion at all stages of a pregnancy. My Christian beliefs, along with science, tell me that life begins at conception. When I look at the first lines of the Constitution it states that every person has certain unalienable rights. The rights that are chief among those are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This is the reasoning I use to justify why the state has a responsibility to take action in limiting abortion. I do not believe this is a state issue, as it is a matter of life and death. I understand until we get a new Court decision taking new science into account we have to live in a world where Roe v Wade (1973) is law. That is why I do not want to give the normal we need to protect all lives argument. I believe, in the intermediate, there are steps we can take to limit the situations where women feel like abortion is necessary.

First, lets look at the main reasons that women choose to have abortions. Of women that get abortions there are 90% that have given reasons. 74% of women say a child would dramatically change their life which includes interfering with their education, interfering with their job, and having other dependents. 73% of women say they can’t afford a baby right now because they are unmarried, are a student or are planning to study, can’t afford a baby and child care, can’t afford the basic needs of life, are unemployed. 48% of women don’t want to be a single mom or are having relationship problems in which they say they are unsure about their relationship, their relationship may break up or end soon. 25% say they do not want people to know they had sex or got pregnant. 14% say that their husband wanted them to have an abortion. 6% say their parents wanted them to have an abortion. Only, 1% of women said they were aborting because they were raped and .05% because of incest. (Illinois Right to Life n.d.)

I take a look at these statistics to show that I understand that abortion for many women is a complicated issue. There are many reasons people will choose to have abortion. I will be addressing some of these reasons that women give as I go into ways we can bring down the situations where a women would seek an abortion.

There are 48% of women that say that they don’t want to be a single mom or are having relationship problems. The breakdown of relationship norms is a good explanation of this statistic. Cohabitation, which is living together outside of marriage, has risen to 18 million people in 2016. That is a rise of 29% since 2007 (Geiger & Livingston 2019). Cohabitation has risen 900% in the past 50 years (Fox 2014). With cohabitation comes sex outside of marriage. Relationships are not fully cemented during this time of cohabitation and when a pregnancy does arise it can break a relationship. Cohabitation is seen as a first-step towards marriage, but when sex is involved, which it most always is, it can get unnecessarily complicated. Teaching the society that living together outside of the confines of marriage will in turn cause problems is a first step to bringing down this statistic. Cohabitation is not the sole reason for the breakdown of relationship norms. Sex outside of marriage and relationships have been on the rise without cohabitation. This is most true of young, low-income teenagers where abortion is most prominent. Studies indicate one in four low-income children between the ages of 11 and 16 is having sex (Jeffers 2009). The society that we live in push finding your sexuality. That means for young people having sex at younger ages which in turn leads to pregnancies outside of marriage. As a society, we need to teach teenagers the importance of waiting for to have sex and the benefits of waiting to get married and have children until after high school.

There are three simple steps teenagers can take to make sure they do not end up in poverty. These steps include waiting until you graduate high school, turn 21, and have a full-time job before getting married or having children. Research has found that if teenagers follow these three simple rules they will be 90% less likely to live in poverty. Following just 2 of the 3 steps is still beneficial in staying out of poverty (Haskins 2013). When 74% of women say a child would dramatically change their life in this way a majority of which say includes interfering with their education that is something that can be addressed. We need to educate children at a young age that if they follow these steps, then they can have a better chance at success. This needs to be addressed in low-income communities where abortion and marriages/pregnancies at a young age are prominent. That is something that we as Christians can push to help educate children. Society needs to stop pushing a narrative of finding your sexuality and promoting sex outside of marriage. Instead, the narrative needs to be about finding someone that you can spend your life with and have a family and never need an abortion.

I want to touch on the idea that adoption is always an option. I won’t go into the numbers, because there is a lot there. The most common argument against adoption instead of abortion is that there are too many children in the system already. This idea rests on the assumption that it is better to be dead than to be alive and in the government adoption system. That belief is the reason why many women choose to get an abortion rather than giving the child up for adoption. I think myself and other Christians need to push for a more robust adoption/foster system in America. This will help push back against the narrative that it would better for a child to die than be in the system.

The final thing that I will touch on is the idea of choice. The way I see it, is that the woman had a choice when she decided to have sex (excluding rape and health of the mother). The biological reason that humans have sex is to reproduce. There was a choice that was made prior to conception. The moment that choice is made, I believe, you should be responsible for what come from that action. I see the fetus as a separate human being and at that point the only choice is life.

I acknowledge that abortion will always be present in this world. I acknowledge that we live in a world where Roe v Wade (1973) is the current law. I will though support any measure to limit the instances that abortion is seen as the only option. I am not just pro-life in terms of abortion. I am pro-life from womb to tomb. I know that there are those that will disagree with many of the points that I have made. I am not here to sway people on this issue. I pray though that those that don’t agree with these points, at least now, see the other side of this debate.

Sources

Fox, Lauren. (Mar 2014). The Science of Cohabitation: A Step Toward Marriage, Not a Rebellion. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/03/the-science-of-cohabitation-a-step-toward-marriage-not-a-rebellion/284512/

Geiger, A.W.; Gretchen, Livingston. (Feb 2019). 8 facts about love and marriage in America. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/02/13/8-facts-about-love-and-marriage/

Guttmacher. (2020). Induced Abortion in the United States. Retrieved from https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states

Haskins, Ron. (Mar 2013). Three Simple Rules Poor Teens Should Follow to Join the Middle Class. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/three-simple-rules-poor-teens-should-follow-to-join-the-middle-class/

Jeffers, Wainwright. (Aug 2009). Children are having sex at younger ages. Retrieved from https://www.walb.com/story/10972974/children-are-having-sex-at-younger-ages/

Roe v. Wade. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved from https://www.oyez.org/cases/1971/70-18

Why Do Women Have Abortions? (n.d.). Illinois Right to Life. Retrieved from https://illinoisrighttolife.org/why-do-women-have-abortions/

The Prentice Puppies

Because Kegan is in politics, right?

When I met Django and Marino, I felt a bit overwhelmed.

Django and Marino are 80 pound black labs. And I couldn’t tell them apart. Not only couldn’t I tell them apart, but I wasn’t even sure what Django’s name was.

I love dogs, don’t get me wrong. But I was a little bit unsure about big dogs. I grew up with a Yorkshire Terrier named Roscoe. He never weighed more than 12 pounds. I could scoop him up and force him to sit with me whenever I wanted. He was my living baby doll.

Compared to Django and Marino, Roscoe was a peanut. However, despite their stature, the dogs’ size didn’t turn out to be as scary as I first anticipated.

Django and Marino were littermates, coming from a litter of 8. They were the only boys in the litter. Kegan’s older brother, Kyle, was planning to take Django with him when he moved out of the house. So the Prentice family adopted the two boys and raised them together. However, when Kyle moved out, he didn’t take Django with him. Instead, he and his girlfriend adopted Riggs, an American Staffordshire Terrier.

So, the Prentices had two black labs. They are well loved in the Prentice household; Kegan’s mom, Christine, gets Christmas presents for them each year and they each have their own stocking. On their birthday, sometimes Kegan’s dad, Harold, will cook them a special dinner.  Now at six years old, the littermates look a lot alike upon first glance. Sturdy boys, black all over, excluding few white and grey furs on their chins. However, it doesn’t take long to see that Django and Marino are a lot more different than they are alike.

Django’s whiskers are much whiter than Marino’s. Aside from the white in his chin, Django’s most iconic features include his red collar and his “smile” with wide-open eyes. In true Labrador Retriever fashion, Django never fails to greet a new friend without a toy in his mouth. As the feistier of the dogs, Django is always looking for a playmate. His ambitious personality has a tendency to get him into trouble; over the last few months, he’s been guilty of chewing up his bed. One of his worst habits is attempting to get up onto the couch. Now, I must admit, this only seems to happen when I am visiting. I think we will chalk that up to coincidence 😉.

Marino, on the other hand, seems to foil his brother. As the quiet dog in the house, Marino is often found sitting on the floor by the couch, waiting for the chance to be petted. Impatient at times, he may nudge a hand or squeeze his head between a pair of unsuspecting legs. He appears older and wiser than his brother, his face wrinkled and eyes never fully open. He dawns a blue collar, and occasionally, if Django lets go of a toy for long enough, he will spend time chomping away at it. His hunger is unmatched; at dinner time, he will eat quickly and wait until Django finishes and walks away before licking the remnants of his bowl up. Marino prefers to spend his time outside. Marino enjoys searching the yard for sticks, but also likes to play fetch with a tennis ball.

Kyle’s dog Riggs is also very much a part of the family. While Django is excited to play when Riggs visits, Marino will dart away from him if at all possible, taking refuge underneath someone’s legs or in his fenced in backyard if someone will let him go outside. Riggs is full of energy, especially when he gets to visit his “friends.”

The labs, not to be cliché or anything, have changed my outlook on dogs. Before falling in love and meeting these boys, big dogs were a little scary for me. I was used to the yappy lifestyle of my Yorkie; I didn’t really see how an 80-pound lab could be as much of a lap dog as Roscoe. Sure, I can’t scoop them up (as easily) and force them to love me, but I don’t have to force them to love me. I just have to sit there and they’ll come to me, Django with a toy, Marino with just himself, and spend time with me.

Ever since Roscoe died, I’ve had a sort of “dog fever” that just won’t go away. Obviously, part of that is still mourning for him and wishing he were still here with me. At my house, there’s no four-legged friend to come home to. It has been hard on me; as such an animal lover, not having a snoot to boop or a water dish to fill up has made me sad. But I know that all I have to do is go over to Kegan’s house, and I’ll have two black labs that will love me unconditionally. They have been an immense source of comfort to me.

The dogs do not have a social media account, and Kegan isn’t the president yet, so they really don’t have a big role in “pawlitics.” However, they’ve watched enough Rand Paul videos with Harold to have developed some fiscal conservative pawlicies.

In the future, I hope to be able to share the stories of some dogs who have really made it in the world of politics. But for now, I hope Django and Marino’s love will keep you inspired until then.

Governor Holcomb is Taking Indiana to the Next Level

Governor Eric Holcomb, of Indiana, is entering his final year of his first term. In his first term, Governor Holcomb has proven himself through his accomplishments. With session underway, Governor Holcomb has recently outlined his legislative goals for the 2020 session. These legislative goals focus on the economy, infrastructure, workforce, public health and drugs, and government services (FOX59 2019).

When addressing the economy, Governor Holcomb wants to promote Indiana as a destination for corporations. Governor Holcomb has started the Indiana Destination Development Corporation with this goal in mind. Governor Holcomb, also wants to make Indiana a defense innovation hub by tripling federal defense investment in Indiana by the end of his second term (Brown 2019).

Governor Holcomb has also expressed his wish to continue improving infrastructure throughout the state. Governor Holcomb has been implementing his “Next Level” Indiana plans. With regard to infrastructure, Governor Holcomb has his Next Level Connections program. This program helps to improve broadband service, expand Indiana’s trail system, create more international flights, and preserve and improve Indiana’s roads (FOX59 2019).

In terms of workforce, Governor Holcomb is focusing on education. Governor Holcomb will be addressing teacher pay next session, in the budget year, but there are some goals that were laid out for this session (Van Wyk 2019). This session, Governor Holcomb has publicly supported the Next Level Teacher Compensation Commission. Governor Holcomb is looking for unfunded programs and unnecessary requirements to eliminate in K-12 education. Republican party members in the House and Senate, along with Governor Holcomb, are pushing for a hold harmless in relation to the ILEARN scores, and changing career-related professional growth points from required to optional. In Governor Holcomb’s State of the State address he gave an early sign of things to come. Governor Holcomb plans to spend $250 million of the state surplus to pay down teachers pensions. This, along with the money spent last session on teacher pensions, will free up $115 million a year that is planned to be used to raise teachers salaries (Associated Press 2020). Holcomb indicated that he and the Republicans will take whatever recommendations that the Next Level Teacher Compensation Commission will give this fall. In other workforce related areas, Governor Holcomb has laid out his plan to redesign the prison education system to better prepare offenders for re-entry (FOX59 2019).

The major goal of Governor Holcomb in the public health sector was to raise the age to buy tobacco to 21. This goal has already been accomplished on the federal level (Howard 2019). However, Governor Holcomb’s 2020 public health agenda also includes providing healthcare transparency, protecting consumers from surprise medical bills, and improving mental health services at schools and hospitals. Governor Holcomb has vowed to continue the fight against the drug epidemic. Governor Holcomb will continue on his promise to become the best state in the Midwest for infant mortality by 2024 (Brown 2019).

Finally, when addressing government services, Governor Holcomb laid out his plan to use the state surplus on capital projects which will save taxpayers $125 million in borrowing costs. Governor Holcomb also plans on integrating the 211 helpline into FSSA call centers (FOX59 2019).

Governor Holcomb’s State of the State address on Tuesday, January 14, touched on many on these same topics. Governor Holcomb also spent part of his speech outlining his accomplishments as he gears up for reelection. Governor Holcomb’s first term has been full of nothing but success.

Governor Holcomb has partnered with the Markle Foundation to launch Skillful Indiana to bridge the divide between the skills Hoosiers have and the skills businesses need. Indiana is just the second state to have this program. Under Governor Holcomb, Indiana has had two consecutive record-breaking years for job commitments. In 2018, 320 companies committed to create at least 31,000 jobs in Indiana (IN.GOV 2019).

Governor Holcomb has worked hard on his Next Level Jobs program to help connect workers to high-demand, high-wage careers. Governor Holcomb has found an innovative way to expand the workforce in his Last Mile program. It helps reduce recidivism by teaching computer coding inside prisons. Governor Holcomb has introduced high-wage, high demand certificate training to prepare offenders to be successful in their communities upon release (IN.GOV 2019).

Governor Holcomb has been increasing Indiana’s competitiveness in the global economy. Governor Holcomb brought Indiana its first-ever nonstop transatlantic flight from Indianapolis to Paris. Governor Holcomb has met with officials and industry leaders in the United Kingdom, Japan, Germany, Canada, Israel, India, France, Belgium, Slovakia, Hungary, Austria, Switzerland and the Czech Republic helping to bring Indiana to the world and the world to Indiana (IN.GOV 2019).

Governor Holcomb has expanded pre-kindergarten for qualifying Hoosiers (IN.GOV 2019). This allows those parents that want to get back into the workforce, but may not have had the means for childcare, to get back to work.

Governor Holcomb has also launched the Next Level Recovery program to help combat the drug epidemic (IN.GOV 2019). The drug epidemic has been a stain on Indiana and Governor Holcomb has only just begun addressing this issue in his first term.

In the first few months in office, Governor Holcomb launched a fully funded 20-year, Next Level Roads program. This program was funded with $60 billion and it is the only such plan in the country (IN.GOV 2019).

This was all be touched on in the Governor’s State of the State Address. Governor Holcomb, with his accomplishments and 2020 session goals, will be a freight train heading into the 2020 elections. Governor Holcomb will continue taking Indiana to the Next Level.

Sources

Associated Press. (2020, Jan 14). Gov. Holcomb outlines plan to free up funds for teacher pay boost during State of the State address. Retrieved from https://fox59.com/2020/01/14/gov-holcomb-to-deliver-state-of-the-state-address/

Brown, Alex. (2019, Dec 10). Holcomb Details 2020 Priorities. Retrieved from https://www.insideindianabusiness.com/story/41432621/holcomb-details-2020-priorities

FOX59. (2019, Dec 10). Gov. Holcomb outlines goals for 2020, including raising smoking and vaping age. Retrieved from https://fox59.com/2019/12/10/gov-holcomb-outlines-goals-for-2020-including-raising-smoking-and-vaping-age/

Howard, Jacqueline. (2019, Dec 20). US raises legal age to buy cigarettes, vapes to 21. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/20/health/tobacco-age-21-trump-spending-bill-bn/index.html

IN.gov. (2020). About Governor Eric J. Holcomb. Retrieved from https://www.in.gov/gov/2358.htm

Wyk, Rich. (2019, Dec 4). Governor Holcomb talks teacher pay raises after protest. Retrieved from https://www.wthr.com/article/governor-holcomb-talks-teacher-pay-raises-after-protest

Pawlitics Introduction

I could tell on our first date that he liked politics.

Kegan was wearing a white Trey Hollingsworth t-shirt. For most of the date he did the talking. I’m not really shy, but I was nervous. If he was willing to talk, I was going to listen. And so he talked about working on the Luke Messer campaign, knocking doors, working for the Republican party…

On our second date, he wore the same Trey Hollingsworth shirt.

Okay, I’ll give him this; he has two identical Trey Hollingsworth shirts. He says he wore the other one. I don’t know how he could possibly tell them apart though.

Point being, I should have known what I was getting into. But for some reason… I didn’t take this as a warning and I stuck around anyway. And here we are, a year and four months later; I’m in love with him, and politics are part of him.

It isn’t that I don’t like politics… it’s just… I don’t love politics. I can have a half-educated discussion about some issues if I’m in the mood. I’m just not in the mood that often. It isn’t something I really get enjoyment out of, not like Kegan does.

There are few things I love like Kegan loves politics. For me, that thing I love, well…

It’s dogs.

Doggos, puppers, floofers, Fido, whatever you call them, I love them all.

Ironically, I didn’t really understand how much I loved dogs until my Yorkie Roscoe fell ill. I got Roscoe the year after my mother passed away, and he quickly became a huge part of my family. We grew up together, as if he were the little brother I never had.

In September 2019, Roscoe became so ill that I couldn’t watch him suffer any longer. It has only been a few months since he passed, and I still miss him every single day. I can’t stop thinking about how important dogs are in our lives and how they impact who we are as people.

So when Kegan mentioned this blog to me, a pun came to me right away. Pawlitics: a narrative series investigating dogs in politics. How have dogs influenced campaigns, politicians as people, or even elections? The goal of Pawlitics is to showcase the dogs behind the people who influence our governing bodies. Conservative dogs, liberal dogs, and undecided dogs: no dog left behind. More influence on the paw, less on the litics.

And if I’m lucky, I’ll meet some new dogs along the way.

Preview of Iowa and the Democrat Primary

With the Iowa caucus just a few weeks away, now is a good time to take a quick preview of the Democrat primary. The field is beginning to shrink as those candidates that had no chance are dropping out. Examining the primary field as it stands right now, I see five candidates that have a possibility of securing the Democrat nomination: Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, and Michael Bloomberg. These candidates do not have an equal chance of securing the nomination. I am just stating, from my perspective, they each have a chance if the primary process goes their way.

Democratic Candidates at the Atlanta primary debate. Timm, Jane. (2019, Dec 17). Democratic debate gets green light after labor dispute is settled. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/democratic-debate-gets-green-light-after-labor-dispute-settled-n1103156

Vice President Joe Biden has been the front runner the entire race thus far. He may not know what state he is in on any given day, but he sure knows that he is at the top of most national polls (Vankin 2020) . It gets interesting for Vice President Biden when you look at the early state polling. There is a very real possibility that the first four primary states of Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada are split between three or four candidates. This sets up Super Tuesday, which includes 16 primaries and caucuses, to be the most pivotal in recent memory. Vice President Biden’s best hope to secure the primary nomination would be to dominate on Super Tuesday. This would mean winning at least 12 of the 16 primaries and caucuses. This would be Vice President Biden’s best chance of securing the Democrat nomination outright. The dominating win Vice President Biden could possibly have on Super Tuesday can help to ensure that there is not a contested convention, which is a possibility I will touch on when talking about two different Democratic candidates.

Senator Bernie Sanders and Senator Elizabeth Warren are twins when it comes to their political beliefs. The only difference is Senator Warren made the grave mistake of not answering a simple yes or now question for months. Time and time again she was asked whether or not she would raise taxes on the middle class. Time and time again all she could say was that costs would go down for those in the middle class. The plans that she put forth would obviously raise the taxes of all Americans. Senator Warren could not come to grips with that simple fact. Senator Sanders, on the other hand, had no problem with telling you that your taxes will go up. If you plan to take our money at least be honest about it (Breuninger 2019). This is the exact reason why Senator Sanders will get the far-left vote in the 2020 Democrat primary. He will win at least one of the first four early states. The pivotal question is: when will Senator Warren decide to drop out of the race? If Senator Warren drops out before Super Tuesday that should give Senator Sanders enough support to overcome any challenger and win the nomination outright. If Senator Warren does not drop out by Super Tuesday then there is no scenario in my mind that Vice President Biden is not the Democrat nominee. The flip side is also true. The way Senator Warren can win the nomination is if Senator Sanders drops out. That is not probable considering he is likely to capture an early primary state. The thing to remember when analyzing Senator Sanders and Senator Warren is that if one of these candidates drops out before Super Tuesday the other will win the Democrat nomination.

Senator Bernie Sanders and Senator Elizabeth Warren at the Detroit primary debate. Montanaro, Domenico. (2019, Oct 4). Progressives Sanders And Warren Lead Democrats In Fundraising, Biden Lags. Retreived from https://www.npr.org/2019/10/04/767210633/progressives-sanders-and-warren-lead-democrats-in-fundraising-biden-lags

Pete Buttigieg, the former Mayor of South Bend, Indiana, has quickly made a name for himself on the national stage. Mayor Buttigieg, or Mayor Pete as he is most commonly referred, is the first prominent LGBT candidate for President of the United States. I am from Indiana, and within the Indiana Republican Party there has been a sense that Mayor Pete was going to run for President for going on three-years. The man that lost by 30 points in a Statewide race to a failed Senate candidate is now a month away from potentially winning the first primary state of Iowa (Webb 2019). This will not be enough to push him to the nomination. The win in Iowa could give him the momentum to get to the nomination in a different way. Mayor Pete will win the Democrat nomination for President by being the spoiler. He needs to make sure that he wins enough states and that enough states are split between the other candidates to ensure that there is a contested convention. At that convention the Democrats will be looking for a moderate that can beat President Trump. I may not believe that Mayor Pete can beat President Trump, but in the current field he has the best chance. It helps that he is a member of the LGBT community. There is also a significant contrast when looking at the top five candidates in terms of age. Mayor Pete is under 40 and the other four are over 70 years young. If there is a contested convention, Mayor Pete may be the one that survives.

I have touched on the idea of a contested convention. This is something that has not happened since 1952, but there are signs it may happen in this primary. A contested convention is when no candidate running in the primary is able to capture the delegates needed. This delegates are awarded based on how candidates perform in the primary and caucuses throughout the country. The fact that there are multiple people who can capture multiple states will help to ensure that no one candidate can get the 1,919 delegates needed to secure the Democrat nomination. This is the first year that there will not be “super-delegates” in the first round of voting at the Democrat convention. These are unbounded delegates that have their position by virtue of their elected office. If these is a contested convention these 758 “super-delegates” will be the “King Makers”. The bar to secure the nomination on a second vote at the convention will be 2,298 (Faucheux 2019). This is the way I see Mayor Pete winning along with the next candidate that I will discuss.

Finally, we have a late entrance into the race, former New York Mayor, Michael Bloomberg. Mayor Bloomberg has had the interesting strategy of skipping the first four early primary states and hedging all of his bets on Super Tuesday. Just like Mayor Pete the best chance for Mayor Bloomberg to win is making sure there is a contested convention. Mayor Bloomberg has a different appeal than Mayor Pete has. He can run on the same platform that President Trump ran on. The idea that he is a successful businessman that can run the country like a business. He can run the same campaign on the Democrat platform. The other plus side is the fact that he is worth about $54 billion and has money to outspend President Trump (Foussianes 2019).

Former Mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg. Klar, Rebecca. (2020, Jan 2). Bloomberg decides to skip Nevada caucuses. Retrieved from https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/476537-bloomberg-fails-to-file-for-nevada-caucuses

In the end I have no idea what is going to happen throughout this process. Looking at the field and how polls look, these are some of the likely outcomes. The one that is most likely to happen in my mind is Vice President Biden winning the Democrat nomination outright. The one that would be most shocking is either Senator Warren or Biden dropping out before Super Tuesday allowing the other to win the Democrat nomination. The outcome that I would be most excited to see is a contested convention where I believe Pete Buttigieg would win the nomination.

I will be looking back to this post after the primary process is over to see how accurate I was in my analysis. Until that time watch the debates, educate yourself, and follow the primaries.

Sources

Breuninger, Kevin. (2019, Oct 15). Elizabeth Warren dodges questions on middle-class tax hikes under ‘Medicare for All.’ Retrieved from https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/15/elizabeth-warren-takes-heat-for-dodging-question-on-medicare-for-all-taxes.html

Faucheux, Ron. (2019, Dec 29). Why a Contested Democratic Convention Is Possible. Retrieved from https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/12/27/why_a_contested_democratic_convention_is_possible_142033.html

Foussianes, Chloe. (2019, Nov 26). Michael Bloomberg’s Net Worth Ranks Him Among the World’s Top Billionaires. Retrieved from https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/money-and-power/a25781489/michael-bloomberg-net-worth/

Klar, Rebecca. (2020, Jan 2). Bloomberg decides to skip Nevada caucuses. Retrieved from https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/476537-bloomberg-fails-to-file-for-nevada-caucuses

Montanaro, Domenico. (2019, Oct 4). Progressives Sanders And Warren Lead Democrats In Fundraising, Biden Lags. Retreived from https://www.npr.org/2019/10/04/767210633/progressives-sanders-and-warren-lead-democrats-in-fundraising-biden-lags

Timm, Jane. (2019, Dec 17). Democratic debate gets green light after labor dispute is settled. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/democratic-debate-gets-green-light-after-labor-dispute-settled-n1103156

Vankin, Jonathan. (2020, Jan 4). Despite Media Reports Of Bernie Sanders ‘Surge,’ New Poll Shows Joe Biden Holding Wide, 10 Point National Lead. Retrieved from https://www.inquisitr.com/5821030/bernie-sanders-new-poll-joe-biden-lead/

Webb, John. (2019, Apr 3). Pete Buttigieg lost his first race to a former Vanderburgh County commissioner. Retrieved from https://www.courierpress.com/story/opinion/columnists/jon-webb/2019/04/03/pete-buttigieg-got-trounced-his-first-indiana-campaign/3341473002/

Impeached! (Maybe?)

Articles of impeachment have finally passed in the House of Representatives (Maybe?). On December 18th President Trump was impeached in the House of Representatives. The House passed two Articles of impeachment, Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress, on a near party line vote. Throughout the process, I have noticed two major arguments that the Republicans don’t seem to be making. The first, an argument against the actual impeachment of President Trump. The second, an argument more geared toward the process of impeachment. The first argument that has been rarely touched on, the aid to Ukraine and the timeline of when it was legally supposed to be released. The second argument that the Republicans have not been able to counter, the idea that the Democrats can’t wait to impeach because Trump is actively attracting foreign interference in the 2020 elections. Democrats argue that impeachment is urgent and can’t wait. There are strong arguments that Republicans can make on both counts.

This whole impeachment mess started with a whistle-blower report about a phone call between President Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine on July 25th. The whistle-blower report alleged that President Trump held back vital military aid from Ukraine which was approved by Congress. The report alleged President Trump wanted Ukraine to open an investigation into Hunter Biden. This was seen as a politically motivated move to try to dig up dirt on his primary political challenger, former Vice President Joe Biden. The Democrats and the whistle-blower that started the impeachment investigation argue that President Trump is using the office of the President for political gain. They allege that since President Trump held back vital military aid that it would pressure Ukraine into opening the politically motivated investigation that he wanted into the Biden’s. This argument against President Trump seems to fall apart when you take into account that the vital military aid had to be legally released by September 30th or the money that was allocated by Congress would have been lost. The vital military aid needed to start moving through the government system by mid-September because there is a requirement for a two-week notification to Congress (Wadhams and Mohsin 2019). The investigation into President Trump started on September 9th and the vital military aid was released on September 11th. The Democrat argument depends on the assumption that President Trump was not going to release the vital military aid before September 30th and that the vital military aid that was allocated would be lost. If you take into account the legal guidelines of the aid it makes sense as to why the aid was released around the same time as the impeachment investigation. There also needs to be the assumption that Ukrainian officials did not know that the vital military aid needed to be legally released by September 30th. If you assume these two “facts” it is easy to see how Democrats can go down the slippery slope that they have gone down. If you don’t make these assumptions, then it can be inferred that Ukraine would not have been pressured into investigating the Biden’s. Ukraine would have known that they would receive the vital military aid no matter what and they would have taken the request from President Trump to investigate the Biden’s as an ask and not something they had to do.

The second argument that the Republicans have not made a strong counter on, the idea that Democrats believe that the impeachment of President Trump can’t wait. This is what House Democrats argued when they could not wait for subpoenas of prominent administration officials to make it through the court system. They are now willing to pressure Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to subpoena those same administration officials that they were not willing to wait on when they were investigating President Trump in the House. Speaker Pelosi is now willing to hold the Articles of Impeachment until the Senate agrees to the trial that the Democrats want to have (Sheth and Haltiwanger 2019). The Senate Democrats want the same rights that should have been afforded to Republicans in the House. If impeachment and removal was really that much of a priority this would not even be on the table. There has been nothing substantial that has changed in the weeks since impeachment has passed the House of Representatives. The argument that impeachment and removal is urgent seems to fall flat. The other question that needs to be asked of Democrats: if impeachment and removal is this pressing issue that needs to addressed then why go on a two-week break? If Democrats were this serious about impeachment and removal they would have pressed Republicans to stay in Washington over break and go through the Senate trial.

Republicans of the House of Representatives and Senate have a strong argument against both the impeachment and removal of President Trump. The Republican argument can be bolstered if they focus on the legal issues surrounding the vital military aid and the hypocritical idea that the Democrats have that impeachment and removal is urgent. Impeachment may be over, but there is a long road ahead for the Republicans and President Trump. Strong arguments against impeachment and removal that will help sway public opinion will be a vital tool in the coming weeks.

Sources

Sheth, Sonam; Haltiwanger, John. Democrats are playing hardball on impeachment, and it’s depriving Trump of the one thing he wants most for his reelection. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/democrats-withhold-impeachment-articles-senate-threatens-trump-reelection-2019-12. Accessed 1 January 2020.

Wadhams, Nick; Mohsin, Saleha. State Department Freed Ukraine Money Before Trump Says He Did. Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-09/state-department-freed-ukraine-money-before-trump-says-he-did. Accessed 1 January 2020.