863 resultados para Democratic Party (Miss.). State Central Committee.


Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The Blue Dog Coalition is an informal organization of legislators within the House of Representatives that strives to influence policy on fiscal responsibility, attract the attention of the electorate, They are a group that elicits wide range of reactions covering the length of the political spectrum, but despite this, their claims of special defense of fiscal conservatism within the Democratic Party have gone relatively undocumented by the academic community.This project has integrated a party literature with a caucus literature, in the attempt of building a novel framework for research. Work on polarization, the significance of parties, the purpose and history of caucuses all have been fused in such away that the Blue Dogs have created an opportunity to test broad congressional questions on a caucus-microcosm scale. Three important questions have emerged from the many possible avenues of exploration on the topic: How does admission into the Blue Dog Coalition effect voting behavior - measured by interest, ideology, and party unityscores? How does party leadership delegate prestigious committee assignments, a traditional indicator of partisan favor and influence, towards Blue Dogs? Can we use the Blue Dog Coalition as an indicator of fiscal conservatism? To each of these questions, a number of interesting results emerged. Blue Dogs, in the 104th scored higher in conservative interest group scores, more towards the center in ideological methods, and lower in party unity Dogs began to behave closer to their Democratic counterparts. In addition, membership on these select committees rose from a very small number to greater proportional parity within the Democratic Party. Perhaps most interesting, the Blue Dog Coalition does behave as a significant, independent predictor effect on NTU scores, a variable used to demonstrate fiscal conservatism. This research has shown, first and foremost, that it is useful and practical to applyold arguments within the party literature to a smaller, caucus level of analysis that is relatively untouched by the political science field. For the Blue Dogs, specifically, we have tested the validity of their claims in an attempt to reach broader questions ofdemocratic responsibility and electoral clarity. This work, and other work I have drawn upon, has barely scratched the surface on Blue Dog Democrats and other caucuses of comparable influence and popularity, and there remains a wealth of research material onthis caucus alone to be explored by scholars in the field of congressional politics.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

During the lead-up to Montana second progressive era, Lee Metcalf and Forrest Anderson, along with others, kept the progressive flame lit in Montana. Metcalf’s political history is replete with close electoral wins because of his commitment to progressive ideals when the times were not always politically favorable for that. As State Legislator, MT Supreme Court Justice, Congressman and eventually as US Senator, Lee won races by as little as 55 votes because he stuck to his guns as a progressive. In Forrest Anderson’s career as a County Attorney, State Legislator, MT Supreme Court Justice and 12 years as MT Attorney General he was respected as a pragmatic practitioner of politics. But during that entire career leading up to his election as Governor, Forrest Anderson was also a stalwart supporter of the progressive agenda exemplified by FDR and the New Deal, which brought folks out of the Great Depression that was brought on by the bad policies of the GOP and big business. As MT’s second progressive period began in 1965, the first important election was Senator Metcalf’s successful re-election battle in 1966 with the sitting MT Governor, Tim Babcock. And the progressive express was really ignited by the election of Forrest Anderson as Governor in 1968 after 16 years of Republican Governors in MT. Gordon Bennett played a rather unique role, being a confidant of Metcalf and Anderson, both who respected his wide and varied experience, his intellect, and his roots in progressivism beginning with his formative years in the Red Corner of NE Montana. Working with Senator Metcalf and his team, including Brit Englund, Vic Reinemer, Peggy McLaughlin, Betty Davis and Jack Condon among others, Bennett helped shape the progressive message both in Washington DC and MT. Progressive labor and farm organizations, part of the progressive coalition, benefitted from Bennett’s advice and counsel and aided the Senator in his career including the huge challenge of having a sitting popular governor run against him for the Senate in 1966. Metcalf’s noted intern program produced a cadre of progressive leaders in Montana over the years. Most notably, Ron Richards transitioned from Metcalf Intern to Executive Secretary of the Montana Democratic Party (MDP) and assisted, along with Bennett, in the 1966 Metcalf-Babcock race in a big way. As Executive Secretary Richards was critical to the success of the MDP as a platform for Forrest Anderson’s general election run and win in 1968. After Forrest’s gubernatorial election, Richards became Executive Assistant (now called Chief of Staff) for Governor Anderson and also for Governor Thomas Judge. The Metcalf progressive strain, exemplified by many including Richards and Bennett, permeated Democratic politics during the second progressive era. So, too, did the coalition that supported Metcalf and his policies. The progressivism of the period of “In the Crucible of Change” was fired up by Lee Metcalf, Forrest Anderson and their supporters and coalitions, and Gordon Bennett was in the center of all of that, helping fire up the crucible, setting the stage for many policy advancements in both Washington DC and Montana. Gordon Bennett’s important role in the 1966 re-election of Senator Lee Metcalf and the 1968 election of Governor Forrest Anderson, as well as his wide experience in government and politics of that time allows him to provide us with an insider’s personal perspective of those races and other events at the beginning of the period of progressive change being documented “In the Crucible of Change,” as well as his personal insights into the larger political/policy picture of Montana. Gordon Bennett, a major and formative player “In the Crucible of Change,” was born in the far northeast town of Scobey, MT in 1922. He attended school in Scobey through the eighth grade and graduated from Helena High School. After attending Carroll College for two years, he received his BA in economics from Carleton College in Northfield, MN. During a brief stint on the east coast, his daily reading of the New York Times (“best newspaper in the world at that time … and now”) inspired him to pursue a career in journalism. He received his MA in Journalism from the University of Missouri and entered the field. As a reporter for the Great Falls Tribune under the ownership and management of the Warden Family, he observed and competed with the rigid control of Montana’s press by the Anaconda Company (the Great Falls Tribune was the only large newspaper in Montana NOT owned by ACM). Following his intellectual curiosity and his philosophical bend, he attended a number of Farm-Labor Institutes which he credits with motivating him to pursue solutions to economic and social woes through the law. In 1956, at the age of 34, he received his Juris Doctorate degree from the Georgetown University Law Center in Washington, DC. Bennett’s varied career included eighteen years as a farmer, four years in the US Army during WWII (1942-46), two years as Assistant MT Attorney General (1957-59) with Forrest Anderson, three years in private practice in Glasgow (1959-61), two years as Associate Solicitor in the Department of Interior in Washington, DC (1961-62), and private law practice in Helena from 1962 to 1969. While in Helena he was an unsuccessful candidate for the Montana Supreme Court (1962) and cemented his previous relationships with Attorney General Forrest Anderson and US Senator Lee Metcalf. Bennett modestly refuses to accept the title of Campaign Manager for either Lee Metcalf (1966 re-election over the challenger, MT Republican Governor Tim Babcock) or Forrest Anderson (his 1968 election as Governor), saying that “they ran their campaigns … we were only there to help.” But he has been generally recognized as having filled that critical role in both of those critical elections. After Governor Anderson’s election in 1968, Bennett was appointed Director of the MT Unemployment Compensation Commission, a position from where he could be a close advisor and confidant of the new Governor. In 1971, Governor Anderson appointed him Judge in the most important jurisdiction in Montana, the 1st Judicial District in Helena, a position he held for seventeen years (1971-88). Upon stepping down from his judgeship, for twenty years (1988-2008) he was a law instructor, mediator and arbitrator. He currently resides in Helena with his wife, Norma Tirrell, former newspaper reporter and researcher/writer. Bennett has two adult children and four grandchildren.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The dramatic period of progressive change in Montana that is documented "In the Crucible of Change" series really exploded with the election of Governors Forrest Anderson and Tom Judge. Anderson's single term saw the dispatching of the sales tax as an issue for a long period, the reorganization of the executive branch of state government and the revision of Montana's Constitution. As a former legislator, county attorney, Supreme Court justice, and Attorney General, Anderson brought unmatched experience to the governorship when elected. Tom Judge, although much younger (elected MT’s youngest governor at age 38 immediately following Anderson), also brought serious experience to the governorship: six years as a MT State Representative, two years as a MT State Senator, four years is Lieutenant Governor and significant business experience. The campaign and election of John F. Kennedy in 1960 spurred other young Americans to service, including Tom Judge. First elected in 1960, he rose rapidly through MT’s political-governmental hierarchy until he took over the governorship in time to implement many of the changes started in Governor Anderson’s term. But as a strong progressive leader in his own right, Governor Judge sponsored and implemented significant advancements of his own for Montana. Those accomplishments, however, are the subject of other films in this series. This film deals with Tom Judge’s early years – his rise to the governorship from when he returned home after college at Notre Dame and newspaper experience in Kentucky to his actual election in November 1972. That story is discussed in this episode by three major players in the effort, all directly involved in Tom Judge’s early years and path to the governorship: Sidney Armstrong, Larry Pettit and Kent Kleinkopf. Their recollections of the early Tom Judge and the period of his advancement to the governorship provide an insider’s perspective of the growth of this significant leader of the important period of progressive change documented “In the Crucible of Change.” Sidney Armstrong, President of Sidney Armstrong Consulting, serves on the board and as the Executive Director of the Greater Montana Foundation. Formerly Executive Director of the Montana Community Foundation (MCF), she has served on national committees and participated in national foundation initiatives. While at MCF, she worked extensively with MT Governors Racicot and Martz on the state charitable endowment tax credit and other endowed philanthropy issues. A member of MT Governor Thomas L. Judge’s staff in the 1970s, she was also part of Governor Brian Schweitzer’s 2004 Transition Team, continuing to serve as a volunteer advisor during his term. In the 1980s, Sidney also worked for the MT State AFL-CIO and the MT Democratic Party as well as working two sessions with the MT Senate as Assistant Secretary of the Senate and aide to the President. A Helena native, and great granddaughter of pioneer Montanans, Sidney has served on numerous nonprofit boards, and is currently a board member for the Montana History Foundation. Recently she served on the board of the Holter Museum of Art and was a Governor’s appointee to the Humanities Montana board. She is a graduate of the International School of Geneva, Switzerland and the University of Montana. Armstrong's Irish maternal immigrant great-grandparents, Thomas and Maria Cahill Cooney, came to Virginia City, MT in a covered wagon in 1865, looking for gold. Eventually, they settled on the banks of the Missouri River outside Helena as ranchers. She also has roots in Butte, MT, where her journalist father's family, both of whom were newspaper people, lived. Her father, Richard K. O’Malley, is also the author of a well-known book about Butte, Mile High, Mile Deep, recently re-published by Russell Chatham. She is the mother of four and the grandmother of eight. Dr. Lawrence K. Pettit (Larry Pettit) (b. 5/2/1937) has had a dual career in politics and higher education. In addition to being Montana’s first Commissioner of Higher Education (the subject of another film in this series); Pettit, of Lewistown, served as legislative assistant to U.S. Senators James E. Murray and Lee Metcalf, campaign manager, head of transition team and assistant to Montana Governor Thomas L. Judge; taught political science at The Pennsylvania State University (main campus), was chair of political science at Montana State University, Deputy Commissioner for Academic Programs at the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, Chancellor of the University System of South Texas (since merged with Texas A&M University), President of Southern Illinois University, and President of Indiana University of Pennsylvania from where he retired in 2003. He has served as chair of the Commission on Leadership for the American Council on Education, president of the National Association of (University) System Heads, and on many national and state boards and commissions in higher education. Pettit is author of “If You Live by the Sword: Politics in the Making and Unmaking of a University President.” More about Pettit is found at http://www.lawrencekpettit.com… Kent Kleinkopf of Missoula is co-founder of a firm with a national scope of business that specializes in litigation consultation, expert vocational testimony, and employee assistance programs. His partner (and wife of 45 years) Kathy, is an expert witness in the 27 year old business. Kent received a BA in History/Education from the University of Idaho and an MA in Economics from the University of Utah. The Kleinkopfs moved to Helena, MT in 1971 where he was Assistant to the Commissioner of State Lands (later Governor) Ted Schwinden. In early 1972 Kent volunteered full time in Lt. Governor Tom Judge’s campaign for Governor, driving the Lt. Governor extensively throughout Montana. After Judge was elected governor, Kent briefly joined the staff of Governor Forrest Anderson, then in 1973 transitioned to Judge’s Governor’s Office staff, where he became Montana’s first “Citizens’ Advocate.” In that capacity he fielded requests for assistance from citizens with concerns and information regarding State Agencies. While on the Governor’s staff, Kent continued as a travel aide with the governor both in Montana and nationally. In 1977 Kent was appointed Director of the MT Department of Business Regulation. That role included responsibility as Superintendent of Banking and Chairman of the State Banking Board, where Kent presided over the chartering of many banks, savings and loans, and credit unions. In 1981 the Kleinkopfs moved to Missoula and went into the business they run today. Kent was appointed by Governor Brian Schweitzer to the Board of the Montana Historical Society in 2006, was reappointed and continues to serve. Kathy and Kent have a daughter and son-in-law in Missoula.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Abstract Montana's Lee Metcalf was an extraordinary Montana leader with an unbelievable record of accomplishment fighting for the little people against the forces of economic and political power. The public memory is so short that this film will serve to help reacquaint Lee & Donna Metcalf to most of those who were around during their time. But it will also provide an opportunity for new generations to receive a perspective of an important leader from an important time. (Language from YouTube version of the film, written and provided by Executive Producer Evan Barrett) Lee Warren Metcalf (January 28, 1911 – January 12, 1978) was an American lawyer, judge, and politician. A member of the Democratic Party, he served as a U.S. Representative (1953–1961) and a U.S. Senator (1961–1978) from Montana. He was permanent acting President pro tempore of the Senate, the only person to hold that position, from 1963 until his death in 1978. U.S. House of Representatives During his tenure in the House, Metcalf served on the Education and Labor Committee (1953–1959), Interior and Insular Affairs Committee (1955–1959), Select Astronautics and Space Exploration Committee (1958), and Ways and Means Committee (1959–1960). He became known as one of Congress's "Young Turks" who promoted liberal domestic social legislation and reform of congressional procedures. He introduced legislation to provide health care to the elderly ten years before the creation of Medicare. He earned the nickname "Mr. Education" after sponsoring a comprehensive bill providing for federal aid to education. He also voted against legislation that would have raised grazing permits on federal lands, and led the opposition to a bill that would have swapped forested public lands for cutover private lands. He was elected chairman of the Democratic Study Group in 1959. U. S. Senate Regarded as "a pioneer of the conservation movement", Metcalf worked to protect the natural environment and regulate utilities. He helped pass the Wilderness Act of 1964, and supported the creation of the Great Bear Wilderness and the Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness. In 1962, he introduced a "Save Our Streams" bill to preserve natural recreation facilities and protect fish and wildlife from being destroyed by highway construction. He was a longtime member of the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission. He was also active on the issue of education. He was a leading supporter of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the effort to extend the G.I. Bill's educational benefits to a new generation of veterans, and the development of legislation to improve federally-aided vocational education.[1] The Peace Corps was established under leadership of Metcalf and Senator Mansfield. In 1983, by act of Congress, the Lee Metcalf Wilderness area was created in southwestern Montana in honor of the late Congressman. The Great Bear Wilderness and Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness areas were also created as a result of Metcalf's efforts in Congress, in addition to the Lee Metcalf National Wildlife Refuge in Montana. Metcalf was ranked number 15 on a list of the 100 Most Influential Montanans of the Century by the Missoulian newspaper. This text is courtesy of Wikipedia®, a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization, and is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Semi-presidential systems of democratic governance risk ending up in a stalemate when it is not clear which of the two „heads” – head of State or head of Government – shall take the lead. The current political situation in Romania features some of the commonly observed characteristics of such an institutional blockade. However, after addressing these formal aspects of political Romania, the author argues for not forgetting to take into account the informal, actor-related factors. The nature of the Romanian political parties and party system seems to hinder the finding of a consensus needed to exit the self-imposed blockade. More specifically, it is the Democratic Party (PD) that is the key to understanding the recent developments. The Government of April the third has yet to prove its efficiency.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

En el presente artículo se describen los factores que provocaron Ias rivalidades y tensiones internas en el Peronismo Mendocino, lo que causó la caída del gobierno de Alberto Martínez Baca - Carlos Mendoza. En este proceso se interrelacionan diferentes actores: la ofensiva extrapartidaria, el movimiento obrero, los jóvenes revolucionarios, los políticos verticalistas, etc. Para ello se comienza presentando el mosaico partidario mendocino en el proceso que desemboca en la transición democrática de 1973. Básicamente, se pone de manifiesto, la interacción entre el Partido Demócrata y el régimen militar, el sesgo moderado de la UCR local, y la conflictiva heterogeneidad del peronismo. Con grandes dificultades para solucionar sus diferencias a través de canales institucionales, pero al mismo tiempo con una dinámica de intensa politización. Por eso, se plantean algunas observaciones sobre las características de la radicalización juvenil, y, se ofrece una breve reconstrucción historiográfica del movimiento obrero mendocino desde una perspectiva de análisis que tiene en cuenta centralmente, dos aspectos: su relación con el liderazgo carismático de Perón, y su relación -ambivalente- con los gobiernos de la "Revolución Argentina". La búsqueda de la desperonización del país, la puja por tratar de captar los votos otrora peronistas, las ansias individuales al abrirse eI mercado eIectoral, la división de posiciones u opiniones frente a Ios gobiernos autoritarios, y la radicalización social, trajo aparejado una profundización de la crisis interna. Crisis que se vio reflejada en el proceso que condujo a la elección de Alberto Martínez Baca y Carlos Mendoza como candidatos a la gobernación, poniendo de manifiesto la influencia de los sectores identificados con el "peronismo revolucionario" y la ofensiva de la "derecha peronista". Su corolario: la intervención a los tres poderes de la provincia.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

2002 elections: On 31 March 2002, parliamentary elections were held in Ukraine. As expected, they were a major success for the centrist-rightist coalition focused around former Prime Minister Viktor Yuschenko. The communists emerged significantly weaker from the vote, and the "party of power" achieved a poor result. Yet, due to the mixed electoral law (half of the deputies were elected in single-mandate districts), the latter block, firmly supported by President Leonid Kuchma, resulted as the main force in Parliament. The results of particular parties and blocks were as follows: Viktor Yuschenko's Block received 23.57% of votes and 112 seats, the Communist Party of Ukraine - 19.98% of votes and 66 seats, the "For One Ukraine" block - 11.77% of votes and 101 seats, Yulia Tymoshenko's Block - 7.26% of votes and 22 seats, the Socialist Party of Ukraine - 6.87% of votes and 22 seats, and the Social Democratic Party of Ukraine (united) - 6.27% of votes and 24 seats. This shows how the mixed electoral regulations favour "For One Ukraine" and act against Yuschenko's block. One should note, however, that the latter gained the support of less than one quarter of voters. After the election: The dominant force in Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada, elected in March 2002, are the deputies of "One Ukraine", a fraction of the pro-presidential centre. "One Ukraine" has refused to admit any of the opposition's representatives (either from the right or left wings) into the parliament's presidium, but has accepted opposition-appointed heads of many parliamentary commissions. Viktor Yuschenko's "Our Ukraine", which has been the largest parliamentary fraction since June, attempted to proclaim itself the centre of the parliamentary majority, but its policy was awkward and inconsistent, and the main success of this club was that it didn't break up. Viktor Yuschenko's moves have been particularly incoherent and they undermined the image of Yuschenko as Ukraine's future leader, created throughout the course of the electoral campaign. In autumn, the main oligarchic groups and their representative fractions ("One Ukraine", which proved to be a useless instrument, was dissolved in June), reached a compromise with the president. It was agreed that the new prime minister should be a Donetsk clan representative (Viktor Yanukovych), and that the Dnipropetrovsk clan should appoint the president of the National Bank of Ukraine (this position went to Serhij Tihipko). The Kyiv clan obtained the President's Administration (Viktor Medvedchuk was appointed in spring) and a considerable number of parliamentary commissions. The president's interests in the government are to be protected by Mykola Azarov, former Head of the State Tax Administration. This compromise "package" was designed to secure the shares of the main oligarchic clans in the power and the president's strong position as mediator.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Moldova’s political system took shape due to the six-year rule of the Alliance for European Integration coalition but it has undergone a major transformation over the past six months. Resorting to skilful political manoeuvring and capitalising on his control over the Moldovan judiciary system, Vlad Plahotniuc, one of the leaders of the nominally pro-European Democratic Party and the richest person in the country, was able to bring about the arrest of his main political competitor, the former prime minister Vlad Filat, in October 2015. Then he pushed through the nomination of his trusted aide, Pavel Filip, for prime minister. In effect, Plahotniuc has concentrated political and business influence in his own hands on a scale unseen so far in Moldova’s history since 1991. All this indicates that he already not only controls the judiciary, the anti-corruption institutions, the Constitutional Court and the economic structures, but has also subordinated the greater part of parliament and is rapidly tightening his grip on the section of the state apparatus which until recently was influenced by Filat.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Ce mémoire s’intéresse au concept de crise, économique et politique, comme source de changement idéologique et politique. Au travers de l’étude de l’austérité économique, il sera possible d’identifier des différences majeures entre deux épisodes de troubles économiques importants, la Grande Dépression et la Grande Récession. Alors que la Grande Dépression est caractérisée par une double crise, économique et politique, la Grande Récession, elle, demeure un choc essentiellement économique. L’absence de contagion dans le système politique explique la ténacité d’une idée comme l’austérité, de retour depuis la révolution néolibérale des années 80. L’austérité économique s’est adaptée et s’aligne maintenant aux intérêts d’une frange importante de la coalition démocrate. La persistance de l’allure des coalitions politiques depuis le dernier grand réalignement témoigne de l’absence de transformation majeure du mode d’action étatique, ce qui constitue une différence importante entre les deux crises.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Mode of access: Internet.