Latest news with #veto
New York Times
6 days ago
- Politics
- New York Times
Tony Evers Declines to Run for 3rd Term as Wisconsin Governor
Gov. Tony Evers of Wisconsin, who led his state through a period of Democratic resurgence, will not seek a third term next year, he announced on Thursday. A battleground-state governor who has never displayed ambitions for higher office, Mr. Evers, 73, presided over the end of Republican dominance of his state and will leave office as his Democratic Party has a chance to win a governing trifecta for the first time in 16 years. 'I'm announcing that I will not be running for a third term,' Mr. Evers said in a video posted to social media. Mr. Evers's political legacy in Wisconsin will be more about measures he blocked than about signature progressive accomplishments. He vetoed hundreds of bills passed by the state's Republican-controlled Legislature, including a package that would have restricted voting access after the 2020 election. During the 2021-2022 legislative session, as he was running for re-election, Mr. Evers vetoed 32 percent of the bills Republicans had passed, a figure about 10 times above what is typical, according to the state's nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau. While Mr. Evers held Republican state legislators at bay, his party won three critical State Supreme Court races that flipped the court's balance of power from the conservatives to the liberals. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
National Post
23-07-2025
- Politics
- National Post
Caroline Elliott: The end of Canada is coming and B.C.'s NDP is leading the charge
Article content Even so, the government maintains its implausible position that this is 'not about a veto' but rather reflects the (democratically and legally-flawed) DRIPA principle that 'both governments have authority to decide whether a particular authorization should be issued.' Article content From a democratic standpoint, shíshálh Nation's constitution is clear: only members can vote in shíshálh elections, and membership is based strictly on ancestry. This means that tens of thousands of citizens living in the large region covered by the agreement will have no democratic voice in consequential land-use decisions that directly affect their interests, a fact that has already led to an important constitutional challenge by one community group on the Sunshine Coast. Article content And this is just one of many similar arrangements being implemented across B.C. Article content Last month, the Province announced a joint land use planning process with five Indigenous groups covering an area larger than England in B.C.'s mineral-rich Northwest. Consent-based agreements are again touted as part of the process. Article content This means Indigenous groups representing a combined population of less than 15,000 will be able to exercise decision-making power over a massive, economically crucial region impacting over five million British Columbians with whom they have no democratic relationship. Article content Another recent agreement 'requires the consent of the Tŝilhqot'in Nation for any mine in the Teẑtan Area that is a reviewable project under the Environmental Assessment Act to proceed.' Most, if not all, of the 740,000 acres covered by the new agreement is outside of the Tŝilhqot'in Aboriginal title area recognized by the Supreme Court of Canada, and remains public land. Article content Once again, the B.C. government has agreed to an effective veto over an area of public land for a governing body that non-Indigenous British Columbians cannot vote for. And once again, they've failed to preserve their own basic responsibility to make decisions in the broader public interest. Article content Over the years, Canadian courts have consistently called for a balancing of the public interest with the unique interests of individual Indigenous groups. Finding that balance is supposed to be the difficult but critically important task of the governments we elect. Article content Instead, under DRIPA, the B.C. government is increasingly abdicating its responsibility to protect the public interest, and eroding the foundational principles underpinning our democracy. Time will tell whether the federal government follows suit.
Yahoo
19-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Jackson County legislators override recall veto, but election date still unclear
Jackson County legislators override recall veto, but election date still unclear Jackson County Executive Frank White Jr.'s latest attempt to stall recall efforts against himself failed, but ongoing legal questions leave voters unclear on when exactly — and if — a special election will take place. The Jackson County Legislature voted on Friday to override White's Thursday veto of a July 7 ordinance that approved petition signatures of recall supporters and set an Aug. 26 date for a public vote to oust the county's top official. Eight Jackson County legislators voted to override White's veto, with one abstaining, surpassing the supermajority of six votes needed. The date legislators proposed and approved in their ordinance for a special election falls within 60 days of when local election boards certified a sufficient number of recall signatures to trigger such a vote, as in accordance with language in the county's charter. Since 2023, local organizers, with help from a dark money political action group, collected over 43,000 signatures calling for a vote over White's removal from office. Public discontent with White — a former Kansas City Royals player and Democrat serving as the county executive since 2016 — stemmed mainly from frustration over increases in Jackson County property tax evaluations in recent years, organizers have said. In the hours after Friday's meeting, White issued a statement on the 'unlawful' ordinance that he says 'would undermine trust in our elections for years to come.' 'There is still a lawful path forward. I urge the Legislature to do the right thing – adopt a new ordinance to move the election to November and protect the integrity of our democracy,' White said in the statement. New ordinances raise new considerations Jackson County legislator Megan Smith (formerly Marshall) was the sole abstainer in the vote to override White's veto. Although she originally voted to schedule the recall vote for Aug. 26, Smith said concerns raised since then complicate her support for the date. Smith said local election boards are concerned by the short time frame to organize an election and would rather the recall effort be put on the Nov. 4 ballot, in line with the at least 10 weeks notice the boards said they need. An August election date may disenfranchise voters overseas who will not receive ballots in time or voters who need to vote early or by absentee ballot, Smith said. She said sticking to the scheduled date is in violation of state and federal election laws and opens the door for more lawsuits or election results being invalidated. 'By continuing down this path of the August 26 election to nowhere, it solves nothing, and it's completely political theatre,' Smith said. For these reasons, Smith introduced an ordinance to move the recall election to the Nov. 4 ballot. In response to Smith's comments, Jackson County legislator DaRon McGee said county law requires the election to be within 60 days of when signatures are submitted, and the courts will 'figure out what is the best path forward' through the existing lawsuits regarding the election. He noted that it was White who caused the delay in preparation for the election, not county legislators. 'If we want to talk about delay, the delay was the additional 10 days where the county executive didn't allow this to go to the election board to do their jobs, where he took 10 days to veto an order that he already knew he was going to veto,' McGee said. Jackson County legislator Manuel 'Manny' Abarca IV introduced an ordinance that would require 'elected officials who reject or obstruct certified recall petitions' to reimburse 'special election costs if a court determines improper denial of voter certified recall efforts,' taking a jab at White. No immediate discussion or votes on any newly introduced ordinances occurred at Friday's meeting. Lawsuits complicate practicality of Aug. 26 date Legal proceedings both supporting and opposing the proposed Aug. 26 election date hang in the air, raising serious speculation about a likely delay. The first of two lawsuits was filed on July 9 by former chairs of both the Democratic and Republican parties of Jackson County and two other county residents. The plaintiffs seek an order from the judge requiring the city and county election boards to host the special election on Aug. 26, notwithstanding actions or ordinances from the legislature or White himself. On July 10, the Kansas City and Jackson County election boards filed suit, arguing that the county charter's requirement of hosting the election within 60 days conflicts with state and federal election laws. Therefore, the parties claim the Aug. 26 date cannot be forced. Considerations on the cost of the special election have also arisen. Phil Lavota, the former Democratic party chair who brought the first lawsuit, and White agree that the Aug. 26 election will cost Jackson County taxpayers around $2 million. What they disagree on is whether the election should occur on Aug. 26 in spite of these varying challenges. Ilana Arougheti and Mike Hendricks contributed reporting. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
18-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Gwen Grant, Urban Leaders call for Frank White to resign
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Jackson County, Missouri Democratic Executive Frank White Jr. has vetoed the recall election ordinance, dealing with himself. His veto announcement came the same day opponents of his called for him to resign. 'I won't walk away and let them sell out our future just to win a political fight,' White said in a statement after his opponents held a press conference at the Jackson County Courthouse. 'My job is to defend the law, protect tax dollars and stand up for what's right. And that's exactly what I'll do.' Jackson County Legislature unanimously approves special election to recall Frank White In his veto on Thursday, White called on the legislature to do the right thing in his eyes. 'The Legislature can move the recall to the November 2025 ballot which would comply with the law, protect the will of the people and save taxpayers millions,' White said. 'Jackson County residents deserve leaders who stand up for the law and protect taxpayer dollars, not political stunts that cost more and deliver less.' Urban League President of Greater Kansas City President & CEO Gwendolyn Grant was one of the participants in Thursday's press conference. 'First off, we don't believe anything that comes out of his mouth because he's a liar,' Grant said when asked what she thought about White being okay with a November election. 'But secondly, the ordinance says 60 days. The people have spoken. That is the law. This should be done with expediency.' 'A special election shall be held to consider recall of a county elected officer within sixty days after the petitions are filed,' Article 14, Section 9 of the Jackson County Charter states. However, both the Jackson County Election Board (JCEB) and the Kansas City Election Board (KCEB) have argued they don't have enough time to put this election on August 26, even though the legislature has called for the election to be held that day. Lawsuit filed against Independence officers in shooting that killed mother, infant daughter The 26th would fit the 60-day timeline from the day the petitions were filed. Attorney Phil LeVota is representing four citizens in a lawsuit that argues White should not have the ability to veto this ordinance, and it shouldn't have to go through the ordinance process. 'I'm telling you, this group is lenient and will say, 'If you can't do it within a certain period of time, please give us another reasonable one,'' LeVota said at Thursday's press conference. Regardless of what LeVota said, the legislature may override White's veto Friday morning. They have a legislative meeting at the Jackson County Courthouse downtown at 10 a.m. Later, Thursday afternoon, Legislator Megan Smith introduced an ordinance attempting to reschedule the election for November 4. She said voters need more time, especially those in the military and overseas. 'In the 10 days since we voted to approve an August 26 recall election for County Executive Frank White, new information and ongoing litigation have raised serious legal concerns about that date,' said Legislator Smith. 'Both the Kansas City and Jackson County election boards have said an August election would be illegal and risk disenfranchising voters—especially military members and residents overseas, since absentee ballots should've gone out by July 11 and voting begun by July 15.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
11-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Frank White vetoes ordinance that he says disqualifies seniors from tax credit program
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Jackson County Executive Frank White Jr. vetoed an ordinance Thursday that he says would have changed the filing deadline for the county's senior property tax program and potentially disqualified thousands of residents who had already been approved. According to a news release, White vetoed Ordinance 5992 because he believes it would have 'pulled the rug out' from under residents. He said the ordinance would have 'quietly' pushed the filing deadline for the program back to Aug. 30 of the prior year, removing several seniors without warning or notice. Kansas City secures $3.5 million grant to clean up polluted lots around city 'This is not how responsible government works. We told seniors they qualified. They followed the rules,' White said. White's office said his veto reinstates the language of Ordinance 5968, which gave eligible seniors an application filing deadline of June 30 of the year following their initial credit year. Now, he is requesting that the county legislature fix the ordinance's error. 'Whether it was intentional or not, the result is the same: thousands of seniors would be kicked off this program. That is unacceptable,' White said. According to White's office, if passed, Ordinance 5992 would have harmed senior residents in multiple ways, including: Retroactive Disqualification: The change in deadline would remove residents already approved for the program, many of whom are on fixed incomes and have budgeted accordingly. Lack of Transparency: The ordinance eliminated a single phrase – 'of the year following their initial credit year' – that is essential to the program's intent and design. No Clear Justification: The change was not accompanied by any public explanation or debate about its consequences. Gov. Kehoe signs 'Danny's Law' after 2021 Mizzou hazing incident 'There is still time to do the right thing. This is not a partisan issue. It's about keeping our word, protecting our most vulnerable residents and ensuring county government works for everyone. I urge the Legislature to act immediately to correct this mistake,' White said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
