US Politics

Trump seems to have a large war chest – but is he struggling to raise money? Some high-profile mega-donors have fled, small-dollar donor stream that fueled his past runs is drying up, and he is accused of violating ‘soft money’ lawsWith his 2024 presidential candidacy officially kicked into gear, Donald Trump would seem poised to enter the Republican nomination race a step ahead: his Pacs and committees boast a war chest of about $95m, enough to give pause to the Republican candidates jockeying against him.But a scratch beneath the surface reveals a different reality. About $78m of the $95m cannot be directly used for Trump’s campaign, according to a Guardian analysis of the Trump fundraising web.What’s more, there’s evidence the small-dollar donor stream that fueled his past runs is drying up. Some high-profile mega-donors have fled. And a campaign finance watchdog has filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) over Trump allegedly violating “soft money” laws as he appears to play a shell game with his cash.“There are a lot of moving parts, but there are a lot of reasons to believe that Trump is struggling more than he has in recent years to raise money,” said Robert Maguire, research director at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. Trump’s fundraising in recent years has raked in eye-popping sums. During the 2020 cycle he raised $882m, and another $500m since then. But the savings have been depleted by Trump spending on his own legal defenses, on Melania Trump’s personal designer, and on helping the January 6 rioters.In recent years, the Trump team and its close allies have worked off an ever-expanding web of at least a dozen similarly named Pacs and committees. Typical examples: the “Trump Save America Joint Fundraising Committee” and the “Save America Joint Fundraising Committee”.The most prolific entity over the current cycle has been the Save America leadership Pac, which raised about $111m and has about $21m left over post-midterm. But federal rules prohibit Trump from using leadership Pac funds for his campaign because leadership Pacs exist to support other candidates. It can, however, be used to support the large rallies that are a central campaign strategy.Various Super Pacs hold another $57m, and though those can be used to support Trump’s campaign or attack his opponents, the Pacs legally cannot coordinate with the campaign.In total, that means about $78m of the $95m on hand as of 28 November cannot be directly used for Trump’s campaign.Still, that isn’t stopping the former president from trying to move money from leadership Pacs to Super Pacs via a legally questionable shell game. On 3 October, the Save America leadership Pac made a $20m contribution to Make America Great Again, Inc because the latter can spend more freely.But that caught the attention of legal observers who say the move clearly violated “soft money” provisions of the Federal Election Campaign Act. On 14 November, the campaign finance watchdog Campaign Legal Center (CLC) filed a complaint with the FEC.It alleges that Trump, based on multiple statements and fundraising totals, was already a presidential candidate when he made the transfer from the leadership Pac to the Super Pac.“Therefore Trump violated federal law that prohibits that kind of soft money transfer,” said Saurav Ghosh, director of federal campaign finance reform for the CLC.Moreover, Trump seems to be circumventing the Super Pac rules that prohibit coordination with his campaign.“Super Pacs are nominally independent of the candidate, but with Trump it is heavy-quotes ‘independent’,” Ghosh said. “Clearly when you have a Super Pac like this, which is organized by allies and folks who worked on prior Trump campaigns, the independence is illusory.”Trump has expressed his disdain for these rules, telling Fox News in an August 2021 interview that “campaign finance laws are extremely complicated and unbelievably stupid”. He also used the interview to strongly hint at his candidacy.“The interview tells you all you need to know,” Ghosh said.The new committee that will act as Trump’s official fundraiser is “Donald J Trump for President 2024”. Filling it with funds from the usual sources, however, may prove more difficult than in the past.That’s because low-dollar donations that fueled previous campaigns – some of which were raised through questionable recurring payments plans – seem to be dwindling. The Trump Save America Joint Fundraising Committee has fused his Save America leadership Pac and official candidate committee.The joint committee boasted about its $24m haul from July to September, but it spent $22m to get there, records later showed. All told, his Pac network ran $13m in the red over the three-month period leading up to the midterms, fuelling speculation of small-donor fatigue.Moreover, the campaign showed $111m in receipts prior to the election, and is down to about $95m post election as its spending exceeds its fundraising.“He captivates a huge population of small-dollar donors willing to keep giving their money to him,” Maguire said. “He still has the capacity to raise money off the Maga crowd, but the question is ‘Is that going to cool off? Is there enough in the till?’, and that remains to be seen.”Among those defecting from Trump’s large-donor battalion are his top 2016 contributors, Robert and Rebekah Mercer, CNBC reported. The billionaires have instead donated to his likely primary rival, the Florida governor, Ron DeSantis.The hedge fund manager Ken Griffin, who threw around $67m in the midterms, has also backed DeSantis: “I’d like to think that the Republican party is ready to move on from somebody who has been for this party a three-time loser,” Griffin told Bloomberg’s New Economy Forum in September.Meanwhile, Blackstone financier and CEO Stephen Schwarzman, who spent $34m in the midterms, expressed a similar sentiment.“America does better when its leaders are rooted in today and tomorrow, not today and yesterday,” Schwarzman said in a statement. “It is time for the Republican party to turn to a new generation of leaders and I intend to support one of them in the presidential primaries.”But DeSantis faces a similar predicament as Trump. He has raised an enormous amount of money through his state-level Pac, but that can’t be transferred to a federal campaign. Ghosh said he suspects DeSantis will try to transfer the money to a Super Pac, as Trump did.That could prompt another complaint from the Campaign Legal Center, but it’s unlikely to go anywhere: with an equal number of Democratic and Republican commissioners, the agency has been stuck in partisan gridlock for years.“These are serious violations because the federal system is designed to be insulated from spending outside of limits,” he said. “But the FEC rarely enforces the laws, and in the case of Trump they have a particularly awful track record, so I don’t expect that they’re going to change here. Obviously I hope they do as this is a clear violation, but we recognize what we’re up against.”TopicsDonald TrumpUS elections 2024US politicsUS political financingfeaturesReuse this content More

US House of Representatives: who’s who in the new leadership?It remains to be seen if Republican Kevin McCarthy can win the speakership while Democrats’ leaders include no white men The balance of power in Washington will shift when Republicans officially take control of the House on 3 January.Will the ‘cool, calm, collected’ Hakeem Jeffries change when in power?Read moreYet House Republicans begin the 118th Congress in a precarious position: their grip on power is fragile and their conference fractured.After a historically weak performance by the minority party in a midterm election, House Republicans have struggled to unite. Uncertainty hangs over the speakership election, as Kevin McCarthy attempts to quell a conservative revolt that could derail his long-held hopes of claiming the speaker’s gavel.Democrats meanwhile will begin the next Congress with a fresh slate of leaders, after the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, and her deputies stepped aside to pave the way for a new generation. Now, in a historical first, the triumvirate of top House Democrats includes no white men.Here’s a look at the highest-ranking members of the Republican and Democratic leadership for the 118th Congress.The RepublicansCongressman Kevin McCarthy of California, Republican nominee for speaker of the HouseMcCarthy, 57, has been plotting his path to the speakership for the better part of a decade. Whether he will finally win the top job remains unclear.Elected to Congress in 2006, McCarthy was part of a triumvirate of self-styled Republican “Young Guns” (along with Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan, neither of whom is currently in Congress) who rode the Tea Party wave to power. Republicans’ romping success in the 2010 midterms catapulted McCarthy into one of the top leadership positions, House majority whip.He was considered next in line for the speakership in 2015, but his bid imploded. McCarthy was eventually elected minority leader in 2018, after Democrats won the House.Once considered a relative moderate, the California congressman has steadily moved to the right. He embraced Donald Trump early and remains one of his staunchest defenders on Capitol Hill. When Trump was defeated in 2020, McCarthy amplified his election lies. After the January 6 attack on the Capitol, McCarthy condemned Trump’s actions but quickly retreated and made amends.Now McCarthy is in the fight of his political life as he again seeks the speakership. He won the party’s internal leadership elections, dispatching a challenge from the far right. But the real test will come on the House floor, where he will need the support of nearly every member of his caucus to become speaker.Congressman Steve Scalise of Louisiana, majority leaderScalise, 57, is a Louisiana native who was elected to the No 2 spot by voice vote, a sign of his broad support in the House Republican conference. Should McCarthy fall short in his quest to become speaker, Scalise has been mentioned as a potential alternative.In 2017, Scalise was critically wounded when a gunman opened fire during a congressional baseball practice. He spent weeks in the hospital and required intensive rehabilitation. A staunch defender of the second amendment, Scalise said the experience only reinforced his support for gun rights.A special election in 2008 brought Scalise to Washington, where he rose quickly through the Republican ranks. In 2012, he was elected chairman of the influential Republican study group, beating a candidate who had been handpicked by the group’s founders. After that surprise victory, Scalise told reporters on Capitol Hill that his goal was to pull Republican leadership “as far to the right” as possible.Congressman Tom Emmer of Minnesota, majority whipIn 2020, as Democrats celebrated Joe Biden’s victory, Republicans made an unexpectedly strong showing in the House. Emmer, in his role as chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, was widely praised for his party’s performance.Just two years later, Emmer, in the same role, faced blowback after Republicans only narrowly won the House, making far fewer gains than anticipated. In the wake of the disappointing results, he faced stiff competition in his bid to become the majority whip though he ultimately prevailed on the second ballot.Emmer, 61, a former attorney and the father of seven, began his career in the Minnesota legislature. He narrowly lost a bid to become governor of Minnesota in one of the closest elections in state history. Four years later, he was first elected to Congress, winning the seat vacated by the conservative firebrand Michele Bachmann.Congresswoman Elise Stefanik of New York, Republican conference chairFew politicians exemplify Trump’s grip on the Republican party better than the New York Republican.Once a mainstream conservative from a moderate district, Stefanik transformed into one of Trump’s most loyal supporters, embracing his election lies, flirting with the QAnon conspiracy theory and amplifying ads that echoed themes of the racist “great replacement” theory.Stefanik claimed the No 3 leadership post last year, after the conference ousted Congresswoman Liz Cheney of Wyoming over her vocal criticism of Trump in the wake of the Capitol attack. Despite speculation that Stefanik would run for majority whip if Republicans won the House in the 2022 midterms, she opted instead to keep her position, tasked with amplifying the party’s message.When Trump announced his intention to run again for the White House in 2024, Stefanik was one of only a handful of prominent Republicans to endorse him, a move that rankled those in her party wary of his attempts at a political comeback.The DemocratsCongressman Hakeem Jeffries of New York, minority leaderWith his unanimous election as Democratic leader, Jeffries, 52, becomes the first Black American to helm a major political party in congressional history. He inherits the job from Nancy Pelosi, the Democrats’ long-serving leader. Yet he begins his tenure in the minority, after Democrats lost control of the chamber in the November midterms despite a stronger than expected performance.The Brooklyn-born son of public sector workers, Jeffries speaks with pride about growing up in a working-class outer-borough neighborhood. After law school, he worked as a corporate attorney, representing clients such as Viacom and CBS.His first foray into politics was unsuccessful. But he was soon elected to the New York state assembly, where he served for six years before running for Congress in 2012. He won the Brooklyn and Queens-based seat, parts of which were once represented by Shirley Chisholm, the first Black woman elected to Congress.His ascent to Democratic leader was long planned and came with the explicit backing of his predecessor. Now, as the new fresh face of House Democrats, Jeffries has vowed to bring his fractious caucus together with the goal of clawing back control of the chamber in two years. In remarks after his election, he said he hoped to work with Republicans, but would not remain silent if they continued to embrace extremism.Congresswoman Katherine Clark of Massachusetts, minority whipElected by acclamation, Clark will become the highest-ranking woman in House Democratic politics. As the party’s top vote-counter, her main task for the next two years will probably be to keep Democrats aligned in opposition to Republican-backed legislation, rather than whipping them in favor of bills.Clark, 59, began her political career as a member of a local public school committee, before rising through the ranks in the Massachusetts state legislature. She was elected to Congress in 2013, where she has been a vocal advocate for women’s reproductive rights and other policies affecting women and children.For years, Clark and Jeffries worked in partnership, cementing their status as heirs apparent for the moment when Pelosi and her deputies stepped down. She is well-liked among the many caucuses and coalitions within her party and her colleagues have praised her as someone who always keeps in touch, a trait that will serve her well as Democratic whip.Congressman Pete Aguilar of California, Democratic caucus chairWith his rise to the No 3 spot, Aguilar, 43, is now the highest-ranking Latino in Congress and a member of a historic Democratic leadership team that includes no white men for the first time in history.Raised in a working-class family in San Bernardino, Aguilar served as mayor of Redlands, a city in southern California. He lost his first bid for Congress in 2012, but tried again two years later and won.Since then, Aguilar has risen steadily in House Democratic politics. He was named to the House select committee investigating the January 6 attack on the Capitol and led the panel’s high-profile third hearing, which focused on Trump’s efforts to pressure his vice-president, Mike Pence, to overturn the results of the 2020 election.Known among his colleagues as someone who can build alliances across factions and party lines, Aguilar is now responsible for Democratic messaging.Congressman Jim Clyburn of South Carolina, assistant Democratic leaderBefore Jeffries’ elevation, Clyburn was the highest-ranking Black man in Congress. After serving as the Democratic whip alongside Speaker Pelosi and the majority leader, Steny Hoyer, Clyburn, 82, decided to remain in leadership even as they stepped aside, though at a lower rank.He briefly faced the possibility of a younger challenger, but was ultimately elected unanimously by the caucus.Born in the Jim Crow south, Clyburn was a civil rights activist before entering politics. Elected to Congress in 1992, he quickly became a leading voice within the caucus, gaining prominence as the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus before joining the Democratic leadership team. Often operating behind the scenes, Clyburn is known for mediating disputes within his caucus and using his clout to advocate for Black leadership.Hailed as a kingmaker in South Carolina politics, his influence is widely felt. Clyburn helped power Barack Obama to victory in 2008 and is credited with rescuing Biden’s foundering presidential campaign in 2020 when he offered his endorsement ahead of the state’s primary.TopicsHouse of RepresentativesRepublicansDemocratsUS politicsprofilesReuse this content More

Politicians around the world tout immigration restrictions as a way to fight wage stagnation and boost the job prospects of low-paid or unemployed locals.

The Trump administration pushed the message aggressively, at one stage calling a proposal to halve migration numbers the RAISE Act (standing for Reforming American Immigration for a Strong Economy), saying it would raise workers’ wages and help struggling families enter the middle class.

Whether or not cutting low-skilled migration would lift working class wages remains a highly contentious question.

Read more:
A myth that won’t die: stopping migration did not kickstart the economy

My research examines the question in a broader way. Its findings – looking back at an extraordinary time of change in US history, from the 1880s on – suggest that while restricting immigration might at first help low-income workers, over time it hurts those local workers. This is due to what I call the “honeypot effect”, in which wage hikes for poor jobs keep people in poor jobs.

The problem is that there are very few real-world immigration restrictions to examine. Immigration to the global West has been rising steadily since the 1960s.

The COVID pandemic essentially eliminated immigration for a short time, but it is as good as impossible to isolate the effects of that from the effects of everything else that was going on at the same time.

America’s first exclusion: the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882

Up until 1882, the US had an open-border policy with virtually no restrictions on entry. The Chinese Exclusion Act – introduced that year in response to the widespread belief that low-skilled Chinese immigrants were responsible for depressed wages and unemployment – was a first.

It was also long-lasting. It completely prohibited the immigration of Chinese labourers for more than fifty years.

It represents an ideal so-called “natural experiment”. Because Chinese immigration had been very heavily concentrated in certain locations, its impact was isolated to those locations, allowing what happened where it did restrict immigration to be compared to what happened where it did not.

And I discovered there was data. The US Government fully discloses Census data after 72 years. This allowed me to link individuals across US censuses to track the employment situation of millions of Americans over the entirety of their working lives.

A significant, negative, long-term effect

What I found was surprising. The Chinese Exclusion Act had a significant, negative long-term effect on American workers. My estimate is that workers in locations exposed to the Act earned on average 6-15% less over their working lives than their counterparts in other locations

The negative effects were strongest for low-skilled and unemployed workers.

The exclusion of Chinese immigrants not only failed to improve conditions for working-class Americans, but made them substantially worse off in the long run.

The honeypot and the occupational ladder

Then I set out to examine this seemingly counter-intuitive result: why shortages of low-skilled labour had led to worse long-term outcomes for low-skilled workers.

The answer appears to lie in a “honeypot” effect.

Higher low-skilled wages are attractive.

A closer look suggests the Chinese Exclusion Act was initially successful in boosting low-skilled wages and the employment of Americans in low-skilled jobs in the regions it had an effect.

This created a “honeypot” – American workers in those locations increasingly took and remained in low-skilled jobs. They became significantly less likely to become educated, meaning they fell behind their counterparts in other locations on the occupational ladder.

And their initial wage gains were short-lived, with increased arrivals from other countries and other parts of the US eventually filling the labour shortages.

This left the workers who had opted to stay in low-skilled jobs stuck with low pay, depressing their lifetime earnings compared to their counterparts in regions unaffected by the Chinese Exclusion Act.

Underlying the honeypot effect is the reality that most workers progress up an occupation ladder over their working lives, often as a result of education and training.

Read more:
Legal work-related immigration has fallen by a third since 2020, contributing to US labor shortages

But education involves trade-offs. It can require giving up immediate income to earn more down the track.

Immediate income which is higher is harder to give up.

And there might be another mechanism at play. When low-skilled workers are in short supply, there might be fewer high-skilled jobs on offer because high-skilled jobs need low-skilled jobs to complement them.

Implications for today

The economy of 1882 bears little resemblance to today’s economy and we should take care in drawing general conclusions.

However, studies of modern immigration inflows into the United States and Europe also find they boost the education and occupational status of native workers, suggesting the processes underlying the honeypot effect are present in modern economies.

Immigration restrictions are too blunt an instrument and their effects are too complex to be used to boost wages and employment.

Read more:
Nobel economics prize winners showed economists how to turn the real world into their laboratory

My findings suggest that even if restrictions are successful in creating wage gains for some in the short run, they are just as likely to lead to negative outcomes for locals in the long run.

This is not to say that increasing low-skilled wages is a bad thing. But immigration restrictions can only create temporary, unsustainable wage increases.

There are better, more sustainable ways to help low-skilled workers, backed by stronger evidence.

Attempts to help low-skilled workers should promote – or at the very least not discourage – education and occupational upgrading. That way they would help the low-skilled workers and the economy as a whole. More

Kevin McCarthy’s speaker bid in balance as effort to placate hardliners flopsRepublican ‘Never Kevins’ say series of concessions to rightwingers are ‘insufficient’ to secure support The final hurdle to Republican Kevin McCarthy’s years-long quest to secure the speaker’s gavel grew even more formidable on Monday as a sizable group of House colleagues from his own party said they were not yet ready to support him.Top Republicans remain silent over George Santos campaign liesRead moreThe nine Republican rebels made the announcement after the California congressman made a series of concessions on Sunday to try to shore up the support of conservative hardliners ahead of Republicans assuming control of the US lower chamber on Tuesday.McCarthy can afford to lose only four votes from his party’s slender majority if he is to win the election for speaker that will be among the first orders of business for the new Congress.The rightwingers had demanded a change in House rules to make it easier to topple the speaker, and increased representation for fringe members on committees.While the group’s statement acknowledged there had been some steps forward, it said McCarthy’s messaging during a Sunday evening conference call, and in a summary sheet obtained by Punchbowl News, left them uncertain of exactly what he was offering.“Despite some progress achieved, Mr McCarthy’s statement comes almost impossibly late to address continued deficiencies,” the letter, signed by the Pennsylvania congressman Scott Perry and eight colleagues, said, according to Politico.“Expressions of vague hopes reflected in far too many of the crucial points still under debate are insufficient.“Thus far, there continue to be missing specific commitments with respect to virtually every component of our entreaties, and thus, no means to measure whether promises are kept or broken.”McCarthy published a 55-page package of proposed rules on Sunday as he attempted to secure the 218 votes he will need to become speaker.The main sticking point appears to be the so-called motion to vacate, a House rule that allows members to challenge the speaker, which was loosened during the tenure of the Democrat Nancy Pelosi.The hardliners want a restoration of the rule that existed under previous Republican speakers John Boehner and Paul Ryan that any single congressman or woman could initiate a vote to remove the speaker.McCarthy said in his call on Sunday that “weeks of negotiations” had resulted in a “concession” of him agreeing to a threshold of five House members.But according to CNN, it was not enough to appease Republicans known as “Never Kevins”, a fluid group of hardliners including the Florida congressman Matt Gaetz, who have said they will not support him under any circumstance.The network reported that later in McCarthy’s call, Gaetz said he would “consider” any offer to lower the motion to vacate threshold to one, but that he did not believe it was being made.McCarthy, CNN said, told Gaetz that the rest of the Republican conference would not support such a move. “It’s not about me,” McCarthy is reported to have said.Other proposals by McCarthy would give lawmakers a minimum 72 hours to read a bill before it comes to the floor, and another concession to rightwingers of creating a select committee to investigate the “weaponization” of the FBI and justice department.A disappointing performance for Republicans in November’s midterms created a particularly rocky path to the speakership for McCarthy, whose most recent challenger for the gavel ended in defeat to Ryan in 2015.Democrats, and some Republican moderates, have accused McCarthy of caving to extremists and placing his own personal political ambitions ahead of the good of his party.In an interview with the Guardian last week, John Yarmuth, outgoing chair of the House budget committee, said the Republican party had become so extreme that it would be willing to default on US debt for the first time in an attempt to secure concessions from Joe Biden’s administration.“My guess is that whoever is speaker of the House will be so in a vice from the extreme members of their caucus, that they won’t be able to get anything done here. I really worry about defaulting,” Yarmuth, a Kentucky Democrat, said.In a statement on Sunday, the Massachusetts Democrat Jim McGovern, chair of the House rules committee, attacked McCarthy’s proposals as a “major step backward”.“Republican leaders have once again caved to the most extreme members of their own caucus,” he wrote.And in an interview with CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday, Republican Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, who is standing down from the House, said McCarthy’s refusal to confront Donald Trump’s election lies had allowed extremism to thrive.“He is the reason Donald Trump is still a factor. He is the reason that some of the crazy elements of the House still exist, Kinzinger said.McCarthy’s allies say there is still time to negotiate the rules package. The House will vote on it later in the week after a speaker is elected and sworn in.TopicsRepublicansHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

Biden declares Arizona floods a federal disaster for Havasupai tribeThe declaration provides funds and federal assistance for emergency and permanent infrastructure The White House has made a federal disaster declaration for the Havasupai Native American tribe that mainly lives deep inside the Grand Canyon in Arizona, as the community prepares to reopen tourist access to its famous turquoise waterfalls next month.Last October, the village experienced drastic flooding which damaged extensive parts of the reservation.The floods “destroyed several bridges and trails that are needed not only for our tourists, but for the everyday movement of goods and services into the Supai Village”, the tribe said.The Havasupai is now readying itself to receive tourists again from 1 February on its reservation, which sits nine miles down narrow trails between spectacular red rock cliffs deep within the Grand Canyon in northern Arizona. Tourists must apply for permits to enter the reservation.It is the first time that tourists have been allowed to return to the reservation not only since the flooding, but in almost three years, since tourism was closed off early in 2020 when the coronavirus pandemic spread across the US. The canyon community has very limited health care resources on site.The tribe is one of North America’s smallest and is the only one based inside the canyon, where the community has lived for more than 800 years, despite being driven off much of its original, much wider, territory by armed settlers in the 19th century.On 31 December the White House announced that Joe Biden had approved a disaster declaration for the Havasupai. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema), such a declaration provides a wide range of federal assistance programs for individuals and public infrastructure, including funds for emergency and permanent work.The tribe grows crops and keeps farm animals on a thin ribbon of land inside the canyon, alongside the naturally occurring, vividly hued streams and falls. Havasupai means the people of the blue-green water.The tribe issued a statement last month, reflecting on last fall’s flooding, saying: “This has been a trying experience for all involved … However, there are many positive things as a result. While you may see downed trees on the trails where the flood crashed through, you will also see flourishing flora and fauna and new waterfall flows.”The White House noted that: “Federal funding is available to the Havasupai tribe and certain private non-profit organizations on a cost-sharing basis for emergency work and the repair or replacement of facilities damaged by the flooding,” the statement continued.In December, the tribe noted that it had been in a dispute with the third-party tourism operator it had normally worked with and had switched to another operator in preparation of the 2023 tourism season.Last month, the tribe also reported fresh uranium mining activity in the Grand Canyon region where the tribe’s water source originates, which it has long claimed is an existential threat.“It is time to permanently ban uranium mining – not only to preserve the Havasupai tribe’s cultural identity and our existence as the Havasupai people but to protect the Grand Canyon for generations to come,” the tribal chairman, Thomas Siyuja Sr, said in a statement reported by Native News Online. “With recent activity observed inside the mine fence, it is clear that the mining company is making plans to begin its operations.”The legacy of uranium mining has long threatened Native American communities, including the Havasupai tribe. From 1944 to 1986, close to 30m tons of uranium ore were extracted from neighboring Navajo lands. During the cold war, companies extracted millions of tons of uranium in those territories to meet the demands for nuclear weapons, causing environmental blight.TopicsArizonaNative AmericansIndigenous peoplesFloodingUS politicsJoe BidennewsReuse this content More

How Adrian Fontes plans to protect Arizona’s elections from ‘Maga fascists’The Democrat who defeated a hard-right extremist in the midterms to be the next secretary of state doesn’t mince words On 5 January, when Adrian Fontes will be inaugurated as the secretary of state of Arizona, there will be no luxuriating over his appointment, no glitzy made-for-media plans for the first 100 days.“I don’t have time for those kinds of things, I’ve just got to get to work,” he said.Conservative donors pour ‘dark money’ into case that could upend US voting lawRead moreThe sense of urgency is understandable. As secretary of state, Fontes will be responsible for overseeing all statewide elections in Arizona. The state found itself at the frontline of efforts to subvert democracy in the wake of Donald Trump’s lie that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him, with Republicans staging a widely derided “audit” of the count and attempting to send fake electors to Washington. That includes federal elections, and with them the 2024 presidential election in which Trump is attempting a comeback. Arizona counties are already preparing for the next battle for the White House, with primary elections to select the two main parties’ nominees only 15 months away.“It’s not that far away. We will have to work at lightning speed,” Fontes said in an interview with the Guardian from his campaign office in Scottsdale, outside the state capital, Phoenix.The US continues to confront the threat to democracy unleashed by Trump in a huge legal campaign after the 2020 presidential election to overturn his defeat and then 2021’s January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol.Fontes has more experience dealing with the crisis than most. In November’s midterm elections he fought against, and defeated, Mark Finchem, one of the most notorious election deniers – who was present at the Capitol on 6 January.The contest appeared at times to be unnervingly close, attracting national and international attention. In the end, however, Fontes won with a comfortable margin, taking 52% of the vote to Finchem’s 48%.“We won by about 120,000 votes – we put it away handily,” Fontes said.But the result is not grounds for complacency, Fontes believes. From his perspective, given the scale of the danger posed by Finchem and his ilk, the outcome should have been much clearer.“Our victory was more narrow than we would have liked. We should have won by 20 points, and sent a much stronger message. Nobody should sleep easy on the Maga fascist threat that still exists,” he said.“Maga fascist” is Fontes’ preferred terminology for “election deniers”. He uses the phrase liberally, referring to Donald Trump’s election slogan, “Make America Great Again” (Maga), which is used by opponents to indicate the former US president’s shrinking and increasingly rightwing base of loyal voters.It indicates how Fontes plans to shore up democracy in his new role as Arizona secretary of state.“I use the words ‘Maga fascists’ because it’s the truth,” he said. “These people are not Grand Old Party Republicans; they are Maga fascists. There is no reason for me to call them by anything other than what they are. If they feel a little sensitive about that, then maybe they ought to reconsider their position vis-a-vis American democracy and stop acting like fascists.”His remarks could be construed as hyperbole. But when it comes to the attack on democracy, Arizona and hyperbole go together; as one commentator put it, the state is the “final frontier” for election denialism.Trump’s playbook, in which legitimate elections are denounced as riddled with fraud when he or his anointed candidates do not win, was deployed again in the Arizona midterm election. Several counties controlled by Republicans delayed certification of their results despite being able to produce no evidence of any substantial problems.Kari Lake, the Trump-endorsed Republican candidate for governor who was defeated by the current secretary of state, Democrat Katie Hobbs, continues to refuse to concede. Lake filed a lawsuit in Maricopa, the state’s most populous county, challenging the certification and claiming to be the official winner.Lake’s suit was rejected by a court, and Democrats – and swing voters – have been heartened by Hobbs’ and Fontes’ victories as an important element in the national thwarting of the predicted Republican “red wave” and defeat of extremists in the midterms. Nevertheless, Fontes sees Lake’s dogged refusal to accept the outcome of a legitimate count as evidence of the ongoing peril the country is in.“We must stop pretending these guys have legitimate complaints, catering to their eggshell sensitivities. We must confront them again and again, treating them like the enemies to democracy that they are. We’re not name-calling, we’re truth-telling – there’s a big difference,” he said.Fontes served for four years in the 1990s in the US Marine Corps, and went on to a career as a lawyer and prosecutor. He first stood for public office in 2016, when he was voted in as recorder of Maricopa county, introducing him to the increasingly volatile world of Arizona’s election administration.Once in the hot seat as Arizona’s chief election official, Fontes intends to use his clout to press the state legislature to increase penalties against anyone threatening or intimidating election workers.During the midterm elections, self-appointed “monitors”, some wearing tactical gear, some visibly armed, staked out outdoor ballot drop boxes that were part of the legal means of casting a vote, sometimes taking pictures of voters’ car registration or asking them questions.“We had folks with long rifles and camouflage gear ‘guarding’ our ballot drop boxes,” Fontes said. “That was asinine. Those folks should be prosecuted as the domestic terrorists that they are.”Any attempt at intimidating election workers should be severely dealt with, he said. “We need to be aggressive – not just assertive, but aggressive – in pursuing these threats, because elections are the gold thread that holds the whole fabric of our society together. We’ve got to defend them fiercely.”TopicsArizonaThe fight for democracyDemocratsUS midterm elections 2022US politicsfeaturesReuse this content More

2024 Veepstakes: who will Donald Trump choose as his running mate?From familiar faces to breakout Republican stars, 10 contenders for Trump’s vice-presidential pick for his third White House run Donald Trump, the former US president, is making a third consecutive run for the White House. But there is a job vacancy this time: his running mate. No one thinks it will be former vice-president Mike Pence after the pair fell out over the 2020 election and January 6 insurrection. Trump, a 76-year-old straight, white man who needs to broaden his appeal, might look to a person of colour, a woman or a young person for 2024 (or all of the above) – or he might not. Here are 10 potential contenders:Tucker CarlsonThe Fox News host turned up last summer in Iowa, which gets the first say in the Republican presidential nominating process, prompting speculation about his political ambitions. He is a Trump kindred spirit who goads liberals, appeases Russian president Vladimir Putin and promotes the far-right “great replacement” theory that western elites are importing immigrant voters to supplant white people. But Carlson would be sure to turn off moderates and independents.Ron DeSantisSome “Make America Great Again” voters torn between the authentic original and his upstart rival want to see them join forces on a dream Maga ticket. Florida governor DeSantis once made a campaign ad in which he read Trump’s book about getting rich, The Art of the Deal, to one of his children and encouraged them to “build the wall” along the US-Mexico border by stacking toy bricks. But Trump has now branded him “Ron DeSanctimonious” and the pair seem too similar to run together: less yin and yang than yin and yin.Tulsi GabbardThe former Democratic congresswoman and presidential candidate is attempting to launch a new career as a rightwing media personality. She campaigned for election-denier Kari Lake and other Republicans in the midterm elections. Her provocative challenges to western orthodoxy towards dictators such as Putin and Syria’s Bashar al-Assad are likely to strike a chord with Trump. He may also decide he needs a female running mate to make himself less toxic to suburban women.Marjorie Taylor GreeneThe far-right congresswoman from Georgia personifies the age of Trumpism with racist, antisemitic and Islamophobic statements, indications of support for political violence and wild conspiracy theories such as the claim that a Jewish-controlled space laser started a California wildfire. She recently suggested that, if she had led the January 6 attack on the US Capitol, the mob would have been armed and victorious in its efforts to prevent the certification of Joe Biden’s 2020 victory (she later claimed this was “sarcasm”). She has little experience but her pugnacious campaigning style is right up Trump’s street.Nikki HaleyThe former South Carolina governor was Trump’s first ambassador to the United Nations. She turned against him over the January 6 insurrection but, like many other Republicans, found it easy to forgive him. She also proved willing to campaign for Georgia Senate nominee Herschel Walker despite his glaring incompetence and scandals. Trump’s campaign, meanwhile, might regard the daughter of Sikh immigrants from India as the perfect foil to charges of sexism and racism.Kari LakeShe was the breakout Republican star of the midterms all the way until election day – when she lost the race for governor of Arizona. The charismatic former TV anchor was endorsed by Trump and found a way to repeat his election lies while sounding almost credible. Despite his distaste for losers, Trump has twice welcomed Lake to his Mar-a-Lago Club in Florida since her defeat. It would be no great surprise to hear him say she is straight from “central casting”.Kristi NoemThe governor of South Dakota has become another familiar face on the conservative conference and media circuit, railing against targets such as coronavirus pandemic lockdowns and the Chinese Communist party. In July, she told CNN she would support Trump in 2024 and “would be shocked if he asked” her to be his running mate. Noem has experience in elected office and could give Trump a new shot at credibility among Christians, rural Americans and women.Sarah SandersShe was unswervingly loyal as Trump’s White House press secretary, championing his agenda and insisting that he was misunderstood by critics. Last month she was elected as governor of Arkansas, following in the footsteps of her father, Mike Huckabee, creator of The Kids Guide to President Trump. Sanders and Huckabee, a former pastor, might help Trump shore up the Christian evangelical vote against potential challengers such as Pence. Tim ScottThe South Carolina senator is said to be eyeing his own run for the presidency. The Trump campaign might regard Scott as a compelling choice, hoping that he would neutralise accusations of racism and rally “Blacks for Trump”. He told the Republican national convention in 2020 that his grandfather “suffered the indignity of being forced out of school as a third-grader to pick cotton and never learned to read or write … Our family went from cotton to Congress in one lifetime.”Elise StefanikTrump prizes loyalty and few have been more loyal than congresswoman Elise Stefanik of New York, the number three Republican in the House of Representatives. Once a moderate, she staunchly defended the former president during his impeachments and declared this year: “I am ultra-Maga. And I’m proud of it.” Shrugging off disappointing midterm results, she was quick to endorse Trump for 2024. He has described her as “a star” and said: “She looks like good talent.”TopicsDonald TrumpRepublicansRon DeSantisUS elections 2024US politicsfeaturesReuse this content More

Republican says he ‘fears for the future’ if Trump is not charged over Jan 6 riotAdam Kinzinger said in an interview the former president should be charged with conspiracy over the insurrection Republican congressman Adam Kinzinger said in an interview on Sunday that he believes the Department of Justice “will do the right thing” and bring criminal charges against Donald Trump for his role in the attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.“I think he will be charged, and I frankly think he should be,” Kinzinger told CNN’s State of Union political talk show on Sunday morning.Last month, the House select committee investigating the attack, on which Kinzinger sits, voted to refer the former president to the justice department on charges of obstruction of an official proceeding, conspiracy to defraud the US, conspiracy to make a false statement and “incite”, “assist” or “aid or comfort” an insurrection.January 6 report review: 845 pages, countless crimes, one simple truth – Trump did itRead moreThe recommendations relate to the former US president’s role in encouraging the insurrection at the US Capitol in Washington DC as thousands of his extremist supporters sought to prevent the certification by Congress of Joe Biden’s victory over Trump in the 2020 presidential election.“If he is not guilty of a crime, then I frankly fear for the future of this country because now every future president can say, ‘Hey, here’s the bar.’ And the bar is, do everything you can to stay in power,” Kinzinger said.Kinzinger was one of two Republicans on the Democratic-led January 6 select committee, which wrapped up its investigation prior to dissolving and the new Congress beginning on Tuesday, when Republicans will assume the majority in the House following last November’s midterm elections.Kinzinger led one of the committee’s sessions last June that focussed on pressure allegedly placed on the justice department by Trump or his allies as he strove to persuade them to overturn his 2020 defeat by falsely claiming the election was blighted by widespread fraud.He has represented Illinois in the House of Representatives since 2011 and was speaking following the last sessions held by the committee and on the eve of his departure from Congress.Kinzinger also slammed Republican leaders for maintaining Trump’s influence on the US political landscape, by playing down the significance of the Capitol attack and Trump’s incitement of the riot, and often backing Trump’s lies about elections being rigged in favor of Democrats.He blamed powerful House minority leader Kevin McCarthy, who is currently battling to become the new speaker of the House, as the reason the former president remains such a force in politics.“He is the reason Donald Trump is still a factor,” Kinzinger said. “He is the reason that some of the crazy elements of the House still exist.”McCarthy, he said, had visited Trump at his Mar-a-Lago Florida residence shortly after the January 6 insurrection. That show of mutual support at a pivotal moment “resurrected” Trump’s relevance in politics, strengthening the right. In McCarthy making the trip, he said, Republicans went from not knowing what to do about Trump to “begrudgingly” defending him.“Donald Trump should consider Kevin McCarthy his best friend because Donald Trump is alive today politically because of Kevin McCarthy,” Kinzinger added.He noted that Senate then-majority leader Mitch McConnell and other Senate Republicans failed to convict Trump during his historic second impeachment for inciting insurrection. “The Republican party is not the future of this country unless it corrects,” he said. “If you think of a successful America in 20 years, that’s not going to be an America based on what Marjorie Taylor Greene wants or … some of these radicals want,” he added, referring to the far-right Georgia congresswoman, who is sympathetic to the QAnon conspiracy theory, and her ilk.As the 2024 presidential election gradually takes shape, Kinzinger said he was fearful for American democracy, given that “maybe a third of the country” believes the last election was stolen from Trump.The congressman said it was not his intention to run for the Republican presidential nomination. But he conceded that it would be “fun” to run against Trump, who in November declared his 2024 candidacy.“He stands up and just lies. He tells untruths. People love it because it’s entertaining but eventually people have a concern for their country. So, no, my intention is not to run in 2024. But it would be fun,” he said.TopicsRepublicansUS Capitol attackDonald TrumpJanuary 6 hearingsUS politicsnewsReuse this content More