BERNIE SANDERS MOVES TO ENSURE HE'S ON NEW YORK'S PRIMARY BALLOT

"‘We are very disappointed that in the midst of an unprecedented crisis, the State of New York is spending taxpayer dollars undermining voting rights," Sanders' campaign manager Faiz Shakir said in a Monday statement. "At a time when Republicans are trying to make it more difficult for people to vote, Democrats should be making it easier-- not denying people the right to participate in the political process.’”

https://www.newsweek.com/bernie-moves-ensure-hes-new-yorks-primary-ballot-after-shooting-down-prospect-another-1503292

BERNIE SANDERS MOVES TO ENSURE HE'S ON NEW YORK'S PRIMARY BALLOT AFTER SHOOTING DOWN PROSPECT OF ANOTHER PRESIDENTIAL BID
BY JEFFERY MARTIN ON 5/12/20 AT 12:39 AM EDT

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign filed an amicus brief with the Second Circuit Court of New York Monday seeking affirmation of the district court's decision to allowed the New York Presidential Primary to be held with all Democratic nominees on the ballot.

In April, the New York State Board of Elections (NYSBE) cancelled the primary, saying that in-person voting was a potential health threat during the coronavirus pandemic. Another factor in the NYSBE decision was that all Democratic candidates, except former Vice President Joe Biden, had exited the race.

Former presidential candidate Andrew Yang challenged the decision, later filing a lawsuit against the NYSBE on the grounds that his campaign was suspended, but not fully terminated.

In his lawsuit, Yang said the "unprecedented and unwarranted" decision by the NYSBE to cancel the primary "infringes the rights of Plaintiffs and all New York State Democratic Party voters, of which there are estimated to be more than six million, as it fundamentally denies them the right to choose our next candidate for the office of President of the United States."

Sanders also declared his intention to remain on the ballots. "We would like to get as many delegates as we can," Sanders told PBS in April, "so that we can have a stronger position at the Democratic Convention to help us shape the new platform of the Democratic Party and the other issues that the DNC [Democratic National Convention] deals with."

Judge Analisa Torres ruled in Yang's favor, saying that the removal of candidates' names from the ballot violated their rights.

"The removal of presidential contenders from the primary ballot not only deprived those candidates of the chance to garner votes for the Democratic Party's nomination," Judge Torres wrote in her May ruling, "but also deprived their pledged delegates of the opportunity to run for a position where they could influence the party platform, vote on party governance issues, pressure the eventual nominee on matters of personnel or policy, and react to unexpected developments at the Convention."

Bernie Sanders' campaign filed an amicus brief with a New York Court of Appeals Monday to affirm a lower court's ruling that Sanders' name could remain on the New York Democratic Primary ballot.

The Sanders campaign filed the amicus brief on Thursday in a bid to ensure the district court's decision is upheld.

"We are very disappointed that in the midst of an unprecedented crisis, the State of New York is spending taxpayer dollars undermining voting rights," Sanders' campaign manager Faiz Shakir said in a Monday statement. "At a time when Republicans are trying to make it more difficult for people to vote, Democrats should be making it easier-- not denying people the right to participate in the political process."

"The district court got it right," Shakir continued. "The State of New York acted unconstitutionally and the district court's decision should be upheld. The people of New York deserve to have their voices heard and their votes counted."

According to the Sanders campaign, even delegates who are allocated to candidates that do not win the nomination play a "central role" in the Democratic party's platform. Having Sanders delegates at the convention could lead to some more progressive policies being instituted by the party at the Democratic National Convention. This could be particularly important to Sanders, since he has indicated he will not be running for president again.

"I think the likelihood is very very slim at that," Sanders told C-SPAN Monday. "I think next time around you're going to see another candidate carrying the progressive banner. I think it's very very unlikely that I will be running for president ever again and I think right now the focus, I would say not only for progressives, not only of Democrats but Independents, moderate Republicans, has got to be how we come together to defeat this very dangerous president who is in office right now."

Newsweek reached out to the Sanders campaign for further comment. This story will be updated with any response.

New York is currently expected to hold its Democratic presidential primary on June 23. Mail-in ballots can be used by residents to avoid potentially crowded voting places.

States Expand Internet Voting Experiments Amid Pandemic, Raising Security Fears

Storm clouds gathering. 

""It is simply irresponsible to allow online voting, when leading experts have warned specifically that this technology is dangerous and before a system has passed an audit by independent experts,”  US Sen. Wyden said in a statement to NPR. "So far none of these products has passed that test. It is far too risky to gamble the constitutional rights of voters with disabilities on unproven tech.”

https://www.npr.org/2020/04/28/844581667/states-expand-internet-voting-experiments-amid-pandemic-raising-security-fears”

States Expand Internet Voting Experiments Amid Pandemic, Raising Security Fears

Election officials nationwide are preparing for what may the highest election turnout in modern history in the middle of a pandemic. In response, several states will be turning to a relatively new and untested form of Internet-based voting to aid the voters who may have the most trouble getting to the polls.

In the latest demonstration of the technology, Delaware will allow voters with disabilities to return their ballots electronically in its primary election next month, becoming the second U.S. state to do so. The decision comes despite grave warnings from the cybersecurity community that the technology doesn't offer sufficient safeguards to protect the integrity of an election.

NPR is the first to report the development, which has yet to be announced publicly. Both the state, and the Seattle-based company administering the technology, Democracy Live, confirmed the decision, although they dispute the term "Internet voting" for the cloud-based system.

Earlier this year, West Virginia passed a bill to allow the use of the technology for disabled voters, after becoming the first state to allow overseas and military voters to use an app to vote in the 2018 midterms. Delaware will also allow overseas and military voters to use the technology.

A third state, New Jersey, is considering making the technology available for voters with disabilities and overseas voters, according to an election official with knowledge of the state's plans. A state elections spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.

The developments are sure to worry election security advocates. Until the pandemic struck, their efforts were focused on cybersecurity following the 2016 election, when Russian operatives successfully hacked election networks in multiple states. Since then, many states have increased their security protocols and generally moved away from all-electronic voting systems back toward paper ballots.

"In the computer security business, we worry about worst-case scenarios, and the downside risk of the Democracy Live model is really bad," said Doug Jones, a computer science professor and election security expert at the University of Iowa. "If the voter is marking the ballot using a device, it's an online ballot-marking system, and if the physical ballot is not printed by the voter, it's online voting."

Still, there are signs that the general public may be becoming more open to the idea. A survey this month by TargetSmart, a data analytics firm that works with Democrats, found that a plurality of voters support Internet voting as a response to the coronavirus crisis.

But advocates of Internet voting technology are clear that they don't see it stopping with relatively small slices of the electorate such as overseas voters and voters with disabilities, or being restricted to times of crisis. They see it as the future of voting.

"You know, eventually we can't hold back the tide. We're going to get there," said Bryan Finney, the CEO and founder of Democracy Live. "Next generation voters are going to demand next generation voting technologies."

Who paper leaves behind

The pandemic took hold in the U.S. in the middle of primary season during a presidential election year. Officials around the country are scrambling with how to make sure the democratic process doesn't become a casualty. 

Many voters are concerned about the potential health risks of casting ballots in person. During Wisconsin's recent controversial primary, voters wearing masks stood in long lines to cast ballots, sometimes relying on DIY safety measures crafted by election officials. State health officials say at least 36 voters and poll workers have subsequently tested positive for COVID-19. 

In response, many jurisdictions and states are looking for alternatives to in-person voting.

While ballots cast by mail are viewed by many as highly accessible, they leave some people behind, says Eric Bridges, the executive director of the American Council of the Blind.

Bridges authored a letter to congressional leaders earlier this month pushing for online voting, which was signed by more than 70 national, state and local disability advocacy groups.

"To complete a paper ballot one is required to, at the least, read standard text, physically write and/or fill in the ballot choices, seal and certify the ballot via a signature on the envelope, and mail the ballot back to the appropriate voting official to be counted," Bridges wrote. "Each of these steps may act as a barrier to voting for voters who are blind and disabled."

The Democracy Live system that will be used this summer allows voters with disabilities to access and mark their ballots on their own accessible devices, meaning voters can fill them out without help and send them in using whatever technology suits their specific physical needs.

A screenshot of Democracy Live's electronic ballot delivery service. Once a voter completes their ballot, they can choose whether to return it electronically or print it out and mail it in.

NPR screenshot of Democracy Live demo

Typically, voters with these sorts of needs have had to travel to a polling place to use an accessible voting machine, but the pandemic may make that difficult this year.

Bridges doesn't think politicians have purposefully or maliciously failed to take the needs of voters with disabilities into consideration by expanding mail-in voting.

"It doesn't make it any less frustrating or angering to be completely honest," Bridges said. "It's just sort of like we weren't even considered; there wasn't even a debate that took place where we could serve and volley."

When asked about security concerns with the technology, he said that's not his job, that's the role of security firms and the government.

"We want access," Bridges said. "It's not really up to the American Council of the Blind to ensure that these systems are secure."

'Risk appetite' 

Returning ballots electronically is still in a pilot phase, with the states taking it one election at a time. But Finney said he expects at least five states to offer his company's ballot return technology to voters with disabilities in November's general election.

It's a major development to expand the use of such systems beyond just military and overseas voters, since many of those voters already vote by what are considered insecure methods like email and fax. Disabled voters in many instances will be choosing to electronically transmit their ballot instead of using a completely paper system.

The Democracy Live ballot return system stores a voter's ballot and then allows an election official to access and print it.

Finney, however, doesn't prefer the term "online voting."

"It's a loaded term. ... Really what this is, is a secure portal. If anything, it's a document storage application," Finney said. "When people think of online voting, they're thinking it's all being tabulated online."

But a number of cybersecurity experts disputed that characterization when presented with it by NPR.

"Sorry, but what a load of bull****," said Joe Kiniry, a principal scientist at Galois, the company contracted by the federal government to develop a secure and open source voting machine.

The phrase "online voting" encompasses any voting system where "voter choices are transmitted over a wide area network," Kiniry said, and has nothing to do with how those ballots are counted.

"Online voting is not a loaded term," Kiniry said. "It has a very simple definition that has been widely agreed upon in the research community for about 40 years."

Cities, counties and states are largely free to use whatever voting technology they want because elections are run at the local level with very limited federal oversight.

In the case of online voting, there's also very little financial risk. Tusk Philanthropies, a nonprofit funded by multimillionaire Bradley Tusk, is funding many of the pilots with an aim at expanding Internet voting and increasing turnout in U.S. elections.

His organization has funded the West Virginia pilot program and other local pilots in Utah, Oregon, Coloradoand Washington.

Tusk told NPR earlier this year that he hopes to fund as many as 50 mobile voting pilots in the coming five years.

"Everyone who doesn't want this to happen is never going to say, 'We oppose mobile voting because we don't want higher turnout,' " Tusk said in January. "They're going to say, 'It's not safe.' And if we have proven 30, 40, 50 times over that it is safe, it's a lot harder for those objections and arguments to fly."

Election security experts say that rigorous independent auditing is needed in order to reassure the public the results are legitimate. That's lacking in the case of Democracy Live, says Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., who has opposed online voting for many years.

Wyden does believe voters with disabilities should have access to software that allows them to mark their own ballot using their own accessible machine, but he thinks those ballots should then be mailed in, not returned electronically.

"It is simply irresponsible to allow online voting, when leading experts have warned specifically that this technology is dangerous and before a system has passed an audit by independent experts," Wyden said in a statement to NPR. "So far none of these products has passed that test. It is far too risky to gamble the constitutional rights of voters with disabilities on unproven tech."

West Virginia dropped its previous online voting vendor after a number of independent investigators cited security issues with its system.

Overall, the amount of voters using some form of Internet ballot return in 2020 is still expected to be minuscule; Finney expects less than 10,000 voters nationwide. And he says he doesn't think the systems should be used more widely until there have been more pilots.

But many election officials say they shouldn't be used at all. One state election director who requested anonymity in order to speak candidly called the technology "the third rail" of voting systems because they ignite such controversy.

Similarly, Washington Secretary of State Kim Wyman gives two reasons for why she has pushed back for 20 years against various efforts to expand Internet voting.

"The Internet is not secure, and we know this more today than I did 20 years ago," Wyman says.

The second problem has less to do with technology, but is tougher to solve she says: convincing voters in a close election that the results are legitimate when they don't understand the underlying technology.

Ahead of a highly polarized presidential election, Wyman says it's not the time to introduce new technology.

"We can't put our election at risk to technology we cannot guarantee is secure, and right now, in 2020, we cannot guarantee that any electronic transmission of a ballot is secure," Wyman said. "While it seems like electronic voting would really solve a lot of problems, it would create far more mistrust than I think we have the risk appetite for."

Andrew Yang sues over New York’s shutdown of presidential primary

"Voting is kind of a big deal."

— Andrew Yang (@AndrewYang) April 29, 2020

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/28/andrew-yang-lawsuit-new-york-primary-217349

POLITICO

2020 ELECTIONS
Andrew Yang sues over New York’s shutdown of presidential primary
The former Democratic candidate argues that axing the primary would deny voters due process and hurt down-ballot candidates.

By ZACH MONTELLARO
04/28/2020 06:48 PM EDT

Andrew Yang, the former presidential candidate, is suing the New York State Board of Elections in federal court after the state election commission effectively canceled the Democratic presidential primary there.

Yang, along with seven New Yorkers who filed to serve as Yang delegates to the Democratic National Convention, filed suit on Monday arguing that they should not be removed because they had otherwise met the requirements to be on the ballot.

The decision to remove Yang “denies voters due process and denies voters the right to vote, and therefore must be invalidated removing the authority for the Defendant to take the actions complained of herein,” reads the lawsuit, which was shared with POLITICO. The lawsuit notes that neither Yang nor the delegate candidates asked to be removed from the ballot.

The New York State Board of Elections effectively canceled the presidential primary on Monday, when the two Democratic commissioners voted to strip every candidate, except former Vice President Joe Biden, off the ballot because they were no longer actively seeking the presidency.

The move infuriated supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders, in particular. Sanders, like Yang, has also suspended his campaign but publicly said he wished to remain on the ballot for the remaining primaries so he could continue to be awarded delegates to sway the national convention.

The suit filed by Yang also argued that axing the Democratic presidential primary would hurt down-ballot candidates. 

The lawsuit argued that canceling the presidential primary would be “suppressing voter turnout as voters will have less incentive to vote if they cannot cast a vote for the highest office in the land, and thereby negatively impact challenger candidates” such as Jonathan Herzog, who is running a longshot primary bid against Democratic Rep. Jerry Nadler in New York's 10th District. Herzog is also a party to the lawsuit.

New York’s presidential primary was originally consolidated with the state”s other federal and state primaries on June 23. For the remaining primaries, Gov. Andrew Cuomo ordered that any New Yorker could vote absentee (typically, New York requires a valid excuse for voters to cast an absentee ballot), and that every voter in the state be mailed an absentee-ballot request form.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/andrew-yang-sues-new-york-democratic-presidential-primary_n_5ea9397fc5b6106b8ecfaae3

POLITICS 04/29/2020 06:45 am ET
Andrew Yang Sues New York State Board Of Elections For Canceling Presidential Primary
The former Democratic presidential candidate has accused the board of denying “voters due process” and the “right to vote.”
By Dominique Mosbergen

Former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang is suing the New York State Board of Elections after the state became the first in the country to cancel its presidential primary over COVID-19 concerns.

The suit, obtained by Politico and filed in federal court on Tuesday by Yang and seven New York residents who’d intended to serve as his delegates to the Democratic National Convention, accuses the election commission of denying “voters due process and … the right to vote.” 

“This unprecedented and unwarranted move infringes the rights of Plaintiffs and all New York State Democratic Party voters, of which there are estimated to be more than 6 million, as it fundamentally denies them the right to choose our next candidate for the office of President of the United States,” the complaint states.

The suit also argues that nixing the primary could impact down-ballot candidates as “voters will have less incentive to vote if they cannot cast a vote for the highest office in the land, and thereby negatively impact challenger candidates.” 

Voting is kind of a big deal.
— Andrew Yang (@AndrewYang) April 29, 2020

New York originally postponed its Democratic presidential primary ― moving it from April 28 to June 23 ― over coronavirus fears. The state’s Board of Elections said this week, however, that it had voted to cancel it entirely after Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) dropped out of the presidential race, leaving former Vice President Joe Biden as the last Democratic contender standing.

State and congressional primaries are still expected to go ahead in June; but as The New York Times noted, about one-third of New York’s counties have no other primaries scheduled, so voters in those counties will no longer need to go to the polls. 

“At a time when the goal is to avoid unnecessary social contact, our conclusion was that there was no purpose in holding a beauty contest primary that would marginally increase the risk to both voters and poll workers,” Douglas Kellner, one of the board’s Democratic commissioners, told CNN of the decision to cancel the presidential primary. 

He added that Sanders’ departure from the race “basically rendered the primary moot.”

But Sanders ― and Yang ― had wanted the presidential primary to go ahead. 

As Jeff Weaver, a senior adviser to Sanders, noted, “the primary process not only leads to [a presidential nominee] but also the selection of delegates which helps determine the platform and rules of the Democratic Party.” 

“New York has clearly violated its approved delegate selection plan,” Weaver said in a statement. “If this is not remedied, New York should lose all its delegates to the 2020 Democratic National Convention and there should be a broader review by the Democratic Party of New York’s checkered pattern of voter disenfranchisement.” 

Our campaign statement on the New York State Board of Elections decision to cancel the state’s presidential primary: pic.twitter.com/BzylNaqCaS

— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) April 27, 2020

Sanders had said previously that he wants to keep amassing delegates so he can exert influence on the party platform on issues like “Medicare for all”  and climate change, The Los Angeles Times reported.

Following the election board’s decision, Biden is expected to get all of New York’s 274 pledged delegates, The Hill noted.

But Jay Jacobs, the chairman of the New York Democratic Party, said this week that he hoped to find a way to allocate some delegates to Sanders.

“What we’re going to do in discussions with the Biden campaign and the Sanders campaign is try to come up with some fair allocation, so that the delegates that go to the convention will have Sanders’ voices as well, as they would have had had we had the primary,” Jacobs said.

More reactions to cancellation of New York Democratic Presidential Primary

Washington Post: Bernie Sanders is right. New York’s decision to cancel its primary is undemocratic.

"States typically do not cancel their primaries after every candidate but one drops out. .... New York’s decision is unprecedented in modern history….The transparently flimsy excuse made the decision even more unpalatable. The state board of elections cited the coronavirus pandemic as a reason not to hold an apparently useless election, but the election will still go forward — largely through absentee ballots — because many other races are on the ballot the same day. Public health is not served by taking away voters’ choices.

The decision also violates the Democratic Party’s rules for selecting delegates to the national convention…

The decision could also boost Trump, who has been courting Sanders voters via tweet, saying that the Democratic establishment is again fixing the race to ensure Sanders’s defeat. This gives him something concrete to point to. It also insulates Trump from the charge Biden levied against him last week that he intends to postpone the November election. Trump has denied he wants to do that, and now he can say that it’s the Democratic establishment that wants to cheat to maintain power. This is an unforced error that gives Trump a new talking point.

Biden should call for the party to undo that error immediately. ... If Biden can’t stand up for democracy within his own party, how can Americans trust him to stand up for it at all?

Federalist: New York Cancels Presidential Primary In A Rebuke To Sanders

"What has already been a bizarre election season just got a little stranger with the decision in New York…..Dampening public turnout on purpose is in itself a strange thing, after all, why wouldn’t the party and the people for that matter want as much input as possible in determining the down ballot races. It could also be a blow to progressives looking to challenge establishment Democrats since Sanders, their biggest star will be on the sidelines. Such a case is NY-16, where Jamaal Bowmann is challenging incumbent Eliot Engel... Hillary Clinton was frustrated in her attempt to woo those voters in 2016, in large part because many progressives felt Sanders had been cheated by the process. Erasing his name from the ballot in a state as large as New York may provide fuel for a similar fire this time around.”

……………………………………………………………………………………………………..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/28/bernie-sanders-is-right-new-yorks-decision-cancel-its-primary-is-undemocratic/

Opinions
Bernie Sanders is right. New York’s decision to cancel its primary is undemocratic.
By Henry Olsen, Columnist

April 28, 2020 at 2:56:08 p.m. EDT

Hardcore fans of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) have long thought that the Democratic establishment would do anything to stop him. Monday’s foolish decision to cancel the New York Democratic presidential primary will simply fan those flames.

New York justified its curious decision, which the state Democratic Party supported and advocated for, by noting that Sanders suspended his presidential campaign this month. Since there was no longer an active contest, the Democrats on the state’s election board reasoned, there was no longer a reason to hold the primary. Sanders immediately protested, calling the decision “an outrage” and “a blow to American democracy.” He’s right.

States typically do not cancel their primaries after every candidate but one drops out. Democrats held their regularly scheduled primaries in 2000 and 2004 even after opponents of eventual nominees Al Gore and John Kerry left the race. Republicans held their primaries in 2000, 2008, 2012 and 2016 after their eventual nominees were effectively unopposed. New York’s decision is unprecedented in modern history.

The transparently flimsy excuse made the decision even more unpalatable. The state board of elections cited the coronavirus pandemic as a reason not to hold an apparently useless election, but the election will still go forward — largely through absentee ballots — because many other races are on the ballot the same day. Public health is not served by taking away voters’ choices.

The decision also violates the Democratic Party’s rules for selecting delegates to the national convention. Those rules require each state to submit a plan for the selection of delegates, and only delegates selected via that plan can be validly seated. New York’s plan established that delegates would be selected via the primary, with different numbers of delegates allocated according to the vote in each of the state’s 27 congressional districts in addition to a certain number awarded via the statewide vote. If there is no primary, there presumably can be no delegates — unless the state awards all the delegates to former vice president Joe Biden since he is, by their fiat, the only candidate on the ballot.

This possible outcome points to what could be the real reason behind the power play. New York sends 274 pledged delegates to the Democratic convention, the second-most of any state. Convention delegates vote on important matters such as the party’s platform and the vice-presidential nominee, on which Sanders supporters would likely have very different views than Biden backers. Sanders would likely have won a large number of New York delegates since Democrats award delegates to any candidate who gets 15 percent of the vote. Giving all the delegates to Biden would seriously weaken the influence of the party’s left wing.

Sanders explicitly said he wanted to remain on state ballots despite his decision to suspend his campaign so that he could amass delegates dedicated to progressive causes and thereby influence the party’s course. That’s clearly something the Biden campaign is worried about, as many polls have shown that policies supported by Sanders and his backers are unpopular with swing voters. Reducing the number of delegates from Sanders’s camp would theoretically let them craft a more centrist platform and help them in the general election against President Trump. Many Sanders supporters might even think Biden’s campaign was behind New York’s decision.

The decision could also boost Trump, who has been courting Sanders voters via tweet, saying that the Democratic establishment is again fixing the race to ensure Sanders’s defeat. This gives him something concrete to point to. It also insulates Trump from the charge Biden levied against him last week that he intends to postpone the November election. Trump has denied he wants to do that, and now he can say that it’s the Democratic establishment that wants to cheat to maintain power. This is an unforced error that gives Trump a new talking point.

Biden should call for the party to undo that error immediately. He should issue a statement demanding that New York’s Democrats reinstate the primary and keep Sanders’s name on the ballot. This would help him as he continues to try to unite the party for the fall campaign and also head off a new talking point for Trump. The longer that he does not do this, the more it will appear that he is behind New York’s undemocratic putsch.

Biden says he’s running the restore America’s soul. Regular, free and democratic elections are at the heart of that soul. If Biden can’t stand up for democracy within his own party, how can Americans trust him to stand up for it at all?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………..

https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/27/new-york-cancels-presidential-primary-in-a-rebuke-to-sanders/

New York Cancels Presidential Primary In A Rebuke To Sanders
The Democrats have cancelled the presidential primary in the Empire state, and once again Bernie Sanders gets the short end of the stick.
APRIL 27, 2020 By David Marcus

The Democratic members of the New York Board of Elections removed Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) from the primary election ballot Monday, effectively canceling the state’s the June 23 presidential primary. Congressional and local primaries will still be held, but the presidential primary cancellation means approximately 20 counties won’t have to administer any contest at all.

The cancellation is a blow to Sanders, whose campaign argued the election should go forward. Although Sanders suspended his campaign, he committed to staying on the ballot in upcoming contests so as to amass enough delegates to influence the platform that the party will decide on at the already delayed Democratic National Convention.

In a statement Sanders said, “Today’s decision by the State of New York Board of Elections is an outrage, a blow to American democracy and must be overturned by the DNC.” He went on to say, “Just last week Vice President Biden warned the American people that President Trump could use the current crisis as an excuse to postpone the November election. Well, now he has a precedent thanks to New York State.”

As it stands now Joe Biden has 1,305 delegates to Sanders’ 939, with 1,991 needed to secure the nomination. However, Democratic Party rules may strip Sanders of about a third of his current delegates, statewide delegates in particular, because of his suspended campaign. These numbers matter because should Sanders come in at under 25 percent of the total delegates, his campaign will not receive seats on a host of convention committees.

The de facto cancellation of the New York State primary was achieved by removing all candidates other than Biden from the ballot, ensuring that the former vice president will rack up all of the 274 pledged delegates chosen by primary voters. Democratic board members who made this decision hope that an uncontested ticket for Biden will dampen voter turnout.

Dampening public turnout on purpose is in itself a strange thing, after all, why wouldn’t the party and the people for that matter want as much input as possible in determining the down ballot races. It could also be a blow to progressives looking to challenge establishment Democrats since Sanders, their biggest star will be on the sidelines. Such a case is NY-16, where Jamaal Bowmann is challenging incumbent Eliot Engel.

This comes a tricky time in the Democratic primary process when Biden, the presumptive nominee, is attempting to court Sanders voters for the general election. Hillary Clinton was frustrated in her attempt to woo those voters in 2016, in large part because many progressives felt Sanders had been cheated by the process. Erasing his name from the ballot in a state as large as New York may provide fuel for a similar fire this time around.

Biden also finds himself in the midst of an emerging Me Too scandal as former aide Tara Reade’s allegation of sexual assault from the 1990s gets increasing corroboration. It was reported Monday that a neighbor of Reade’s remembers a conversation about the alleged assault she had with Reade in the mid-1990s.

If the scandal should reach the point where Biden is no longer able to run, the entire primary process will be thrown into chaos. Sanders with the second most delegates will have a strong argument to make for being the nominee. But there are already whispers that the Democratic establishment would prefer someone else, maybe even coronavirus superstar New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who said he had no influence on the decision to cancel the primary.

What has already been a bizarre election season just got a little stranger with the decision in New York. And once again, as so often seems to be the case, the decision by Democratic leaders, in this case the board members, hurts Bernie Sanders. How will his supporters react to the snub? It history is any indication it may not be pretty.

David Marcus is the Federalist's New York Correspondent. Follow him on Twitter, @BlueBoxDave.

Reactions to cancellation of NY Democratic Presidential Primary

NEWS: Sanders Campaign Statement on New York Primary   
April 27, 2020
Contact: press@berniesanders.com 
WASHINGTON – Bernie 2020 Senior Advisor Jeff Weaver on Monday issued the following statement after the New York State Board of Elections moved to cancel the state’s presidential primary:  

"Today’s decision by the State of New York Board of Elections is an outrage, a blow to American democracy, and must be overturned by the DNC. Just last week Vice President Biden warned the American people that President Trump could use the current crisis as an excuse to postpone the November election. Well, he now has a precedent thanks to New York state. 

"While we understood that we did not have the votes to win the Democratic nomination our campaign was suspended, not ended, because people in every state should have the right to express their preference. What the Board of Elections is ignoring is that the primary process not only leads to a nominee but also the selection of delegates which helps determine the platform and rules of the Democratic Party. 

"No one asked New York to cancel the election. The DNC didn’t request it. The Biden campaign didn’t request it. And our campaign communicated that we wanted to remain on the ballot.  Given that the primary is months away, the proper response must be to make the election safe – such as going to all vote by mail – rather than to eliminating people’s right to vote completely.
"New York has clearly violated its approved delegate selection plan. If this is not remedied, New York should lose all its delegates to the 2020 Democratic National Convention and there should be a broader review by the Democratic Party of New York’s checkered pattern of voter disenfranchisement.”
###

NY Dems Nix Presidential Primary - And Other News Both Bad and Good: 'BradCast' 4/27/2020
NY State Dems under fire for removing Sanders/Biden contest from ballot; Native American Tribes settle ND Photo ID voting lawsuit

With that good election news out of the way, we move on to New York for some much-less-than-good election news. On Monday, the Democrats on the State Board of Elections voted to cancel the June 23 Democratic Presidential Primary, even though Bernie Sanders, who has suspended his campaign and endorsed Joe Biden, has said he wishes to remain on the ballots for the 20 or so remaining primaries. Over the weekend, his campaign asked the NY Dems to NOT cancel the primary. While most NY voters, due to the coronavirus, will be allowed to vote via absentee ballot in the June 23 election (where there will still be other primaries and issues on the ballot), Democratic state officials said that removing the Presidential race from the ballot would lower turnout in hopes of making in-person voting safer.

The Sanders Campaign is furious and calls the move a "blow to American democracy". Democratic NY Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is also angry and called for the DNC --- which claims they did not call for the cancellation --- to override or reverse the decision, in some fashion. She notes that "Sen. Sanders explicitly stated that he intended on continuing to collect delegates in order to advance wage, healthcare, climate & other priorities into the platform at the convention," adding "unity isn't a feeling, it's a process. Undemocratic, unilateral decisions that disenfranchise millions of progressive voters & volunteers is extremely destructive to the process of unifying the party for Nov."

The Sanders Campaign has now petitioned the NY State Board of Elections to keep his name on the ballot, with his attorney noting that the Vermont Senator "is concerned that his removal from the ballot would undermine efforts to unify the Democratic Party in advance of the general election." The vote today --- which neither Biden, nor the state Party, nor Gov. Andrew Cuomo asked for --- comes despite the reasonable argument detailed last week at The BRAD BLOG by Ernie Canning, who explained why he believes the more votes Sanders receives in the remaining primaries, the more likely that presumptive nominee Biden will actually win this November!;

Brad Blog
Why Voting For Sanders in Remaining Primaries Will Help Biden Win in November
...And ensure the former Veep keeps his promise for 'one of the most progressive administrations since Roosevelt'...
By ERNEST A. CANNING on 4/24/2020, 11:05am PT 

While it might appear counterintuitive, if a significant number of people vote for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) in the remaining primaries, that could enhance former Vice President Joe Biden's chances to defeat President Trump this November.

Let there be no mistake as to the tactical reasoning behind this assertion.

As observed recently by one of the Left's foremost intellectuals, Prof. Noam Chomsky, the U.S. 2020 Presidential Election will be "the most crucial election in human history." The re-election of Donald J. Trump, whom Chomsky describes as a "sociopath" and a "gangster", would produce an "indescribable disaster." It would threaten the survival of constitutional democracy and rule of law in these United States. Citing the climate crisis and an enhanced threat of nuclear war, Chomsky also argued that Trump's re-election would threaten the very survival of humanity.

It is vital that Trump be defeated. Basic math tells us that the only way sensible Americans --- Democrats, Independents and sane Republicans --- can avert Chomsky's "indescribable disaster" is to unite in support of the Democratic Party Nominee. There is virtually no chance that a third party candidate can win the 2020 election. Disaster cannot be averted by refusing to vote as a form of ill-considered protest.

Basic delegate math also reveals that, as Sanders clearly asserted, Biden will be the nominee. He offered that assessment, first, when he announced his decision to suspend his campaign and, again, during a joint, must-watch livestream endorsement. (See video posted below).

In Chomsky's view, there are "many enormous differences" between the presumptive empathetic Democratic Party Presidential Nominee and the "sociopath" who now occupies the White House.

As demonstrated by the President's asinine and unlawful decision to cut Congressionally authorized funding of the World Health Organization in the midst of a deadly global pandemic, Trump is impervious to either legality or political pressure. That stands in stark contrast to Biden, who, over his decades-long tenure on the Senate Judiciary Committee, demonstrated a basic commitment to the rule of law, and who, per Chomsky, can be "pushed" to accept a progressive agenda.

So why does a vote for Sanders now help Biden win this fall?...

Win-Win

Sanders's decision to both endorse Biden and to remain on the ballot in the remaining primaries has created a potential win-win scenario. The decision allows voters to safely exert political pressure on Biden in order to secure a commitment to concrete progressive policies that will meet the needs of the many, create a more just, egalitarian democratic society and serve to help fend off a climate catastrophe. If primary voters elect a maximum number of Sanders delegates to the Democratic National Convention, it enhances the likelihood that the Convention will produce a robustly progressive platform. Because those progressive policies are immensely popular, a large number of votes for Sanders in the remaining primaries could also maximize the unity required to defeat Trump, to retain control of the House and to take back the Senate.

Although the livestream endorsement video reveals that Biden is astutely cognizant of the politics-driven need to advance a progressive agenda --- he proclaimed that his administration would be the most progressive since FDR occupied the White House --- there are reasons why a significant number of votes for Sanders in the remaining primaries will be needed to ensure that Biden emerges from the Convention, backed by a unified Party.

Progressive policies bridge the generation gap

There's a dangerous and acute ideological divide between progressive voters under the age of 45 and neoliberal "centrist" Democrats.

Biden, according to Waleed Shahid, the Communications Director for the youth-dominated progressive organization, Justice Democrats, "lost under 45 votes in nearly every state by double digits." Citing a recent Monmouth poll [PDF], Shahid adds that the former Vice President is currently "tied with Trump among voters under 35." That poll, if accurate, is especially ominous because it doesn't account for eligible under 35 electors who might either vote for a third party candidate or simply fail to cast a vote.

Justice Democrats is but one of a bevy of youth-dominated progressive organizations that submitted an open letter to the presumptive Democratic Party nominee. The content of that letter accords with the immortal words uttered in 1857 by the former slave-turned-abolitionist, Frederick Douglass: "Power concedes nothing without a demand."

The groups argue in their letter that concrete progressives polices --- as opposed to mere lip service towards a progressive agenda or Biden's call, during the primaries, for a "return to [the] normalcy" of the Obama years --- is imperative to motivate support from their members. Their "energy and enthusiasm", they argue, will be needed "to win up and down the ballot in November"...

For so many young people, going back to the way things were "before Trump" isn't a motivating enough reason to cast a ballot in November. And now, the coronavirus pandemic has exposed not only the failure of Trump, but how decades of policymaking has failed to create a robust social safety net for the vast majority of Americans.

[W]e grew up with endless war, skyrocketing inequality, crushing student loan debt, mass deportations, police murders of black Americans and incarceration, schools that have become killing fields, and knowing that the political leaders of today are choking the planet we will live on long after they are gone. We've spent our whole lives witnessing our political leaders prioritize the voices of wealthy lobbyists and big corporations over our needs. From this hardship, we've powered a resurgence of social movements demanding fundamental change. (Emphasis added).

They go on to inform the former Veep that he must "earn" their support with a real commitment to a series of progressive policies. Their demand is consistent with the advice offered by Rep. James Clyburn, (D-SC), whose endorsement, more than any other, provided a launch pad for Biden's ensuing electoral victories. Biden, in Clyburn's view, should "incorporate as much of the efforts of Bernie Sanders as he can."

Biden's mixed-bag response

Much of what was said during the joint Sanders/Biden endorsement discussion suggests Biden understands these concerns and the need to "earn" progressive support.

Biden, whose ability to reverse his previous neoliberal positions has been practically and intellectually enhanced by the catastrophic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, said that his would be the most progressive administration since the White House was occupied by Franklin D. Roosevelt. He praised unions; explicitly supported Sanders' call to raise the minimum wage to $15/hour; openly challenged income and wealth inequality*; proposed making community colleges tuition free for all; public colleges tuition free for anyone earning less than $125,000/year; a minimum of $10,000 in student debt relief; and total cancellation of student debt for those misled by private for-profit colleges. He pledged to support comprehensive immigration-, racism- and criminal-justice reform. Biden's comments on the need for sustainable green infrastructure projects suggest he will support a Green New Deal. He also praised Sanders' slogan, "not me, us", which entails a tribute to the bottom/up, democratic basis for the "political revolution" long sought by the Vermont Senator.

Biden was receptive to the core message he received from that bevy of youth-dominated progressive organizations. "We can't just build back to the way things were before," he told Sanders. "That is not good enough. We need to build for a better future. That is exactly what these task forces, yours and mine, have been put together to focus on."

The task forces he referenced entail six policy working groups from staffers in both campaigns, who will separately focus on healthcare, education, the economy, criminal justice, immigration and climate change.

Of course the devil will be in the details of the concrete proposals that emerge from those working groups. Continued pressure via support for Bernie Sanders in the remaining primaries is therefore warranted, especially after Biden offered a separate healthcare pronouncement that gives rise to concerns that the policies produced by the groups could fall well short of the expectations of those voters under 45.

Shortly after Sanders suspended his campaign, but before the joint televised endorsement --- against the backdrop of exit polls which revealed majority supported for Medicare for All in states that have already voted --- Biden offered a concrete proposal to lower the age of Medicare eligibility from 65 to 60.

Biden's over 60 eligibility proposal immediately drew harsh criticism not only from Sanders' supporters but also from the single-payer advocates at Physicians for a National Health Program  (PNHP). Susan Rogers, M.D., PNHP's president-elect, derided Biden's proposal as a "so-called 'big' gesture [that] is simply not sufficient to to address the healthcare crisis in the country, especially now that the coronavirus outbreak has paralyzed the economy and thrown millions out of work --- and off of employer-provided insurance."

It was one thing for Biden to rely upon insurance industry disinformation to help secure the nomination; quite another for the presumptive nominee to offer a proposal that would be of no benefit to under 45 voters at a time when the deadly COVID-19 pandemic has exposed life endangering deficiencies in our dysfunctional, for-profit healthcare system --- dysfunctions that occasioned severe shortages of testing, supplies, and the availability of hospital beds and personal protective equipment. Over a span of just two weeks in late March, 3.5 million out-of-work Americans lost their employer-based insurance. Tens of millions have been added to the jobless ranks in the weeks that followed.

In the case of healthcare, the new pandemic-related statistics, coupled with a pandemic-related surge in insurance industry profits (United Health reported $5 billion in first quarter 2020 profits), not to mention the chutzpah reflected by the insurance industry (which announced that they will likely increase premiums by 40%) all provide ample intellectual justification for the joint Sanders/Biden healthcare task force* to set forth a concrete proposal to call for the passage of Medicare for All. Indeed, those factors suggest that Biden would do well to advocate an immediate transformation to Medicare for All, as opposed to Sanders' four-year process that would gradually reduce the eligibility age to 55 in year one, 45 in year two, and 35 in year three. Under the Sanders plan, under 35s would have to wait until the 4th year before they'd be eligible to receive Medicare.

* The disparate economic impacts occasioned by the COVID-19 pandemic have also strengthened the case for the Biden/Sanders economy task force to challenge income and wealth inequality head-on. During a relatively brief period, as tens of millions of Americans, sheltering in place, have lost jobs, income and healthcare coverage, Jeff Bezos, already the world's richest man, added $24 billion to his already obscene wealth.

A 'political revolution' for Joe Biden

If a significant number of the electorate express their support for Medicare for All and other concrete progressive policies by casting votes for Sanders in the remaining primaries, that would enhance Biden's ability to provide concrete progressive policies while minimizing opposition to his decision that might otherwise be voiced by the neoliberal "centrist" wing of the Democratic Party. It would also serve to highlight, for the entire electorate, the manifest differences between a Biden administration and the criminal sociopath who now occupies the White House.

Biden's support for Medicare for All would also spell an end to his insurance and pharmaceutical industry campaign funding. That loss, however, could be offset by the same active grassroots support that Sanders received from a large number of youth-dominated organizations. It is the support those organizations offered in their open letter to the nominee. Hopefully, it would also occasion a reversal of the recent Democratic Socialists of America refusal to endorse Biden's Presidential bid.

Even if the concrete policies that emerge from the Biden/Sanders task forces fall short of the ideal, progressives must come together to actively support the Democratic Party nominee. Anything less will lead to an irreparable disaster.

Scientific American Letter to the Editor

No-Confidence Vote

“One Phone, One Vote” by Wade Roush, discusses software developed to ensure votes are counted correctly. :But technology will never make elections more secure. And praising Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky for initially releasing a mere $250 million for election security (since followed by a woefully still inadequate $425 million), without any provisions banning hackable voting machines, is off base.

Our elections are under attack from sophisticated adversaries, foreign and domestic. They must have analog audits, not digital ones. Procedures must be in place for hand counts of hand-marked paper ballots to ensure that any electronic vote count is accurate.

Allegra Dengler
Citizens for Voting Integrity New York

Prediction, Death Knell for Postal Delivery: Trump Will Kill the Postal Service to Prevent 2020 Election Voting by Mail

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/4/10/1936160/-Trump-is-trying-to-kill-the-USPS-as-vote-by-mail-becomes-the-best-chance-to-save-our-democracy

Trump is trying to kill the USPS as vote-by-mail becomes the best chance to save our democracy
Laura Clawson
Daily Kos Staff
2020/04/10

Though the novel coronavirus has Americans more reliant on package delivery than ever—including for prescription medications—it has put the future of the U.S. Postal Service in danger. Not distant, far-in-the-future danger, but could-stop-operating-in-June danger. And the Trump administration, which wants to bail out foreign-flagged cruise lines, is saying the postal service is on its own.

“I spoke with the Postmaster General again today,” Rep. Gerry Connolly tweeted Thursday afternoon. “She could not have been more clear: The Postal Service will collapse without urgent intervention, and it will happen soon. We’ve pleaded with the White House to help. @realDonaldTrump personally directed his staff not to do so.”

What’s on the line here? Those prescription medications so many people get by mail. Delivery to rural areas that the for-profit companies don’t think are worth delivering to; in many cases, the USPS brings UPS or FedEx packages the last leg to people’s actual doors, or to tiny rural post offices. Vote-by-mail, which will be essential this November, is—as David Nir put it—“our last best chance to save democracy.”

Why is the novel coronavirus crisis such an immediate, life-or-death crisis for USPS, a part of the federal government that is actually written into the Constitution? Mail volume is already down by nearly a third and could be down by half by the end of June. But the origin of the crisis comes from Congress—specifically from a congressional mandate for the USPS to prepay its retiree health obligations decades into the future and from congressional blocks on the postal service doing things like online bill-paying, money transfer services, postal banking, copy and fax services, phone cards, notary public services, and hunting and fishing licenses. There are so many things that post offices, which are located in nearly every community in the nation, could do that would help Americans out by providing affordable services they need, and at the same time the USPS would be strengthened. But Congress won’t allow it. 

And now in the current crisis, Congress would have passed a bill including at least part of what the USPS needs to survive—but Donald Trump wasn’t having it, in part because he’s angry that the postal service doesn’t charge enough to deliver packages for Amazon, which was founded by Jeff Bezos, who owns The Washington Post, which has published stories Trump didn’t like.

So the postal service’s ability to continue delivering the mail as it has done for hundreds of years is in immediate danger at the moment when, without vote-by-mail, we might face the choice between risking our lives and giving up our democracy.

Sign the petition to Congress: Save the U.S. Postal Service. Seriously.

https://www.dailykos.com/campaigns/petitions/sign-the-petition-to-congress-save-the-us-postal-service-seriously