Deutsche Welle: EU moves toward wage equality for foreign workers

It is not yet law, but the principles are now clear: Posted workers sent from their home country to another in the European Union should, in future, receive higher wages and have the same rights as local workers. "This is very good news," said Marianne Thyssen, the European Commissioner for Social Affairs and Labor Mobility. "We don't want wage dumping." [...]

Social security contributions and income tax will continue to be payable in the home country of a posted employee. This means that a Polish company that sends its workers to Frankfurt can continue to pay the lower social security contributions in Poland. This will enable them to compete with domestic German companies. [...]

Until now, Poland in particular has been against any reform. With 500,000 posted workers it has the highest number among EU member states. However, EU Commissioner Thyssen has the impression that the Polish side will accept the compromises. "We can also pass the new law with a qualified majority," Thyssen said, which means that it can happen, if necessary, without Poland.

read the article

Politico: Exiled Puigdemont endorses jailed Sànchez as next Catalan president

The potential election of Sànchez will also depend on a court decision. He’s been in pre-trial detention since October and will need a judge’s permission to attend the parliamentary session at which he would be named regional president. [...]

He also announced the creation in Belgium of what he called the “Council of the Republic,” an unofficial group that is expected to promote the Catalan independence project — as well as safeguard a position for himself.

Earlier in the day, the pro-independence majority of the Catalan regional parliament paid tribute to Puigdemont. In their symbolic declaration, the secessionist lawmakers stated that Puigdemont is the “legitimate” candidate for the presidency, condemned Madrid’s “authoritarianism” and defended October’s referendum.

Yet they fell short of ratifying last year’s declaration of independence or pushing forward with reelecting their former leader — a move that could have triggered further judicial action against the separatists. [...]

Enric Hernández, the editor of Catalan newspaper El Periódico, said pro-independence forces are trying to combine a “government of a republic that doesn’t exist” with “the limitations of the actual [Catalan] autonomous government.”

read the article

The Atlantic: Where the Gun-Control Movement Goes Silent

Gun-control advocacy groups occasionally bring up Burger’s words to buttress their campaign against the special-interest group to which he was undoubtedly referring, the National Rifle Association. But in the decades since, as the push for tighter limits on guns has surged and stalled, again and again, none of them have taken up the suggestion implicit in the justice’s critique: There has never been a serious effort to rewrite or repeal the Second Amendment. [...]

The new players in the gun-control advocacy space have not, however, dramatically widened the scope of proposals to reduce gun violence. The main ask for most advocates remains a universal background check system that closes loopholes that allow people with criminal records or mental illness to buy firearms at gun shows or from private dealers. The groups largely also back a ban on assault-style rifles, limits on high-capacity magazines, a crackdown on straw purchasing, and an end to the prohibition on federally-funded research into gun violence as a matter of public health. [...]

In 2008, that all changed. Writing for a 5-4 Supreme Court majority, Justice Antonin Scalia—the conservative who filled the vacancy created by Warren Burger’s 1986 retirement—authored the decision in District of Columbia v. Heller that interpreted the Second Amendment as granting an individual right to bear arms. The ruling struck down D.C.’s handgun ban and provided a landmark victory in the decades-long push by the conservative legal community and gun-rights supporters.  [...]

The simplest reason why there hasn’t been a movement to change the Second Amendment is the daunting process for amending the Constitution, which requires a two-thirds majority vote in each chamber of Congress and ratification by three-quarters of the 50 states. The 27th and most recent amendment to the Constitution was ratified in 1992, and none of the efforts since—including bids to ban same-sex marriage or require Congress to balance the budget—have come close to success.

read the article

The Guardian: How America's identity politics went from inclusion to division

Many also began to notice that the leading liberal figures in America, whether in law, government, or academia, were predominantly white men and that the neutral “group-blind” invisible hand of the market wasn’t doing much to correct long-standing imbalances. [...]

As Oberlin professor Sonia Kruks writes, “What makes identity politics a significant departure from earlier [movements] is its demand for recognition on the basis of the very grounds on which recognition has previously been denied: it is qua women, qua blacks, qua lesbians that groups demand recognition ... The demand is not for inclusion within the fold of ‘universal humankind’ ... nor is it for respect ‘in spite of’ one’s differences. Rather, what is demanded is respect for oneself as different.” [...]

Not everyone on the Left is happy with the direction that identity politics has taken. Many are dismayed by the focus on cultural appropriation. As a progressive Mexican American law student put it, “If we allowed ourselves to be hurt by a costume, how could we manage the trauma of an eviction notice?” [...]

At its core, the problem is simple but fundamental. While black Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, Jewish Americans, and many others are allowed – indeed, encouraged – to feel solidarity and take pride in their racial or ethnic identity, white Americans have for the last several decades been told they must never, ever do so.

read the article

Vox: Why Democrats are suddenly competitive in deep-red Texas

There are Democratic candidates running in all of the state’s 36 congressional districts for the first time in 25 years. Democrats know they won’t be competitive in every congressional district, but they have their sights set on the three they believe they have the best shot at winning — the Seventh Congressional District in Houston against incumbent Rep. John Culberson, the 23rd Congressional District outside San Antonio against incumbent Rep. Will Hurd, and the 32nd Congressional District in Dallas against incumbent Rep. Pete Sessions. [...]

To be sure, competing seriously in Texas is still a long shot for Democrats. Sessions and Culberson, in particular, are formidable incumbents who have been in office since the early 2000s. But the fact that there are fields of seven Democratic candidates lining up to challenge each one is notable in a state where those primary fields were empty just two years ago. [...]

They could repeat that in Texas if they can do two things at once: spur Hispanic and Latino voters to turn out in droves, and peel off white, moderate suburbanites who don’t like Donald Trump (particularly women). [...]

The president’s approval rating in the Lone Star State is noticeably low — 39 percent, as opposed to the 54 percent of Texans who say they don’t like him. This may seem surprising at first blush, given that Texas is thought of as the home of conservative politics. But Texas has a lot of college-educated, affluent, suburban voters, who historically don’t like Trump that much — especially suburban white women.

read the article