Abercrombie & Fitch Co.’s Post

Our latest policy round-up is live. In case you’ve missed it, here’s what the policy and influencing team has been up to over the past month, plus events and news to be aware of. https://lnkd.in/eGU9PiKP

When those in public positions of power choose not to be transparent outside a limited set of accepted circumstances, one of two things occurs: 1. The lack of transparency needlessly creates the perception that something untoward or questionable is occurring when everything is as it should be; or 2. Something untoward and questionable is occurring, and those in power have made it extremely difficult for taxpayers or the press to figure it out. More often than not, the former is closest to the truth. And yet both are equally as corrosive to trust in government, at a time when that comes at a premium. That's why Spotlight PA focuses so much time and attention on government transparency, including today's excellent story by Angela Couloumbis on how a private group is paying to upgrade the Pennsylvania governor's mansion — the current living quarters of the sitting governor — without disclosing who is paying, how much, or if they have other business before the state. https://lnkd.in/e4nw9S-B

Eighty-one year old Senator Mitch McConnell "froze" again during a press conference.   Ninety-year old Senator Dianne Feinstein has to have her staff tell her how to vote! We need term limits NOW! But even though we have 101 co-signers of our term limits legislation in the House, the professional politicians are still blocking a vote. Please make a donation today to fund ads and grassroots events to force a vote on term limits in the House.   The American people see as plain as day why we need term limits. Congress is out of control. It is run by a permanent class of politicians who never intend to leave office...even when they can no longer physically do the job. That's why we need to force a vote on term limits in the House. Philip Blumel President U.S. Term Limits - www.termlimits.com 1250 Connecticut Avenue NW Suite 700  | Washington, District of Columbia 20036 (202) 261-3532 | info@termlimits.com

“Lobbyists have more offices in Washington than the President. You see, the President only tells Congress what they should do. Lobbyists tell'em what they will do.” — Will Rogers 🇺🇸 If Americans knew what went on inside the GOP’s “Capitol Hill Club,” they would be aghast at the sloppy “hog trough” were lobbyists & GOP lawmakers cavort and commingle with one another to disgustingly advance the agendas of the corporations who have business before Congress while the Republican lawmakers synergistically raise copious campaign funds for their reelection campaigns. To be fair, this is a bi-partisan problem for American government. Approximately 95% of incumbents who run for reelection are successful. Did you ever wonder why? Conveniently located adjacent to the House and Senate Office Buildings, the Capitol Hill Club has very restrictive membership criteria open only to the nation’s wealthiest corporations, trade associations, and other “special interests” along with the “people’s representatives” in Congress which of course is a gross misnomer for whom the congresspersons and senators really work, and, spoiler alert: it’s not “the People!” Together with Citizens United, it appears we have the best government money can buy. Since “Democracy dies in darkness,” the Washington Post could really enlighten us by publicizing the names of corporations & trade associations who pay for the lavish lunches & dinners our elected representatives consume at the GOP’s Capitol Hill Club. capitolhillclub.org #WashingtonPost

Our PolitiFact team stayed up till the wee hours, or through them, (yes, Katie Sanders and Josie Hollingsworth, I’m looking at, and applauding, you) late Thursday and early Friday to deliver our comprehensive debate coverage. Weeks of painstaking preparation paid off. We had 27 of us working together on this.   I bring you our excellent latest work.   2024 presidential debate fact-check: How accurate were Joe Biden, Donald Trump? By PolitiFact’s staff. https://lnkd.in/eqyAyjG7   And post facto sidebars   What would happen if Joe Biden or Donald Trump leaves his party’s ticket? >> By Louis Jacobson https://lnkd.in/eUgbG_z7   No studio audience doesn’t mean CNN 2024 presidential debate was ‘scripted’ >> By Jeff Cercone https://lnkd.in/exhGY8M4   CNN knocks down rumor of longer TV delay at Biden-Trump debate. >> By Jeff Cercone https://lnkd.in/eFA7AKtF   And here’s our coverage of today’s Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity.   What Supreme Court’s immunity ruling means for Trump’s cases and, potentially, future presidents >> By Amy Sherman and Louis Jacobson https://lnkd.in/eAgVS-Fx   There are many more top-flight fact checks and stories at politifact.com If you like this coverage and want to help us thwart misinformers’ agendas, please donate to our nonprofit fact-checking newsroom. https://t.co/9QyICRsdsQ

This time next year, Americans will be preparing to vote. And rampant misinformation could make things even more complicated than the last time we faced the ballot box.   PolitiFact and the Poynter Institute invite you to discuss the truth about the 2024 U.S. presidential election during our third annual United Facts of America next week, Nov. 6 to Nov. 8.   This free online fact-checking festival will feature live and on-demand conversations with leading voices from across the political spectrum including experts in health, media, artificial intelligence and law. We’ll clarify our society’s most complicated issues and build new fact-checking habits to help you quickly sort bad information from good information see online.   We’ll cover what you can expect to see during the race; the facts about the charges against former President Donald Trump; what voters could swing the election and the threat of artificial intelligence and Russian propaganda.   For the first-time in PolitiFact history, we’ll give you an exclusive glimpse behind our fact-checking curtain. Get a live behind-the-scenes look at how our on-the-ground reporting team prepares to fact-check U.S. presidential debates just hours before it covers the third Republican presidential primary debate in Miami.   People who stand up for facts, like you, will enjoy this online celebration that supports our work to fight online misinformation, hold powerful people accountable and defend a healthy democracy.   Register to join us live or watch the recordings whenever works best for you. REGISTER FOR FREE. https://lnkd.in/eYSZZpnH  

📞 "Michelle Haywood speaking..." When the tiny but mighty team that mobilized the March on Washington answered the phones, anyone in the travel department answered the phone that way. It kept it easy, according Bayard Rustin. ✨ BRILLIANT✨ Imagine organizing a protest of over 100K people coming from all over the country with an insanely small team of people that were barely clinging on to the vision that doing such a thing safely, peacefully even... was a possibility. They had no cell phones. They had to install "phone booths" with information & instructions along travel routes. They had no email. They had to stuff tons of envelopes & send correspondence via snail mail. They had no video messaging apps. They played the craziest game of telephone to organize, so communication had to be super clear and consistent from person to person as organizations signed on to participate. I hadn't really taken the time to even think about how such a thing would get organized during that time in history until I saw Rustin on Netflix over the weekend. Dr. King gets all of the credit for the March on Washington, but the one with the logistical prowess and extraordinary, unwavering vision was Bayard Rustin. As a marketer, leader, and an ops nerd, there was so much that I had an opportunity to re-examine as I watched the movie. 👁 Vision: At some point the vision matters more than all of the obstacles. 🌹 Leadership isn't always roses: His own people got in his way until they had no choice but to support. The movement was bigger than him, bigger than their silly egos and limited thinking. Once it was over, they had no choice but to show their respect. 🗣 Put the HUMAN EXPERIENCE FIRST: Bayard left out ZERO details when it came to taking care of people. He made sure that all of their needs were met, & I mean ALL of them. (Food, water, transportation, safety, sanitation, sound so that they could all participate and be a part of the experience, etc) Because of that, the March drew in 250,000+ people from all over. 💼 One Job: He was an operations and communications genius. With a small team of inexperienced yet eager volunteers, he gave each person ONE JOB, & ONE MESSAGE to spread. That was it. They all knew their numbers & their impact on the movement at any given moment. That team was a machine. 🥊 Keep Fighting: He had people that were supposed to be on his side fighting against him. Trying to tear him down for their own personal gain. Attempting to use his sexuality against him so that he would bow down to the people who thought they knew better. He knew he had to stay in the fight, even at some of his most darkest moments and when the people closest to him seemed to turn on him. Boy, am I glad that he did. I learned a lot about him, & it gave me an opportunity to remember that I get to fight my measly battles today because people like him fought the bigger ones that mattered. I'm my ancestors wildest dreams. And so... we fight on. 🙏🏾 #bhm

"Some might have thought Jan. 6 was a one-off, but it's an ongoing reckoning," shares BSR Center for Business and Social Justice Co-Director Jennifer Stark on the practices of corporate PACs, and how business can demonstrate its commitment democratic practices. https://lnkd.in/dmSMHD3y #governmentrelations #governmentaffairs #externalaffairs #sustainablebusiness

As an election law geek, sadly one of the first things that came to mind in seeing Lee Anderson's defection to Reform UK was the potential impact on charities and civil society organisations arranging hustings (public debates between candidates or party representatives) and other public events in the run up to the general election. Under The Electoral Commission's hustings guidance, spending on hustings won't be regulated under election law if they're "non-selective", meaning they can't reasonably be regarded as intended to promote any parties or candidates over any others. An important principle in assessing whether a hustings is non-selective is whether the organiser has impartial/objective reasons for excluding any candidates/parties from the event. Sometimes it's not practical to invite everyone, so how to decide who to exclude? The Electoral Commission recognises that practicalities like time or space might limit the numbers of people you can invite, and suggests that in deciding who to exclude, you might look at the local prominence of some parties or candidates over others, or the number of elected representatives at a local or national level. For charities which are required to avoid inappropriate party political activity, the Charity Commission for England and Wales recognises in its guidance that charities don't necessarily need to achieve political balance in every individual event they organise, and that sometimes "an event may be more manageable and more focused if all minority parties are excluded". We've sometimes seen these principles applied by organsiations inviting only those parties currently represented in Parliament, as an objective way to decide where to draw the line. In which case, after yesterday's news, they might now need to find a little more room... #electionlaw #hustings #election24   https://lnkd.in/erxMq63H

How can movements restore democratic accountability? Challenging corporate power requires combining political organizing with economic organizing. Watch a clip, featuring Saqib Bhatti of Action Center on Race and the Economy: https://bit.ly/44m8NkU