Dennis Kucinich on Civil Rights Democratic Representative (OH-10)

Sub-sections under Civil Rights:
• Voting Record
• Other issues under Civil Rights

Not any issue on which he disagrees with GLBT community

A: (Pause).

Q: There’s got to be something.

A: All I can say is, keep those contributions coming, you’ll have the president that you want.

Q: I’ll take that as a “no.”

A: That’s a “no.”

Real GLBT equality includes the right to marry

A: Why do you think that is?

A: This is really a question of whether you really believe in equality. When you understand what real equality is, you understand that people who love each other must have the opportunity to be able to express that in a way that is meaningful, and that the state should not be intervening against people, the state should be there on behalf of people, to make sure that that love has a chance to be facilitated.

Q: So what you’re saying is that Senator Obama and Senator Edwards, who sat here just moments ago both espousing equality--are you saying that they don’t truly oppose same sex marriage, that they’re just playing politics?

A: I’m saying that I stand for real equality and that this is really part of an American tradition because when you look at the founding documents, to me this is a foundational principle of who we are as a country.

Supports reparations for slavery, to “repair the breach”

EDWARDS: I’m not for reparations. But I think there are other things we can do

OBAMA: I think the reparations we need right here in South Carolina is investment, for example, in our schools.

Q: Is anyone on the stage for reparations for slavery?

KUCINICH: I am. The Bible says we shall be and must be repairers of the breach. And a breach has occurred. We have to acknowledge that. It’s a breach that has resulted in inequality in opportunities for education, for health care, for housing, for employment. But it’s also a breach that has affected a lot of poor whites as well. We need to have a country which recognizes that there is an inequality of opportunity and a president who’s ready to challenge the interest groups--be they insurance companies or mortgage companies or defense contractors who are taking the money away from the people who need it. Yes, I am for repairing the breach. Yes, I am for reparations.

Gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender right to marry

KUCINICH: The answer to your question is yes. And let me tell you why. Because if our Constitution really means what it says, that all are created equal, if it really means what it says, that there should be equality of opportunity before the law, then our brothers and sisters who happen to be gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender should have the same rights accorded to them as anyone else, and that includes the ability to have a civil marriage ceremony.

Q: [to Dodd]: You supported the Defense of Marriage Act.

DODD: [Same-sex couples ought to be treated equally and] ought to have civil unions. I don’t go so far as to call for marriage. I believe marriage is between a man and a woman.

RICHARDSON: I would do what is achievable. What I think is achievable is full civil unions with full marriage rights.

Supreme Court has forgotten 13th, 14th, & 15th Amendment

A: When you look at that Supreme Court decision on education a few weeks ago, it’s very clear that this Supreme Court has a problem. They’re working with an old Constitution that didn’t have the 13th and 14th and 15th Amendment in it. We have to make sure there’s equal protection of the law and we have to make sure that’s enshrined in the way that we conduct our policy. So as president of the United States, I intend to appoint people in the Supreme Court who stand for the Constitution and, by the way, if we’re going to stand for the Constitution and the rule of law, we can all start now by saying it’s time to impeach Dick Cheney.

Overturn the Patriot Act as unconstitutional

Civil marriage is not necessarily between a man & a woman

KUCINICH: No. There’s a question of civil marriage, and there’s a question of marriage as performed by the church. We’re talking about civil law here.

Allow gays and lesbians to marry

A: I would help to create a culture in America so that people could be whoever they are, because if America is about anything, it has to be about a chance for people to live out their dream and to express their own authenticity. And so, gays, lesbians, bisexual, transgender people under my administration would have full participation, and they would also have the right to marry.

Reparations for slavery should take form of social programs

A: The Bible tells us we must be “repairers of the breach”. The institution of slavery created a breach in our society, which still remains today. That breach is evident in the disparities which exist in educational opportunities, health care, employment opportunities, housing and other critical areas for people of color. The question is not whether or not there should be reparations. There must be. The question is what form will such reparations take? I believe a broad based program of social and economic reforms which consciously works to lift the conditions for people of color will lift up everyone. It is said a rising tide lifts all boats. We must create the advancing tide with health care for all, jobs for all, educational opportunities for all, housing opportunities for all.

Repeal the PATRIOT Act: stop being driven by fear

Must challenge rationale of USA PATRIOT Act

Same sex couples deserve equal domestic benefits

Affirmative action is necessary & right & must be preserved

Prayer for America: Why put aside Constitutional justice?

I offer this prayer for America.
• Let us pray that our nation will remember that the unfolding of the promise of democracy in our nation paralleled the striving for civil rights. That is why we must challenge the rationale of the Patriot Act. We must ask, Why should America put aside guarantees of Constitutional justice?
• How can we justify in effect canceling the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments?
• We cannot justify widespread wiretaps and Internet surveillance with judicial supervision, let alone without it.
• We cannot justify secret searches without a warrant.
• We cannot justify giving the attorney general the ability to designate domestic terror groups.
• We cannot justify giving the FBI total access to any type of data which may exist in any system anywhere, such as medical records and financial records.
• We cannot justify giving the CIA the ability to target people in this country for intelligence surveillance.

Focus on jobs instead of pitting people against each other

A: I would rather concentrate on creating more decent jobs for everyone, discriminating against no member of our society, rather than get involved with pitting Americans against one another.

Voted against the misnamed “Patriot Act”

A: I am the only presidential candidate to vote against the misnamed “Patriot Act.” I am proud of that vote. As President, I will push to revoke it. I will challenge any Patriot II sequel. I argued that the “Patriot Act” and related measures had effectively revoked half of the ten amendments in the Bill of Rights. I am now drafting a bill to repeal the “Patriot Act” and restore civil liberties essential to a functioning democracy.

Voted YES on prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Proponents support voting YES because:

Rep. CASTOR: The march towards equality under the law for all of our citizens has sometimes been slow, but it has been steady. Over time, Congress has outlawed discrimination in the workplace, based upon a person's race, gender, age, national origin, religion and disability, because when it comes to employment, these decisions are rightly based upon a person's qualifications and job performance. This legislation that outlaws job discrimination based upon sexual orientation was first introduced over 30 years ago. A broad coalition of businesses and community organizations strongly support this landmark civil rights legislation, including the Human Rights Campaign; the Anti-Defamation League; and the NAACP.

Opponents recommend voting NO because:

Rep. HASTINGS: Federal law bans job discrimination based on race, color, national origin, or gender. In addition, 19 States have passed laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. I strongly oppose discrimination in the workplace. However, I do not think it is the place of the Federal Government to legislate how each and every workplace operates. A number of States have enacted State laws in this area. That is their right. Many businesses have chosen to adopt their own policies. That is appropriate as well. This bill as written would expand Federal law into a realm where PERCEPTION would be a measure under discrimination law [which I consider inappropriate].

Voted NO on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman.

Proponents support voting YES because:

The overwhelming majority of the American people support traditional marriage, marriage between a man and a woman. The people have a right to know whether their elected Representatives agree with them about protecting traditional marriage.

Every child deserves both a father and a mother. Studies demonstrate the utmost importance of the presence of a child's biological parents in a child's happiness, health and future achievements. If we chip away at the institution which binds these parents and the family together, the institution of marriage, you begin to chip away at the future success of that child.

Opponents support voting NO because:

This amendment does not belong in our Constitution. It is unworthy of our great Nation. We have amended the Constitution only 27 times. Constitutional amendments have always been used to enhance and expand the rights of citizens, not to restrict them. Now we are being asked to amend the Constitution again, to single out a single group and to say to them for all time, you cannot even attempt to win the right to marry.

From what precisely would this amendment protect marriage? From divorce? From adultery? No. Evidently, the threat to marriage is the fact that there are millions of people in this country who very much believe in marriage, who very much want to marry but who are not permitted to marry. I believe firmly that in the not-too-distant future people will look back on these debates with the incredulity with which we now view the segregationist debates of years past.

Voted NO on making the PATRIOT Act permanent.

• Assigning three judges to hear individuals' petitions concerning improper requests by the FBI for library circulation records, library patron lists, book sales records, book customer lists, and other records
• Reporting every year the number of library records orders that are granted, modified, or denied
• Allows Internet service providers to disclose their subscribers information and the contents of their communications to a government entity, if they believe there is “immediate danger of death or serious physical injury”
• Requires that any court that allows a “roving wiretap” under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) must describe in great detail the intended target whose identity is not known
• Allows individuals and businesses to seek legal counsel if they have received a National Security Letter from the FBI requiring them to disclose financial information and records

Voted NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage.

Voted NO on protecting the Pledge of Allegiance.

Voted YES on constitutional amendment prohibiting flag desecration.

Voted NO on banning gay adoptions in DC.

Voted NO on ending preferential treatment by race in college admissions.

Constitutional Amendment for equal rights by gender.

Title: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to equal rights for men and women. Summary: States that equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Rated 64% by the ACLU, indicating a mixed civil rights voting record.

The mission of the ACLU is to preserve protections and guarantees America’s original civic values - the Constitution and the Bill of Rights:
• Your First Amendment rights-freedom of speech, association and assembly. Freedom of the press, and freedom of religion supported by the strict separation of church and state.
• Your right to equal protection under the law - equal treatment regardless of race, sex, religion or national origin.
• Your right to due process - fair treatment by the government whenever the loss of your liberty or property is at stake.Your right to privacy - freedom from unwarranted government intrusion into your personal and private affairs.

Our ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.

Rated 100% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance.

OnTheIssues.org interprets the 2005-2006 HRC scores as follows:

• 0% - 20%: opposes gay rights (approx. 207 members)
• 20% - 70%: mixed record on gay rights (approx. 84 members)
• 70%-100%: supports gay rights (approx. 177 members)

The Human Rights Campaign represents a grassroots force of more than 700,000 members and supporters nationwide. As the largest national gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender civil rights organization, HRC envisions an America where GLBT people are ensured of their basic equal rights, and can be open, honest and safe at home, at work and in the community.

Ever since its founding in 1980, HRC has led the way in promoting fairness for GLBT Americans. HRC is a bipartisan organization that works to advance equality based on sexual orientation and gender expression and identity.

Rated 94% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance.

OnTheIssues.org interprets the 2005-2006 NAACP scores as follows:

• 0% - 33%: anti-affirmative-action stance (approx. 177 members)
• 34% - 84%: mixed record on affirmative-action (approx. 96 members)
• 85%-100%: pro-affirmative-action stance (approx. 190 members)

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) has worked over the years to support and promote our country's civil rights agenda. Since its founding in 1909, the NAACP has worked tirelessly to end racial discrimination while also ensuring the political, social, and economic equality of all people. The Association will continue this mission through its policy initiatives and advocacy programs at the local, state, and national levels. From the ballot box to the classroom, the dedicated workers, organizers, and leaders who forged this great organization and maintain its status as a champion of social justice, fought long and hard to ensure that the voices of African Americans would be heard. For nearly one hundred years, it has been the talent and tenacity of NAACP members that has saved lives and changed many negative aspects of American society.

Recognize Juneteenth as historical end of slavery.

A resolution recognizing the historical significance of Juneteenth Independence Day and expressing that history should be regarded as a means for understanding the past and solving the challenges of the future.

Recognizes the historical significance to the nation, and supports the continued celebration, of Juneteenth Independence Day (June 19, 1865, the day Union soldiers arrived in Galveston, Texas, with news that the Civil War had ended and that the enslaved African Americans were free). Declares the sense of Congress that:

1. history should be regarded as a means for understanding the past and solving the challenges of the future; and
2. the celebration of the end of slavery is an important and enriching part of the history and heritage of the United States.

ENDA: prohibit employment discrimination for gays.

Prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity by covered entities (employers, employment agencies, labor organizations, or joint labor-management committees). Prohibits preferential treatment or quotas. Allows only disparate treatment claims. Prohibits related retaliation.

Makes this Act inapplicable to:
1. religious organizations; and
2. the relationship between the United States and members of the Armed Forces.

Constitutional Amendment for women's equal rights.

JOINT RESOLUTION: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to equal rights for men and women. Constitutional Amendment: Prohibits denying or abridging equality of rights under the law by the United States or by any state on account of sex.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives: That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of 3/4ths of the several States:
1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

[Explanatory note from Wikipedia.com and OnTheIssues.org]:

The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) was a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution. The ERA was originally written by Alice Paul and, in 1923, it was introduced in the Congress for the first time. In 1972, it passed both houses of Congress, but failed to gain ratification before its June 30, 1982 deadline. This new proposed amendment is identical in wording to the original 1972 proposed amendment. It was proposed in Congress in every session from 1923 through 1970 prior to passing in 1972; and has been re-introduced in Congress in every session since 1982 after its failure at ratification. The current version removes the Congressionally imposed deadline for ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment, so that if the bill passes Congress, states have no deadline as they did in 1982.

Prohibit sexual-identity discrimination at schools.

Student Non-Discrimination Act of 2011:
• Prohibits public school students from being excluded from participating in, or subject to discrimination under, any federally-assisted educational program on the basis of their actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity or that of their associates.
• Considers harassment to be a form of discrimination.
• Prohibits retaliation against anyone for opposing conduct they reasonably believe to be unlawful under this Act.
• Authorizes federal departments and agencies to enforce these prohibitions by cutting off the educational assistance of recipients found to be violating them.
• Allows an aggrieved individual to assert a violation of this Act in a judicial proceeding and recover reasonable attorney's fees should they prevail.
• Deems a state's receipt of federal educational assistance for a program to constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity for conduct prohibited under this Act regarding such program.

Provide benefits to domestic partners of Federal employees.

Sen. LIEBERMAN: This legislation would require the Government to extend employee benefit programs to the same-sex domestic partners of Federal employees. It is sound public policy and it makes excellent business sense.

Under our bill, Federal employee and the employee's domestic partner would be eligible to participate in benefits to the same extent that married employees and their spouses participate. Employees and their partners would also assume the same obligations that apply to married employees and their spouses, such as anti-nepotism rules and financial disclosure requirements.

The Federal Government is our Nation's largest employer and should lead other employers, rather than lagging behind, in the quest to provide equal and fair compensation and benefits to all employees. That thousands of Federal workers who have dedicated their careers to public service and who live in committed relationships with same-sex domestic partners receive fewer protections for their families than those married employees is patently unfair and, frankly, makes no economic sense.

I call upon my colleagues to express their support for this important legislation. It is time for the Federal Government to catch up to the private sector, not just to set an example but so that it can compete for the most qualified employees and ensure that all of our public servants receive fair and equitable treatment. It makes good economic and policy senses. It is the right thing to do.

SUMMARY: Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act of 2007

Employees and their domestic partners will have the same benefits as married employees and their spouses under--
• Employee health benefits
• Retirement and disability plans
• Family, medical, and emergency leave
• Group life insurance
• Long-term care insurance
• Compensation for work injuries
• Death, disability, and similar benefits
• Relocation, travel, and related expenses.

Re-introduce the Equal Rights Amendment.

A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to equal rights for men and women, which shall be part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of 3/4 of the States:
• Section 1.Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
• Section 2.The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
• Section 3.This article shall take effect 2 years after the date of ratification.

"Despite passage of the Equal Pay Act & the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s, discrimination against women continues to permeate the workforce and many areas of the economy. Today, women earn about 77 cents for each dollar earned by men, and the gap is even greater for women of color. More than 60% of working women are still clustered in a narrow range of traditionally female, traditionally low-paying occupations, and female-headed households continue to dominate the bottom rungs of the economic ladder.

"A stronger effort is clearly needed to finally live up to our commitment of full equality. The ERA alone cannot remedy all discrimination, but it will clearly strengthen the ongoing efforts of women across the country to obtain equal treatment.

"We know from the failed ratification experiences of the past that amending the Constitution to include the ERA will not be easy to achieve. But the women of America deserve no less."

Reinforce anti-discrimination and equal-pay requirements.

A bill to restore, reaffirm, and reconcile legal rights and remedies under civil rights statutes. Amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for:

1. establishing discrimination based on disparate impact; and
2. rights of action and recovery for unlawful discrimination.

• Authorizes civil actions in federal court for discrimination based on disability.
• Repeals provisions limiting the amount of compensatory and punitive damages that may be awarded in cases of intentional discrimination in employment.
• Revises provisions governing discrimination in the payment of wages, including equal pay requirements.

Give domestic partnership benefits to Federal employees.

A federal employee who has a same-sex domestic partner and the domestic partner of the employee shall be entitled to benefits available to, and shall be subject to obligations imposed upon, a married employee and the spouse of the employee. In order to obtain benefits and assume obligations under this Act, an employee shall file an affidavit of eligibility certifying that the employee and the domestic partner of the employee:
1. are each other's sole domestic partner and intend to remain so indefinitely;
2. have a common residence, and intend to continue the arrangement;
3. are at least 18 years of age and mentally competent to consent to contract;
4. share responsibility for a significant measure of each other's common welfare and financial obligations
5. are not married to or domestic partners with anyone else;
6. are same sex domestic partners, and not related in a way that, if the two were of opposite sex, would prohibit legal marriage in the State in which they reside; and
7. understand that willful falsification of information within the affidavit may lead to disciplinary action and the recovery of the cost of benefits received related to such falsification and may constitute a criminal violation.
   An employee or domestic partner of an employee who obtains benefits under this Act shall file a statement of dissolution of the domestic partnership not later than 30 days after the death of the employee or the domestic partner or the date of dissolution of the domestic partnership. Source: H.R.2517 2009-H2517 on May 20, 2009

   Honor the 100th anniversary of the NAACP.

   Kucinich signed bill honoring the 100th anniversary of the NAACP
   • Whereas the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, NAACP, originally known as the National Negro Committee, was founded in New York City on February 12, 1909, the centennial of Abraham Lincoln's birth, by a multiracial group of activists who met in a national conference to discuss the civil and political rights of African-Americans;
   • Whereas the NAACP is the oldest and largest civil rights organization in the United States;
   • Whereas the mission of the NAACP is to ensure the political, educational, social, and economic equality of rights of all persons and to eliminate racial hatred and racial discrimination;
   • Whereas the NAACP is committed to achieving its goals through nonviolence;
   • Whereas the NAACP advances its mission through reliance upon the press, the petition, the ballot, and the courts, and has been persistent in the use of legal and moral persuasion, even in the face of overt and violent racial hostility;
   • Whereas the NAACP has used political pressure, marches, demonstrations, and effective lobbying to serve as the voice, as well as the shield, for minority Americans;
   Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Congress
   1. Recognizes the 100th anniversary of the historic founding of the NAACP.
   2. Honors and praises the NAACP on the occasion of its anniversary for its work to ensure the political, educational, social, and economic equality of all persons.
   Source: SCR.3&HCR.35 2009-SCR3 on Jan 28, 2009

   Click here for definitions & background information on Civil Rights. Click here for a summary of all issue stances of Dennis Kucinich. Click here for a Wikipedia profile of Dennis Kucinich. Click here for a Ballotpedia profile of Dennis Kucinich. Click here for VoteMatch responses by Dennis Kucinich. Click here for AmericansElect quiz answers by Dennis Kucinich. Click here for issue positions of other OH politicians. Click here for OH primary archives. Click here for OH secondary archives.
   Other governors on Civil Rights:		Dennis Kucinich on other issues:
   OH Gubernatorial: Betty Sutton Connie Pillich Jim Renacci Joe Schiavoni John Kasich Jon Husted Mary Taylor Mike DeWine Nan Whaley Richard Cordray OH Senatorial: Jim Renacci Mike Gibbons P.G. Sittenfeld Rob Portman Sherrod Brown Ted Strickland Gubernatorial Debates 2018: AK: Walker(i) vs.Chenault(R) vs.Huggins(R) vs.Begich(D) vs.Treadwell(D) AL: Kay Ivey(R) vs.Countryman(D) vs.Tommy Battle (R) vs.George(R) vs.Carrington(R) AR: Hutchinson(R) vs.Henderson(D) vs.West(L) AZ: Ducey(R) vs.David Garcia (D) vs.Farley(D) CA: Newsom(D) vs.Chiang(D) vs.Villaraigosa(D) vs.Delaine Eastin (D) vs.David Hadley (R) vs.John Cox (R) vs.Zoltan Istvan (I) vs.Allen(R) vs.La Riva(P) CO: Johnston(D) vs.Mitchell(R) vs.Cary Kennedy (D) vs.Doug Robinson (R) vs.Barlock(R) vs.Lynne(R) vs.Polis(D) vs.Coffman(R) vs.George Brauchler(R,A.G.) vs.Stapleton(R) CT: Malloy(D) vs.Lamont(D) vs.Srinivasan(R) vs.David Walker (R) vs.Lumaj(R) vs.Visconti(R) vs.Lauretti(R) vs.Drew(D) FL: Gillum(D) vs.Graham(D) vs.Putnam(R) GA: Kemp(R) vs.Cagle(R) vs.Hill(R) vs.Abrams(D) vs.Levine(D) HI: Ige(D) vs.Hanabusa(D) vs.Carroll(R) IA: Kim_Reynolds(R) vs.Leopold(D) vs.Boulton(D) vs.McGuire(D) vs.Glasson(D) vs.Hubbell(D) ID: Little(R) vs.Fulcher(R) vs.Labrador(R) vs.Ahlquist(R) vs.Minton(D) vs.Jordan(D) IL: Rauner(R) vs.Kennedy(D) vs.Pawar(D) vs.Daniel Biss (D) vs.Pritzker(D) vs.Ives(R) KS: Brewer(D) vs.Wink Hartman (R) vs.Colyer(C) vs.Kobach(R) vs.Orman(O) MA: Baker(R) vs.Gonzalez(D) vs.Setti Warren (D) vs.Bob Massie (R) MD: Hogan(R) vs.Alec Ross (D) vs.Cummings(D) vs.Madaleno(D) vs.Jealous(D) ME: Mayhew(R) vs.Mills(D) vs.Boyle(D) vs.Thibodeau(R) vs.Moody(D) MI: Whitmer(R) vs.El-Sayed(D) vs.Tim Walz (D) vs.Schuette(R) vs.Calley(R) MN: vs.Smith(D) vs.Coleman(D) vs.Murphy(D) vs.Otto(D) vs.Tina Liebling (DFL) vs.Tim Walz (DFL) vs.Matt Dean (R) vs.Pawlenty(R) vs.Johnson(R) NE: Ricketts(R) vs.Krist(D) NH: Sununu(R) vs.Schwartz(R) vs.Steve Marchand (D) NM: Lujan-Grisham(D) vs.Pearce(R) vs.Cervantes(D) vs.Apodaca (D) NV: Fisher (R) vs.Sisolak(D) vs.Laxalt(R) vs.Schwartz(R) NY: Cuomo(D) vs.Nixon(D) vs.Sharpe(L) vs.DeFrancisco(R) OH: DeWine(R) vs.Husted(R,Lt.Gov.) vs.Kucinich(D) vs.Sutton(D,Lt.Gov) vs.Taylor(R) vs.Jim Renacci (R) vs.Connie Pillich (D) vs.Schiavoni(D) vs.Whaley(D) vs.Cordray(D) OK: Gary Richardson (R) vs.Johnson(D) OR: Brown(D) vs.Scott Inman(D) vs.Buehler(R) PA: Wolf(D) vs.Wagner(R) vs.Barletta(R) RI: Raimondo(D) vs.Fung(R) vs.Morgan(R) SC: McMaster(R) vs.McGill(R) vs.Pope(R) vs.Templeton(R) vs.Smith(D) SD: Noem(R) vs.Jackley(R) vs.Sutton(D) TN: Green(R) vs.Dean(D) vs.Black(R) TX: Abbott(R) vs.Glass(L) vs.White(D) vs.Valdez(D) VT: Scott(R) vs.Stern(D) WI: Walker(R) vs.Harlow(D) vs.Vinehout(D) vs.Evers(D) vs.Roys(D) WY: Throne(D) vs.Dahlin(R) vs.Gordon(R)	Newly-elected governors (first seated in Jan. 2017): DE-D: Carney IN-R: Holcomb MO-R: Greitens NH-R: Sununu NC-D: Cooper ND-R: Burgum VT-R: Scott WV-D: Justice Retiring 2017-18: AL-R: Robert Bentley(R) (term-limited 2018) CA-D: Jerry Brown (term-limited 2018) CO-D: John Hickenlooper (term-limited 2018) FL-R: Rick Scott (term-limited 2018) GA-R: Nathan Deal (term-limited 2018) IA-R: Terry Branstad (appointed ambassador, 2017) ID-R: Butch Otter (retiring 2018) KS-R: Sam Brownback (term-limited 2018) ME-R: Paul LePage (term-limited 2018) MI-R: Rick Snyder (term-limited 2018) MN-D: Mark Dayton (retiring 2018) NM-R: Susana Martinez (term-limited 2018) OH-R: John Kasich (term-limited 2018) OK-R: Mary Fallin (term-limited 2018) SC-R: Nikki Haley (appointed ambassador, 2017) SD-R: Dennis Daugaard (term-limited 2018) TN-R: Bill Haslam (term-limited 2018) WY-R: Matt Mead (term-limited 2018)	Abortion Budget/Economy Civil Rights Corporations Crime Drugs Education Energy/Oil Environment Families/Children Foreign Policy Free Trade Govt. Reform Gun Control Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Infrastructure/Technology Jobs Local Issues Principles/Values Social Security Tax Reform War/Iraq/Mideast Welfare/Poverty Contact info: Mailing Address: Rayburn HOB 2445, Washington, DC 20515 Official Website Phone number: (202) 225-5871

   
   
   
   
   
   Page last updated: Jun 16, 2018