League of Women Voters of Martin County wins big at State Convention
The first was for their work on Fostering Civic Dialogue. They went from a small league to a medium league now boasting over 130 members. Over the past two years the League of Martin County has brought together Martin County citizens for their dynamic and inclusive initiative; Imagine Democracy.
Imagine Democracy brings neighbors together to learn, listen, and practice the civic skills of empathy, understanding and engagement. With a deep desire to get people talking to each other to share and value their different perspectives, the League enlisted one of their esteemed members, Bliss Browne, creator of Imagine Chicago. Bliss has led trainings like these to bring opposing sides together around the world.
The final award of the evening, The President's Award of Excellence, also went home with Martin County. Debbie Chandler, Co-president of League Florida called the Martin County League 'A shining example of what is possible when vision meets commitment, and when members believe that democracy is worth rebuilding.'
The League of Women Voters a nonpartisan political organization encouraging informed and active participation in government, working to increase understanding of major policy issues, and advocating for legislative changes and policies for the public good. Martin County League meetings are open to the public and nonmembers are welcome to subscribe to our monthly newsletter. Learn more at www.LWVMartinCounty.org.
This article originally appeared on Treasure Coast Newspapers: League of Women Voters honors Martin County for civic engagement
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 minutes ago
- Yahoo
After D.C., Trump says he might use the National Guard to ‘take back' other cities. Can he actually do that?
When President Trump announced his plan Monday to send 800 National Guard troops to Washington, D.C., to crack down on what he described as 'crime, bloodshed, bedlam and squalor' in the nation's capital, he also issued a warning to other cities around the country. "We're going to take back our capital," Trump said. "And then we'll look at other cities also.' But can Trump actually send federal forces elsewhere? And what cities might he target? Here's everything you need to know about the president's warning. What did Trump say about sending the National Guard into other cities? During his news conference on Monday, Trump singled out Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Baltimore and Oakland, Calif. as 'other cities also that are bad, very bad.' 'They're so far gone,' he continued. 'We're not going to let it happen. We're not going to lose our cities over this. And this will go further. We're starting very strongly with D.C. and we're going to clean it up real quick, very quickly, as they say.' Beyond that, the president didn't elaborate on his plans. But he did issue what amounted to an ultimatum: 'self-clean up' or else. 'Other cities are hopefully watching this,' Trump said. 'Maybe they'll self-clean up, and maybe they'll self-do this.' But 'if they don't learn their lesson, if they haven't studied us properly,' he continued, 'then I'm going to look at New York in a little while. … And if we need to, we're going to do the same thing in Chicago, which is a disaster.' Later Monday, Trump issued an executive order directing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to coordinate with state governors and "authorize the orders of any additional members of the National Guard to active service, as he deems necessary and appropriate, to augment this mission." What does the law say about Trump's plans? Trump's actions in Washington, D.C., are legal. As you may remember from elementary school, D.C. isn't a state. It isn't part of any other state either. It doesn't have a constitution of its own. Instead, D.C. is what's known as a 'federal district,' and it's been mostly under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Congress since its founding in 1791. In 1973, Congress passed the Home Rule Act, which allowed D.C. residents to elect their own mayor and council members. But the law doesn't give D.C. complete autonomy. Even now Congress controls its budget. Congress also has the power to review and block local legislation. The president, meanwhile, still appoints D.C.'s judges — and he still leads its National Guard. He can also take control of the District's police force by invoking Section 740 of the Home Rule Act, which is precisely what he did Monday. But Trump doesn't have the same powers across the rest of the country. Under current law, governors are in charge of each state's National Guard and the police are largely controlled locally. Trump has already challenged some of these rules. Over the objections of state and local officials, he deployed nearly 5,000 National Guard members and U.S. Marines to Los Angeles in June after a new round of ICE workplace raids sparked protests marred by sporadic violence. California Gov. Gavin Newsom swiftly sued the administration to end the mobilization, claiming that Trump was violating the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which prohibits the president from deploying the armed forces to participate in domestic law enforcement operations unless he declares that an insurrection is underway. A federal judge agreed with Newsom, but an appeals court blocked that ruling. Now Trump and Newsom are facing off in a three-day trial that began on Monday in San Francisco to determine whether Trump has the authority to do what he did in L.A. in other cities such as Chicago and New York. A verdict is expected Wednesday. What does Trump hope to accomplish by mentioning other cities? Whether the president sends federal forces into other cities remains to be seen; much depends on the outcome of the current trial in California (and any subsequent appeals). In the meantime, Trump was clear on Monday: He wants to pressure Democratic-run cities to change certain policies he disagrees with. One policy he mentioned was cashless bail, which eliminates the requirement for defendants to pay money to be released from jail before their trial. Supporters say the policy addresses disparities in the justice system, where those who can afford bail are released while those who cannot remain incarcerated; critics (like Trump) say that it puts the public at risk by releasing potentially dangerous individuals back into the community. Maybe other cities will 'get rid of the cashless bail thing and all of the things that caused the problem,' Trump said Monday. 'I mean, if you go back, this whole thing with cashless bail is a disaster. So many problems came that we never had before.' Have local officials pushed back? Yes. As Yahoo News reported Monday, 'the president's description of crime in Washington, D.C., is not reflected in official statistics, which show that the city had its lowest violent crime rate in over 30 years in 2024. The rates of homicide, sexual abuse, assault with a dangerous weapon and robbery all fell by at least 25% compared to 2023, according to statistics from the U.S. attorney's office for the district.' On Sunday, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat, cited similar statistics to claim that Trump is prioritizing politics over policy. 'If the priority is to show force in an American city, we know he can do that here,' Bowser told MSNBC. 'But it won't be because there's a spike in crime.' Officials elsewhere have repeated that message. On Monday, the U.S. Conference of Mayors responded to Trump's actions and statements by touting a "nationwide success story" of plummeting crime rates. An FBI report released Aug. 5 found that between 2023 and 2024, violent crime nationwide dropped by 4.5%, with murder and non-negligent manslaughter falling by nearly 15%. "Ultimately, the best public safety outcomes are delivered by local police departments and local officials, who know the communities," Oklahoma City Mayor David Holt, president of the mayors' conference, said in a statement. "America's mayors never see takeovers by other levels of government as a tactic that has any track record of producing results."
Yahoo
5 minutes ago
- Yahoo
DC Residents Are Saying The Same Thing About This Clip Of DEA Officers Patrolling The National Mall
On Monday, Donald Trump announced he would be taking over the Washington DC police department and deploying National Guard troops there. One day before that, on Sunday, DC news anchor Lorenzo Hall took this video of DEA police officers patrolling the National Mall: LorenzoHall/Twitter: @LorenzoHall Related: There were a bunch of *viral* responses to the clip. DC political analyst and journalist Tom Sherwood called it "Basically [a] meaningless stroll." Related: @johnmconnollyjr said, "I've lived in DC for 10 years. The only crime I've ever seen on the National Mall was when a mob ransacked the Capitol on January 6, 2021 at the direction of the man who lost the 2020 presidential election." And Aaron Fritschner the Deputy Chief of Staff for Virginia Rep. Don Beyer, pointed out, "The Metropolitan Police Department tracks and publishes the location of all crimes committed in the DC; the map grid section where this video was shot on the National Mall near the Lincoln Memorial has recorded zero (0) crimes so far in 2025: Related: The responses get pretty funny from there: One person said, "6 guys in full uniform on a stretch of the mall where the biggest threat is the mama ducks defending their ducklings from my dog." Another person joked, "You know what screams 'high crime area'? White women jogging." Related: And this person said, "This is cosplay. this is drag. this is banned from entering Florida public schools." Basically, everyone is like: "If you know DC you understand how tremendously goofy this is." Also in BuzzFeed: Also in BuzzFeed: Also in BuzzFeed:
Yahoo
5 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Price Trumps 'Made In USA' Labels As Tariffs Affect Consumer Choice
Key Takeaways A new survey showed that consumers are less likely to emphasize where a product is made. U.S. consumers are 18% less likely to prioritize buying American-made products than they were three years ago. Consumer loyalty to products made in other countries also declined. The survey showed that price-conscious consumers are more likely to look for value than focus on where the product is made.'Made in the U.S.A.' labels may appeal less to consumers as rising tariff costs are changing people's attitudes about where products are made. A new study by The Conference Board found consumers are now less likely to purchase a product based on where it's made, even if it's in the U.S. The June survey of 3,000 U.S. adults found that 50% said they were more likely to buy American-made products, down from 60% in a similar survey from 2022. It's not just American-made products, either. Consumer loyalty was lower for products made in every country included in the survey. The sentiment shift comes as President Donald Trump instituted a series of tariffs that he said would help boost American manufacturing, potentially enabling businesses to offer more products made domestically. However, price-conscious buyers are more focused on a product's price than where it's made, the report found. 'As price concerns intensify, many U.S. consumers appear to associate 'made in' labels with elevated prices due to generally higher domestic production costs as well as tariffs on foreign-made goods,' said Denise Dahlhoff, director of marketing and communications research at The Conference Board. 'Increasingly, consumers prioritize value and affordability over emotional affinity for certain countries, including their own.' Support for American-Made Products Drops for Older Buyers Support for American-made products dropped across almost every age group and demographic category, with those younger than 35 being the only group more likely to buy American-made products than they were three years ago. Notably, customers older than 55 were among the most likely to lose support for buying products with the 'Made in the U.S.A.' label, dropping 22 percentage points from three years ago. American-made products were most popular with middle-income consumers; those making between $50,000 and $125,000 a year were most likely to purchase domestically produced goods. Read the original article on Investopedia Sign in to access your portfolio
