Aurelia Butler

More stories

  • 125 Shares169 Views

    in Elections

    What’s Next for Trump’s Plans to Dismantle the Education Department

    Administration officials have already begun the process of transferring certain functions to other agencies.The Trump administration on Tuesday announced plans to shift key functions from the Education Department to other corners of the federal government, moving quickly to implement changes just one day after the Supreme Court cleared the way for mass layoffs.The department’s main purpose has been to distribute money to college students through grants and loans, to send federal money to K-12 schools, particularly for low-income and disabled students, and to enforce anti-discrimination laws. But soon after President Trump’s return to the White House, he signed an executive order aimed at dismantling the Education Department.The order acknowledges that the department cannot be shuttered without approval from Congress. Still, Mr. Trump’s education secretary, Linda McMahon, has been focused on what she has called the department’s “final mission.” So far, at least 1,300 workers have been fired, an effective gutting of the agency, while more than 500 accepted the administration’s offer of early retirement. Ms. McMahon has said that there will be additional job cuts.Ms. McMahon told Fox News in an interview on Tuesday that one of her immediate goals was to “transfer different jobs that are being done at the Department of Education” to other agencies.Here is what we know about the next phase of the Trump administration’s effort to reshape and reduce the federal government’s role in education.Key training programs are outsourced to the Labor Department.Under the changes announced on Tuesday, the Labor Department will assume a larger role in administering adult education, family literacy programs and career and technical education. The Education Department will send $2.6 billion to the Labor Department to cover the cost of the programs.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 150 Shares169 Views

    in Elections

    Mayor Adams Loses Another Round in Bid to Receive Public Matching Funds

    The New York City Campaign Finance Board rejected Mayor Eric Adams’s request for millions of dollars from the city’s generous matching-funds program.Mayor Eric Adams of New York City was again denied public matching funds for his re-election campaign after a panel said on Tuesday that he had once again failed to provide requested information regarding his campaign’s fund-raising efforts, including interactions with Turkish business interests.The New York City Campaign Finance Board initially denied Mr. Adams’s request for public funds following his indictment on corruption-related charges last year, blocking him from the city’s generous program that gives qualifying candidates an eight-for-one match of small-dollar donations.In May, Mr. Adams sued the board in an effort to overturn the ruling, arguing that the decision to withhold $3.4 million was based on an indictment that had been dropped by the Justice Department. The mayor’s lawsuit was dismissed last week, with a federal judge in Brooklyn, Nicholas G. Garaufis, noting that Mr. Adams had been late to provide information regarding conflicts of interest and that more information was still outstanding.In its denial on Tuesday, the Campaign Finance Board said that the mayor’s team still had not provided the necessary documents, some of which were requested in November. The board’s chairman, Frederick P. Schaffer, said that Mr. Adams’s campaign had requested an extension until Aug. 1.A spokesman for Mr. Adams’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment.The board’s denial comes as its investigation into the Adams campaign’s financing practices appears to be expanding, with its lawyers indicating in court filings that the board had requested more information from the campaign to explain potential improper behavior. Some of the requested correspondence is connected to an Uzbek businessman, according to court documents.The board’s decision is yet another blow to the mayor’s effort to defeat the Democratic nominee, Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, who won a decisive victory in last month’s primary, handily outpacing his closest rival, former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, by 12 points.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 138 Shares189 Views

    in Elections

    Mamdani Prepares to Meet With New York City’s Wary Business Leaders

    On Tuesday, Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist running for mayor, will meet with the who’s who of the corporate world as he prepares for the general election.In the weeks since Zohran Mamdani’s stunning victory in the Democratic mayoral primary, some corporate and finance leaders have predicted an exodus of wealthy investors from New York City. They have called him a Marxist and an out of touch idealist, and have warned of rough times ahead for the city if Mr. Mamdani, a democratic socialist, wins the general election in November.On Tuesday and Wednesday, leaders on Wall Street and across the business world will have an opportunity to confront Mr. Mamdani directly in meetings with the Partnership for New York City, a consortium of 350 members representing banks, law firms and corporations.The meetings were requested by Mr. Mamdani, a Queens assemblyman who says he wants to work with the business community. Mr. Mamdani has recently moderated some of his stances that have generated the most controversy as he shifts his focus to the general election. Tuesday’s meeting will take place behind closed doors with no news media present, and more than 100 executives are expected to attend.The Partnership’s board is a who’s who of powerful business leaders including Henry Kravis of KKR, Rob Speyer of Tishman Speyer and J.P. Morgan’s chief executive, Jamie Dimon, who last week publicly criticized Democrats for “falling all over themselves” to support Mr. Mamdani’s policies including city-run grocery stores and a rent freeze on rent-stabilized apartments. “There’s the same ideological mush that means nothing in the real world,” Mr. Dimon said at an event in Europe.But as much as corporate leaders express reservations about Mr. Mamdani’s left-leaning policies, some of them are taking a pragmatic approach to the upstart candidate, who is leading in polls.Kathryn Wylde, the Partnership’s chief executive who had a frosty relationship with the city’s last progressive mayor, Bill de Blasio, has been open to working with Mr. Mamdani.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Elections

    When It Comes to Undermining America, We Have a Winner

    Capitalizing on Democrats’ weakness, President Trump is winning his battle to undermine democracy in this country.But he has not won the war.A host of factors could blunt his aggression: recession, debt, corruption, inflation, epidemics, the Epstein files, anger over cuts in Medicaid and food stamps, to name just a few. Much of what Trump has done could be undone if a Democrat is elected president in 2028.But for federal workers, medical and scientific researchers, lawyers in politically active firms, prominent critics of Trump — thousands of whom have felt the sting of arbitrary firings, vanished paychecks and retracted grants, criminal inquiries and threatened bankruptcies — the 2028 election may prove too late to repair the damage.And that’s before we even begin to talk about the anti-immigration crackdown.Trump’s assaults are aimed at targets large and small, some based on personal resentments, others guided by a more coherent ideological agenda.The brutality of Trump’s anti-democratic policies is part of a larger goal, a reflection of an administration determined to transfer trillions of dollars to the wealthy by imposing immense costs on the poor and the working class in lost access to medical care and food support, an administration that treats hungry children with the same disdain that it treats core principles of democracy.Trump has succeeded in devastating due-process protections for universities, immigrants and law firms. He has cowed the Supreme Court, which has largely failed to block his violations of the Constitution. He has bypassed Congress, ruling by executive order and emergency declaration. He is using the regulatory power of government to force the media to make humiliating concessions. He has ordered criminal investigations of political adversaries. He has fired innumerable government employees who pursued past investigations — and on and on.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 113 Shares99 Views

    in Elections

    Democrats Are Workshopping New Tactics After Losses of 2024

    Among the ideas being promoted: knocking on every single door in a House district and awarding cash prizes for the most effective new ways to reach voters.If there is one point of consensus in the deeply fractured Democratic Party, it’s that the old ways of doing business just aren’t cutting it.And so, many of the party’s most analytically minded strategists have begun focusing their energies on dissecting the tactical and technical decisions that led to last year’s devastating defeats, and dreaming up proposals to overhaul the machinery of progressive politics.This work is not about the big picture of what the party stands for. It is about the nuts and bolts of how to get candidates elected: which potential voters to target; whose doors to knock on, and whether door-knocking is still effective in a digital age; and when and where to advertise, whether online, on television or by mail.There is also a concern that too many of those decisions have been made by party officials on high, relying too heavily on polling to guide their choices on policy positions, messaging and advertising, and ignoring other important signals that could help influence voters.“We need to rethink things,” said Danielle Butterfield, executive director of Priorities USA, which was once the party’s premiere super PAC and spent $45 million, including its nonprofit arms, in the 2024 election. “The same elitism that is abundant in our party exists in the way we make decisions.”Priorities USA is spending $8 million on three pilot programs this year to explore some of the surprise findings from 2024. One such finding was that some of the Democratic group’s most effective ads turned out to be those that ran on YouTube channels favored by Republican voters who were seen as unpersuadable.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 113 Shares129 Views

    in Elections

    Are the Courts Checking Trump — or Enabling Him?

    A former federal judge weighs in.In this episode of “The Opinions,” the editorial director David Leonhardt talks to a conservative former federal judge, Michael McConnell, about the role of the courts in President Trump’s second term.Are the Courts Checking Trump — or Enabling Him?A former federal judge weighs in.Below is a transcript of an episode of “The Opinions.” We recommend listening to it in its original form for the full effect. You can do so using the player above or on the NYT Audio app, Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts.The transcript has been lightly edited for length and clarity.David Leonhardt: I’m David Leonhardt, the director of the New York Times editorial board. Every week I’m having conversations to help shape the board’s opinions.One thing that I find useful right now is talking with President Trump’s conservative critics. They tend to be alarmed by the president’s behavior, but they also tend to be more optimistic than many progressives about whether American democracy is surviving the Trump presidency. And that combination helps me and my colleagues think about where the biggest risks to our country really are.One area I’ve been wrestling with is the federal court system. I want to understand the extent to which the courts are acting as a check on President Trump as he tries to amass more power, or whether the courts are actually helping him amass that power.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 100 Shares109 Views

    in Elections

    How Does Trump Silence the Epstein Conspiracy Theories?

    President Trump is finding it hard to put the Epstein files behind him.As a presidential candidate, Donald Trump loved a conspiracy theory.He started his political career by stoking the lie that President Obama was not born in the United States. By 2024, he complained, falsely, that noncitizens would vote in the November election and throw the result to Democrats. He declared on a debate stage that immigrants in Ohio were eating people’s pets. He promised to release government files on Sept. 11 and the assassination of John F. Kennedy, and told Fox News that “I guess I would” release the government’s files on Jeffrey Epstein, too.As president, though, he’s finding that it’s a whole lot easier to start a conspiracy theory than it is to put one to rest.That is the challenge facing Trump now, as his political supporters stage an open revolt over his administration’s decision not to release further materials about Epstein, the convicted sex offender who hobnobbed with the global elite before he died by suicide in prison in 2019.Putting the genie back in the bottleThey could be forgiven for expecting more details. Trump installed two vocal Epstein conspiracy theorists and right-wing media personalities, Kash Patel and Dan Bongino, to run the F.B.I. after both men spent years telling their audiences there really was a there there. This spring, Attorney General Pam Bondi promised big revelations about the case that have come to nothing.It turns out, though, it is a whole lot easier to be a conspiracy theorist when you’re not president, you don’t control both houses of Congress, and you haven’t handpicked the leaders of the nation’s premier investigative agencies.Trump has tried to put the genie back in the bottle. He admonished a reporter for asking about the matter at a cabinet meeting last week — “Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein?” — and then, over the weekend, told off his followers, in a lengthy social media post.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 100 Shares129 Views

    in Elections

    Senate Approves First Judge of Trump’s Second Term

    The pace of judicial confirmations is lagging compared with the president’s first stint in office, but more are in the pipeline.The Senate on Monday confirmed the first federal judge of President Trump’s second term, putting the administration on a much slower pace for filling federal court vacancies than in his first term, when a rush to install conservatives on the courts was an overarching priority.Senators voted 46 to 42 along party lines to confirm Whitney D. Hermandorfer of Tennessee to a seat on the Cincinnati-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Her approval came more than six weeks later than the first appellate judge confirmed after Mr. Trump took office in 2017. The Senate had also confirmed a new Supreme Court justice by this point in his last term, placing Neil M. Gorsuch on the court.This time around, Mr. Trump has put more emphasis on other aspects of his administration, aggressively pushing ambassadorial nominations and devoting much of the energy of the Senate to pushing through the sweeping tax and policy legislation enacted this month.In addition, significantly fewer judicial vacancies exist today compared with 2017, when Mr. Trump inherited more than 100 court openings after Senate Republicans stalled President Barack Obama’s judicial selections when they took Senate control in 2014.“We’re not facing the number of judicial vacancies this Congress we did during Trump’s first term,” said Senator John Thune, Republican of South Dakota and the majority leader. “There are around 50 vacancies on the federal bench. Our job is to fill those vacancies with more judges who understand the proper role of a judge, and that starts with confirming Ms. Hermandorfer.”Ms. Hermandorfer served as director of the strategic litigation unit in the Tennessee attorney general’s office, where she has argued high-profile cases, including defending the state’s abortion ban and challenging a Biden administration prohibition on discrimination against transgender students.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More