La nueva sesión legislativa de Minnesota comienza mañana (14/1), pero todavía se desconoce cuánto comenzará realmente. Un experto político dice que las maniobras de ambos partidos por el control de la Cámara de Representantes probablemente desanimen a los votantes.

Después de las elecciones del otoño pasado, la Cámara de Representantes de Minnesota estaba dividida en partes iguales: 67 escaños para los republicanos y el DFL. Pero un ganador demócrata renunció debido a las reglas de residencia, lo que significa que temporalmente el Partido Republicano tiene una ligera ventaja.

Esto ha hecho que los republicanos dejen de lado un acuerdo para compartir el poder, y los miembros del DFL amenazan con no presentarse, citando una elección especial.

David Schultz, de la Universidad Hamline, dice que la óptica no es buena.

"Este es el tipo de escenario que realmente explica porqué muchas veces la gente piensa que el gobierno simplemente no puede hacer nada," insistió Schultz.

Con el electorado cada vez más divisivo, Schultz argumenta que ambos partidos tienen incentivos para atraer a sus votantes de base. Pero para los votantes con una mente más abierta, agrega que los acontecimientos que se desarrollan parecen "grandilocuencia" por parte de estos funcionarios electos.

Schultz añade que ninguna de las partes está realmente dispuesta a llegar a un compromiso y que las sesiones recientes no brindaron la oportunidad de perfeccionar esas habilidades.

Schultz además añade que aunque a los republicanos les fue bien a nivel nacional en las elecciones del otoño pasado, siente que ambos partidos se encuentran en una encrucijada a la hora de atraer a los votantes y sus cambiantes mentalidades, especialmente a las generaciones más jóvenes.

"Existe la posibilidad de que a más largo plazo podamos ver decaer el apoyo a los dos partidos principales y eso abre una posibilidad para redefinir los partidos, la creación de un nuevo partido que podría brindar alguna posibilidad para un mayor compromiso," enfatizó Schultz.

Pero insiste que la posibilidad de un entorno político menos hostil probablemente no se concretará hasta dentro de una década. Hasta entonces, Schultz predice más pensamiento a corto plazo por parte de los partidos principales que se alinea con un enfoque de "el ganador se lo lleva todo," incluso si eso no siempre se traduce en un gobierno eficaz.

Apoyo para esta historia fue proporcionado por la Carnegie Corporation of New York


get more stories like this via email

By Kyla Russell for WISH-TV.
Broadcast version by Joe Ulery for Indiana News Service reporting for the WISH-TV-Free Press Indiana-Public News Service Collaboration

Indiana Lt. Gov. Micah Beckwith said he supports efforts to redistrict Indiana's U.S. House seats, and he's seen what could be redrawn maps floating around, but has not seen any official maps.

He shared his thoughts on Friday in a one-on-one interview with I-Team 8.

"People want to scream about gerrymandering. Listen, every state does it. Democrats do it. Republicans do it. I think what Republicans have kind of fallen into the trap of doing for many years in the establishment way of thinking is if we just play nice, they'll play nice, if and when they're in power. We found out that that doesn't happen. So, listen, we've got the ball. We need to run the ball down the field, and we should do everything we can to make big wins for Republican principles, constitutional concepts and I believe ... the Republican Party embodies those principles better than the other party does. So, I'm fully in support of President Trump and his offensive-minded strategy here."

Beckwith told I-Team 8 he does not know exactly what happened on Thursday in a closed-door meeting at the Statehouse with Vice President JD Vance, Gov. Mike Braun and other top state lawmakers.

However, Beckwith said, he is aware of the taxpayer cost to calling a special session.

He says it's worth it.

"I think in the long run, if we can get the outcome that we're looking for, I think it will be certainly we're going to have to spend money. Yes, they are expensive. Nobody takes that lightly. That is certainly a conversation that needs to be had, and we need to look at that. But, I do think if we can take the 1st and 7th districts back, and really make Indiana a powerhouse red state, and then also give Washington a boost with a little bit more in the majority there. I think, economically, it will pay off in the long run, and I think we'll see our investment have big returns."/p<>


Kyla Russell wrote this article for WISH-TV.


get more stories like this via email

A public funding mechanism for Seattle elections is up for renewal in next week's election.

The Democracy Voucher program was passed 10 years ago. It offers voters four $25 vouchers to use each election cycle for candidates who accept certain fundraising and spending limits. Supporters said it is a model for more inclusive democracy, touting higher turnout, increased participation from more small donors and a more diverse candidate field.

Spencer Olson, spokesperson for the group People Powered Elections Seattle, which supports Proposition 1, said the program helps level the playing field.

"It's really important that people's voices are heard and that candidates can run being supported by their constituents," Olson contended. "Versus just listening to those wealthiest donors, those special interests that have historically been the loudest voices at the table and really dominated what priorities rise to the top."

The voucher is supported by a property tax. Olson and other supporters hope to bring the model statewide. Critics said the program is not big enough to make a difference in elections and has not curbed outside spending. Ballots are due by 8 p.m. Tuesday.

Olson pointed out the vouchers have succeeded in encouraging more diverse participation in local elections.

"The intention of the program was to bring a public financing program to Seattle elections to help empower more candidates -- more diverse candidates, women, renters, people of color -- to have equal access to be able to run, and run competitive elections without having to rely on wealthy donors, special interests," Olson emphasized.

Olson noted because the money comes from a dedicated tax levy, unused vouchers roll over to the next election.

"The goal isn't to create an unlimited pot of money but to be able to provide resources for candidates to run with the community's support," Olson stressed. "But it's not a blank check at the same time."


get more stories like this via email

Texas lawmakers will return to Austin on July 21 for a special legislative session called by Gov. Greg Abbott.

The 18 items on the agenda include redrawing congressional maps. Redistricting usually occurs every 10 years, following the census, but Abbott added the item to the agenda after the Department of Justice drew attention to four Democratic seats.

Christina Sanders, founder of the nonprofit PoliChic Engagement Fund, said Texas maps are already caught up in litigation.

"Some of the court cases that are still even pending from the maps that have not been drawn fairly and the potential impact of new maps in the middle of a census cycle," Sanders explained.

The Biden administration sued Texas, alleging the state's legislative and congressional district maps discriminate against Latino and Black voters. The Justice Department, under President Donald Trump, withdrew from the lawsuit earlier this year.

The seats targeted by the Justice Department are held by Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, Rep. Sylvia Garcia, D-Texas, and Rep. Marc Veasey, D-Texas. They are also focused on the vacant seat previously held by late Congressman Sylvester Turner. Following the 2023 legislative session, Abbott called four special sessions to pass a school voucher bill, which failed.

Sanders feels Abbott is using special sessions to push personal agendas.

"A special session would be for something like the flood that just occurred," Sanders argued. "It would be something that there is an emergency -- something immediate needs to happen at this moment -- because this policy for the state cannot wait."

Flood warning systems and communication are also on the agenda, along with hemp and THC legislation and changes to the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness test.