Pull the lever / Feel the change

Today: Luke O'Neil, author of the story collection A Creature Wanting Form and the newsletter Welcome to Hell World; Sam Thielman, a reporter, critic, essayist, and editor, and graphic novel columnist for the New York Times; Carrie Frye, writer and book editor at Black Cardigan Edit; writer and editor Maria Bustillos; Colin McGowan, a writer living in Chicago; Joe MacLeod, Creative Director at INDIGNITY and author of the column MR. WRONG; and Dessane Lopez Cassell, New York-based writer, editor and curator.

Issue No. 193

What Else to Vote For
The Editors

Not Coming Back
Luke ONeil

What Else to Vote For

by The Editors

On the eve of the most fraught U.S. election any of us can remember (and that is saying something), some Hydra contributors wanted to share our thoughts on various elections taking place around the country, to calm our nerves, mainly.

ARIZONA

PROP 139
Right to Abortion Initiative

A “yes” vote supports amending the state constitution to provide for the fundamental right to abortion, among other provisions.  

A “no” vote opposes amending the state constitution to provide for the fundamental right to an abortion.

Pretty clear. Vote YES.

— Sam Thielman

COLORADO

COLORADO AMENDMENT 79
Right to Abortion and Health Insurance Coverage Initiative

A“yes” vote supports creating a right to abortion in the state constitution and allowing the use of public funds for abortion. 

A “no” vote opposes creating a right to abortion in the state constitution and opposes repealing a constitutional provision that bans the use of public funds for abortion. 

Again, YES.

— Sam Thielman

FLORIDA

FLORIDA AMENDMENT 4
Right to Abortion Initiative

A “yes” vote supports adding the following language to the Florida Constitution’s Declaration of Rights: “… no law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.” Amendment 4 would maintain the current constitutional provision that permits a law requiring parents to be notified before a minor can receive an abortion. 

A “no” vote opposes amending the Florida Constitution's Declaration of Rights to provide that the state cannot “... prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.”

YES.

— Sam Thielman

ILLINOIS

CHICAGO JUDICIARY

I don’t know the damn judges. Which is troubling, because they are petty tyrants of our democracy, shaping and sometimes solely determining the fates of accused felons, fraudulent landlords, and children living in rough homes. They’re really important people, broadly unaccountable in their day-to-day work, and I don’t know their backgrounds or their records or how they run their courtrooms.

Thankfully for me and other Cook County residents, the nonprofit outfit Injustice Watch assembles an excellent judges guide for every election, providing a brief overview of the variously accomplished and crooked lawyer-kings on the ballot. It’s not a comprehensive look, but this November, I’m voting to keep or expel 77 judges operating at various levels of the Illinois judiciary. I do not have time for “comprehensive.” But I can identify who’s married to a cop, who’s been wrapped up in baroquely Chicago-ass real estate and investment schemes, who understands their area of the law and routinely treats defendants well. I probably still vote the wrong way, sometimes, but I make much better decisions consulting the Injustice Watch guide than I otherwise would.

It would be irresponsible of me to recommend specific similar resources for wherever you live. For all I know, the Los Angeles and New York ones I’ve perused are funded by conservative think tanks. I can’t speak to the quality of service journalism happening in any of America’s 67 Springfields. My simple exhortation is this: at least try to find out who the judges on your ballot are. Use whatever good information is available, particularly if it comes from reporters who cover your local courts on a regular basis. These are important votes, even if you’re making them half-blindly.

— Colin McGowan

MARYLAND

UNITED STATES SENATE

My city, Baltimore, MD, is a Blue city inside the eccentrically Blue state of Maryland. Over roughly the past 30 years, we have had alternating Democratic and Republican governors, and we have a far right Republican member in our Congressional delegation. Maryland has been identified as a Battleground State for control of the Senate.

Former two-term Maryland Governor Larry Hogan (R) – a “centrist” Republican real estate developer and kinda-sorta not-Trumper when it suits him, is going for an open Senate seat currently held by a retiring Democrat.

Hogan is opposed by Prince George’s County Executive Angela Alsobrooks (D), a center-left (“tough on crime”) Democrat, which is a popular thing to be, this election cycle. 

Ignoring the candidates’ respective web sites (Alsobrooks, Hogan) and strictly considering their TV spot buys, Alsobrooks wants you to know that Hogan is a staunch Republican, and is politically expedient and self-preservationist on abortion. At one point he appeared to be leaning toward No Labels, along with West Virginia’s Joe Manchin (I), the soon to be former Senator, former Democrat who voted with Trump 50 percent of the time. 

Most of the pro-Hogan TV spots I see in Baltimore are from PACs attacking Alsobrooks for her messy personal real estate holdings and property tax record, not for any policy issues.

QUESTION H
CHARTER AMENDMENT VIA LOCAL PETITION, REDUCING THE SIZE OF THE CITY COUNCIL

The notable thing about this amendment for cutting the size of the City Council from 14 to eight is that it is largely supported by the guy who owns Sinclair Broadcasting, who also bought the city’s daily newspaper, killed their features department, and is using the paper to parrot messages from his TV station.

MARYLAND QUESTION 1
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT (Ch. 245 of the 2023 Legislative Session) Declaration of Rights - Right to Reproductive Freedom

The proposed amendment confirms an individual’s fundamental right to an individual’s own reproductive liberty and provides the State may not, directly or indirectly, deny, burden, or abridge the right unless justified by a compelling State interest achieved by the least restrictive means.

A “yes” vote supports adding a new article to the Maryland Constitution’s Declaration of Rights establishing A RIGHT TO REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM, defined to include “the ability to make and effectuate decisions to prevent, continue, or end one’s own pregnancy.”

A “no” vote opposes amending the state constitution to establish A RIGHT TO REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM.

Abortion is (currently) legal in Maryland.

— Joe MacLeod

MISSOURI

MISSOURI AMENDMENT 3
Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative

A “yes” vote supports adding a fundamental right to reproductive freedom, defined to include abortion and “all matters relating to reproductive health care,” to the Missouri Constitution, among other provisions. 

A “no” vote opposes adding a fundamental right to reproductive freedom, defined to include abortion and “all matters relating to reproductive health care,” to the Missouri Constitution, among other provisions.

YES.

— Sam Thielman

MONTANA

MONTANA CI-128
Right to an Abortion Initiative

A “yes” vote supports amending the Montana Constitution to:  

- provide a state constitutional “right to make and carry out decisions about one’s own pregnancy, including the right to abortion,” and 

- allow the state to regulate abortion after fetal viability, except when “medically indicated to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient.”

A “no” vote opposes amending the Montana Constitution to:  

- provide a state constitutional “right to make and carry out decisions about one’s own pregnancy, including the right to abortion,” and 

- allow the state to regulate abortion after fetal viability, except when “medically indicated to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient.”

YES.

— Sam Thielman

NEBRASKA

INITIATIVE 434
Prohibit Abortions After the First Trimester Amendment

A “yes” vote supports amending the state constitution to prohibit abortions after the first trimester unless necessitated by a medical emergency or the pregnancy is a result of sexual assault or incest. 

A “no” vote opposes amending the state constitution to prohibit abortions after the first trimester unless necessitated by a medical emergency or the pregnancy is a result of sexual assault or incest.

INITIATIVE 439
Right to Abortion Initiative

A “yes” vote supports amending the state constitution to establish a right to abortion until fetal viability. 

A “no” vote opposes amending the state constitution to establish a right to abortion until fetal viability.

I had to go to my pal Jessica Valenti’s Substack to make sure I had this one right—even 439 sounds a little weird because it’s generally pro-lifers who like to talk about “fetal viability” in extremely broad terms. But that’s the one to vote YES on. 434 is a spoiler amendment drafted by misogynists, obviously. 

YES on 439, NO on 434.

— Sam Thielman

NEVADA

QUESTION 6
Right to Abortion Initiative

A “yes” vote supports providing for a state constitutional right to an abortion, providing for the state to regulate abortion after fetal viability, except where medically indicated to “protect the life or health of the pregnant patient.”

A “no” vote opposes providing for a state constitutional right to an abortion.

Vote YES.

— Sam Thielman

NEW YORK

NEW YORK PROPOSAL 1
Equal Protection of Law Amendment

A “yes” vote supports adding language to the New York Bill of Rights to provide that people cannot be denied rights based on their “ethnicity, national origin, age, and disability” or “sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy.” 

A “no” vote opposes adding language to the New York Bill of Rights to provide that people cannot be denied rights based on their “ethnicity, national origin, age, and disability” or “sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy.”

I love New York. Vote YES.

— Sam Thielman

NEW YORK

NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK
PROPOSAL 2
New York Street Cleaning and Requirement of Waste Containers Amendment

This proposal would amend the City Charter to expand and clarify the Department of Sanitation’s power to clean streets and other City property and require disposal of waste in containers.

Voting ‘Yes’ will expand and clarify the Department of Sanitation’s power to clean streets and other City property and require disposal of waste in containers. Voting ‘No’ leaves laws unchanged.

For any New Yorker who’s survived the chaos of facing off against our city’s rats (or worse, having one scurry over a vulnerable, sandaled foot), Proposal 2 might sound like a great idea. After Mayor Adams slashed the Sanitation Department budget in late 2023, followed by an additional 3 percent cut in 2024, the degradation of the city’s trash management has been palpable. Sidewalk trash can collection is down by 40 percent, community composting programs have been cut, and thousands—yes, thousands—of trash cans have been removed altogether. Hence, you may find yourself walking blocks and blocks with a baggy of dog poop in hand before finding a trash can that’s not already overflowing. 

But the devil’s in the details on this one. Much like the dog whistle of calls for “law and order,” narratives of “cleanliness” have long been used to target communities of color. This proposal is no different. Critics rightly fear that passing Prop 2  would only further the Mayor’s already aggressive crackdown on street vendors, the majority of whom are working class immigrants and people of color trying to eke out a living in a city where the cost of living has continued to soar. While many of us would love more garbage cans and fewer rats, this proposal isn’t the way to achieve those ends. Instead it’s part of a brazen attempt by the Adams administration to seize power from the City Council and consolidate control of city services at a time when the mayor himself and nearly his entire inner circle have been indicted or are under investigation for bribery and other corruption charges. Sort of reminds you of the old “waste management” euphemism used by the mob, no? 

So vote NO on Prop 2, and while you’re at it nix the similarly structured 3 through 6 as well.

— Dessane Lopez Cassell

NORTH CAROLINA

HB 1074
North Carolina Citizenship Requirement for Voting Amendment

[ ] FOR [ ] AGAINST Constitutional amendment to provide that only a citizen of the United States who is 18 years of age and otherwise possessing the qualifications for voting shall be entitled to vote at any election in this State.

Thanks to the infernalness of gerrymandering, the Republicans hold a supermajority in North Carolina’s Senate and House, which allows them to try things like this to re-write the state’s constitution. Here what they did is replace the phrase “every person born in the United States and every person who has been naturalized” with the single word “citizen.” 

As the voting rights organization Democracy North Carolina has pointed out: “By removing the term ‘naturalization’ from the constitutional voting qualifications, this opens the door to confusion and may prevent naturalized citizens from exercising their fundamental right to vote...”

Vote AGAINST this amendment.

— Carrie Frye

OHIO

SUPREME COURT

I don’t live in Ohio, but the shenanigans engineered by the Ohio Republicans in charge of elections have been disproportionately affecting the residents of planet Earth for many decades now. (We could be here for a week examining the details, but a look at the record of former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, who was in office during the infamous 2004 presidential election, is a fine place to start.) 

Republicans have made every effort, for years and years, to prevent countless Ohio citizens from exercising their legal right to vote.

Ohio voters passed an amendment to guarantee abortion rights last year by a landslide, but even a constitutional amendment will only stem, not stop, the onslaught of legal challenges to reproductive rights expected in the wake of Dobbs.

Thousands of Ohioans have already waited in line for about forever for early voting, thanks to the aforementioned Republican shenanigans. But if you’re voting in Ohio tomorrow, three seats on the Ohio Supreme Court are up for grabs. Votes for Donnelly, Stewart, and Forbes would shift control of the Ohio Supreme Court out of Republican hands for the first time since 1986, helping turn the tide toward fair elections and guaranteed reproductive rights.

— Maria Bustillos

SOUTH DAKOTA

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT G - RIGHT TO ABORTION INITIATIVE

A “yes” vote supports providing for a state constitutional right to abortion in South Dakota, using a trimester framework for regulation:  During the first trimester, the state would be prohibited from regulating a woman's decision to have an abortion; 

During the second trimester, the state may regulate abortion, but “only in ways that are reasonably related to the physical health of the pregnant woman;” and 

During the third trimester, the state may regulate or prohibit abortion, except “when abortion is necessary, in the medical judgment of the woman's physician, to preserve the life and health of the pregnant woman.” 

A “no” vote opposes providing for a state constitutional right to abortion in South Dakota, using a trimester framework for regulation.

YES. I realize this one is weird; I had a long talk with my sister, who lives in Texas, about this stuff, and one thing I’ve grown to accept as I’ve gotten older is that not everybody is going to leap out of bed every morning excited to embrace fully automated gay luxury communism the way you and I might. Some voters need to be met halfway if you’re going to get them to join your team. (Journalists do not need to be met halfway, incidentally, and if you read someone in the national press demanding to be coddled for their ignorance the same way electeds have to coddle overchurched reactionaries, I think you should ignore that person.)

Anyway vote yes. It makes space in state law for abortion in one of the most conservative states in the country, and that is the tip of the wedge.

— Sam Thielman

WELCOME, NEW SUBSCRIBERS TO FLAMING HYDRA

If you pledged in the recent fundraiser on Kickstarter, welcome! to an incandescent world of real writing, art, criticism, fiction and more. Visit our FAQ for details on how to manage your subscription, and contact us if you need help.

If you’d like to read Flaming Hydra on RSS, instructions are here (and at the FAQ):

Not Coming Back

by Luke O’Neil

For you

On your timeline it’s still the second inning of a game your favorite team lost last night. 

Activists are protesting the coming execution of a dead man the governor declined to pardon. 

On your timeline it’s still Halloween and all the skeletons and princesses are giddy with childish gluttony. 

There’s a beautiful beach town unbothered by a looming storm. 

No cars stacked atop of one another like felled dominoes. 

Nothing has happened anywhere.

On your timeline a friend still has last week’s smile on in a selfie she felt insecure about. 

A movie no one went to see is about to premiere.