Biden administration

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden isn’t serious about forgiving student debt. ‘Means-testing’ is a con | David Sirota

      by

      Biden isn’t serious about forgiving student debt. ‘Means-testing’ is a conDavid Sirota and Andrew PerezThe Biden administration’s proposal is cynicism masquerading as populism – and it will enrage everyone and hurt the Democrats’ electoral chances During the 2020 Democratic primary, Pete Buttigieg’s personal ambition led him to poison the conversation about education in America. Desperate for a contrast point with his rivals, the son of a private university professor aired ads blasting the idea of tuition-free college because he said it would make higher education “free even for the kids of millionaires.”The attack line, borrowed from former secretary of state Hillary Clinton, was cynicism masquerading as populism. It was an attempt to limit the financial and political benefits of a proposal to make college free. Worse, it was disguised as a brave stand against the oligarchs bankrolling Buttigieg’s campaign, even though it actually wasn’t – almost no rich scions would benefit from free college.Buttigieg and copycats like Amy Klobuchar were pushing a larger lie. Call it the means-testing con – the idea that social programs should not be universal, and should instead only be available to those who fall below a certain income level. It is a concept eroding national unity and being carried forward by wealthy pundits and a Democratic party that has discarded the lessons of its own universalist triumphs like social security, Medicare and the GI Bill.This week the Biden administration tore a page from Buttigieg’s book. The White House leaked that it is considering finally following through on Joe Biden’s promise to cancel some student debt – but not the $50,000 pushed by congressional Democrats, and only for those below an income threshold.In trial-ballooning the college debt relief proposal, the president is boosting the media-manufactured fiction that real, universal college debt relief would mostly help rich Ivy League kids – even though data from the Roosevelt Institute conclusively proves that canceling student debt “would provide more benefits to those with fewer economic resources and could play a critical role in addressing the racial wealth gap and building the Black middle class”.As the report points out: “People from wealthy backgrounds (and their parents) rarely use student loans to pay for college.”But setting aside how the media-driven discourse omits those inconvenient facts, what’s noteworthy here is the underlying principle.This latest discussion of means-testing follows Biden and congressional Democrats pushing to substantially limit eligibility for Covid-19 survival checks and the expanded child tax credit. Taken together, it suggests that Democrats’ zeal for means-testing is no anomaly – it is a deeply held ideology that is both dangerous for the party’s electoral prospects and for the country’s fraying social contract.The superficial appeal of means-testing is obvious: it promises to prevent giving even more public money to rich people who don’t need it.But in practice, means-testing is a way to take simple universal programs and make them complicated and inaccessible. Calculating exact income levels and then proving them for eligibility means reams of red tape for both the potential beneficiary and a government bureaucracy that must be created to process that paperwork.Data from the food stamp and Medicaid programs illustrate how means-testing creates brutal time and administrative barriers to benefits, which reduce payouts to eligible populations. In the case of means-testing student debt relief, those barriers may end up wholly excluding large swaths of working-class debtors.This is a feature, not a bug – it is means-testers’ unstated objective. They want to limit benefits for the working class, but not admit that’s their goal.Universal programs like social security and Medicare were what we once defined as “society” or “civilization”. They may be derided as “entitlements”, but the reason they have (so far) survived for so long is because their universality makes them wildly successful in their missions and more difficult to demonize. Their universality also precludes austerians from otherizing and disparaging the programs’ recipients.Means-testing destroys that potential unity. It may initially poll well, but it turns “entitlements” into complicated “welfare” programs only for certain groups, which then makes those programs less popular and makes the beneficiaries easy scapegoats for political opportunists. Think of Ronald Reagan’s “welfare queen” trope vilifying recipients of means-tested food stamps.Now sure, billionaires are eligible for social security and Medicare, and their kids are eligible for free K-12 education – and that aristocracy doesn’t need that help. But when those programs were created, we accepted that rich people being granted access to those programs along with everyone else was the relatively small price to pay for simplicity, universalism and the attendant national unity that comes with it.Not surprisingly, Democrats’ creation of popular universalist programs coincided with the most electorally successful era in the party’s history.Equally unsurprising: the shift to fake means-test populism has coincided with rising popular hatred of liberal technocrats and the Democratic party they control.What is surprising is that Republicans may be starting to understand all this better than Democrats.For instance, Donald Trump’s signature spending legislation offered direct, non-means-tested aid to small businesses during the pandemic. The former president touted a plan to just pay hospital bills for Covid patients who didn’t have coverage. The programs were hardly perfect, but they were straightforward, universal, relatively successful and extremely popular because they embodied a powerful principle: keep it simple, stupid.When it comes to student debt relief, there’s a rare chance for Democrats to also embrace simplicity – and prevent Republicans from outflanking them.More specifically, they can use the student debt crisis to finally return to their universalist roots – and they don’t have to skimp and provide merely $10,000 worth of relief.Biden could simply send out a one-page letter to every student borrower telling them that their federal student debt is now $0.Yes, Republican lawmakers would try to block it and affluent pundits would tweet-cry about it to each other.But amid all that elite whining and couch-fainting, Democrats would be launching a battle against an immoral system of education debt – and directly helping 40 million voters ahead of a midterm election.It’s so easy and simple – which is probably why they won’t do it.
      David Sirota is a Guardian US columnist and an award-winning investigative journalist. He is an editor-at-large at Jacobin, and the founder of the Lever. He served as Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign speechwriter
      Andrew Perez is a senior editor at The Lever and a co-founder of the Democratic Policy Center
      A version of this piece was first published in the Lever, a reader-supported investigative news outlet
      TopicsUS student debtOpinionUS politicsBiden administrationJoe BidenDemocratsUS CongressUS student financecommentReuse this content More

    • 200 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Unless Democrats start fighting like they mean it, they’re going to lose Congress | Steve Phillips

      by

      Unless Democrats start fighting like they mean it, they’re going to lose CongressSteve PhillipsWe are engaged in an existential battle over the identity of this nation. The Biden administration’s tepid midterm strategy is failing The surest way to lose a battle is to not fight. Despite this fairly obvious logic, President Joe Biden and too many Democrats seem to have adopted a political strategy for the midterm elections of avoiding as many fights as possible. This path-of-least-resistance approach has resulted in plummeting presidential approval numbers and will further plunge the party off the cliff in the midterms if Democrats do not quickly reverse course. To turn things around, Biden should leap into the fundamental fights over what are called “culture wars” – and he should do so with gusto.It is unmistakably clear that we are engaged in an existential battle over the very identity of this nation. Is the United States of America primarily a straight, white, cisgender, male, Christian country, or is it a multiracial and multicultural democracy? The adherents of the former view are waging war with glee and abandon. From rightwing state legislatures to the supreme court, they are holding nothing back in attacking voting by people of color, the rights of the LGBTQ+ community, multicultural education, reproductive freedom and commonsense public health protections during a global pandemic, to name just a few fronts in this fight.With the heartening exception of the attempts to defend Roe v Wade, Democrats, for their part, are shying away from almost all of these fights beyond tepid words of disapproval, hand-wringing, and low-profile and lethargic counter-measures such as lawsuits and investigations. The result is a sharp decline in enthusiasm among the people who put the White House and Congress in Democratic hands, contributing significantly to the drop in polling approval numbers. Support among people of color has dropped 24% from its highs of last year. At this pace, Democrats will in fact lose the midterm elections, but it does not need to be so, and they can absolutely turn things around if they engage the fight.The misguided strategy that got us here results from bad math and electoral myopia by Democratic strategists and advisers. Despite an avalanche of empirical data, Democrats still do not believe that the majority of people are on their side. Yet with one exception (in 2004), the Democratic nominee has won the popular vote in every presidential election since 1992. The progressive trend is only accelerating as more and more young people – the majority of whom are people of color or white progressives – turn 18 every day. Every eight seconds, someone turns 18 and becomes eligible to vote.Democrats are so obsessed with wooing conservative white working-class voters that they fail to see the ever-increasing ranks of people of color who can strengthen their political hand. I call this phenomenon being “blinded by the white”. Fear of alienating an elusive white constituency has paralyzed a party in desperate need of decisive and bold action.The very fact that Democrats control the executive and legislative branches is proof that the worldview that America is and should be a multiracial nation enjoys majority support. In high-turnout elections such as presidential races, the majority usually supports the Democrat. The question for the midterms is how much of that majority will be sufficiently motivated to come back out and vote. The reason that the party that controls the White House typically fares poorly in midterm elections is that that party’s supporters tend to get complacent and do not see the urgent need to turn out and vote again. That is why it’s essential to engage in the fight. The failure to fight is dispiriting to one’s supporters and a significant contributor to falling polling numbers.Biden’s advisers believe that engaging in fights will harm their popularity, but the painful reality is that there is not much popularity left to harm. By throwing himself into the raging battles with gusto, he can reverse his polling descent and save Democratic control of Congress. Here are four examples of how he can send a strong signal to the electorate and inspire his supporters to mobilize to vote this fall.Reproductive freedom summit: The White House should host a strategy summit with leaders in the reproductive rights movement and women’s healthcare field to discuss ways to fight back on restrictive legislation and expand access to healthcare for all women.Say gay conference: Biden should organize a presidential “We Say Gay” conference in Florida as an in-your-face rebuttal to the homophobic legislation by Florida’s governor and legislature. In fact, he could hold the conference in Disneyworld, which is the target of punitive measures by the state government for its gay-friendly policies. That would have the added advantage of engaging the business community in the fight for equality.Read banned books: Biden should go to Texas, where nearly 1 million eligible African Americans didn’t vote in 2020, and hold an event at a school where he reads to students from Toni Morrison’s Bluest Eye, a book about Black identity. Multiple school districts in Texas have banned Morrison’s books, and Biden would send a strong signal by reading from the book and even bringing copies to hand out to students.Go door-to-door with voter registration groups: In the face of all of the voter suppression legislation sweeping the south and south-west, Biden should show his solidarity with groups working to expand democracy and encourage Americans to register to vote. He can go to Phoenix, where the Arizona legislature is trying to make it harder to vote, and go precinct-walking with members of a Latino-led, community-based organization such as Lucha. He could couple that with a speech at a local high school where he encourages senior-year students to come forward and register on the spot.These are just a few examples of how Biden could use his bully pulpit to lead the fight to make America the multiracial democracy that the majority of people want it to be. Such high-profile and, yes, controversial initiatives are both the right thing to do and the smart strategic step. They will inspire and mobilize the base, redefine the nature of the fight so that Democrats are on the offensive, and solidify Biden’s role as a strong and resolute leader. If he can find the courage to take such steps, Biden will reshape the political debate and put the Democrats on the path to victory in the midterms.
      Steve Phillips is a Guardian columnist, host of the Democracy in Color podcast and author of the forthcoming book How We Win the Civil War
      TopicsUS politicsOpinionDemocratsJoe BidenBiden administrationRoe v WadecommentReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Schumer announces Senate abortion rights vote: ‘America will be watching’ – as it happened

      by

      US politics liveUS politicsSchumer announces Senate abortion rights vote: ‘America will be watching’ – as it happened
      Measure has next to no chance of passing in divided chamber
      Biden names Karine Jean-Pierre new White House press secretary
      Supreme court justice Alito bails on senior judges’ conference
      ‘Do something’: Democrats struggle to rise to abortion challenge
      Russia-Ukraine war – latest updates
      Sign up to receive First Thing – our daily briefing by email
       Updated 1h agoRichard LuscombeThu 5 May 2022 16.14 EDTFirst published on Thu 5 May 2022 09.26 EDT Show key events onlyLive feedShow key events onlyFrom More

    • 150 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden warns LGBTQ+ children could be next target of Republican ‘Maga crowd’

      by

      Biden warns LGBTQ+ children could be next target of Republican ‘Maga crowd’President warns of new attacks by Trump-dominated political party after supreme court ruling draft leak on abortion Joe Biden has warned of new attacks on civil rights as the supreme court prepares to strike down the right to abortion, telling reporters at the White House that LGBTQ+ children could be the next targets of a Trump-dominated Republican party he called “this Maga crowd” and “the most extreme political organisation … in recent American history”.Contraception could come under fire next if Roe v Wade is overturnedRead more“What happens,” the president asked, if “a state changes the law saying that children who are LGBTQ can’t be in classrooms with other children? Is that legit under the way the decision is written?”Biden’s remarks, at the end of a brief session on deficit reduction, referred to a leaked draft of a ruling by Justice Samuel Alito. One of six conservatives on the supreme court, Alito was writing on a Mississippi case which aims to overturn both Roe v Wade, the 1973 ruling which guaranteed the right to abortion, and Casey v Planned Parenthood from 1992, which buttressed it.The Mississippi case is expected to be resolved in June. The leak of the draft ruling to Politico, which reported that four other conservatives on the nine-justice court supported it, caused a storm of controversy and anger.In a statement and remarks on Tuesday, Biden condemned Alito’s reasoning and intentions and called for legislation to codify Roe into law.But the president has faced criticism within his own party for seeming reluctant to contemplate reform such legislation would require, namely abolishing the Senate filibuster, the rule that requires 60 votes for most bills to pass.A lifelong Catholic who nonetheless supports a woman’s right to choose, Biden has been eclipsed as a strong voice against the attack on abortion rights by high-profile Democratic women including the Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren, who spoke angrily outside the court on Tuesday, and the vice-president, Kamala Harris.Harris’s struggles as vice-president have been widely reported but on Tuesday night, speaking to the Emily’s List advocacy group in Washington, she seemed to hit her stride.The former prosecutor and California senator said: “Those Republican leaders who are trying to weaponise the use of the law against women. Well, we say, ‘How dare they?’“How dare they tell a woman what she can do and cannot do with her own body? How dare they? How dare they try to stop her from determining her own future? How dare they try to deny women their rights and their freedoms?’”She asked: “Which party wants to expand our rights? And which party wants to restrict them? It has never been more clear. Which party wants to lead us forward? And which party wants to push us back? You know, some Republican leaders, they want to take us back to a time before Roe v Wade.”At the White House on Wednesday, Biden took brief questions. He was asked about sanctions on Russia over the invasion of Ukraine and about “the next step on abortion once this case gets settled”.“As I said when this hit, as I was getting on the plane to go down to Alabama, this is about a lot more than abortion,” he said. “I hadn’t read the whole opinion at that time.”The 79-year-old president then gave a lengthy, somewhat rambling answer about “the debate with Robert Bork”. Bork was nominated to the supreme court by Ronald Reagan in 1987. Biden was then chair of the Senate judiciary committee. The nomination failed.US supreme court justices on abortion – what they’ve said and how they’ve votedRead moreAt the White House, Biden said Bork “believed the only reason you had any inherent rights was because the government gave them to you”, a stance with which Biden said he disagreed.Biden also said Bork had opposed Griswold v Connecticut, the 1965 case which established the right to contraception – a right many on the left fear may be left open to rightwing attack once Roe, another case concerning privacy, has been overturned.In her speech the previous night, Harris said: “At its core, Roe recognises the fundamental right to privacy. Think about that for a minute. When the right to privacy is attacked, anyone in our country may face a future where the government can interfere in their personal decisions. Not just women. Anyone.”The vice-president also said: “Let us fight for our country and for the principles upon which it was founded, and let us fight with everything we have got.”TopicsLGBT rightsJoe BidenBiden administrationUS politicsAbortionUS supreme courtnewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Approval for Biden Ukraine aid request likely after Pelosi Kyiv visit, McCaul says

      by

      Approval for Biden Ukraine aid request likely after Pelosi Kyiv visit, McCaul saysRepublican says House likely to approve $33bn but also says Democrats have not acted quickly enough

      Russia-Ukraine war: latest updates
      Joe Biden’s $33bn request to Congress for more aid for Ukraine is likely to receive swift approval from lawmakers, a senior Republican said on Sunday, as the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, made a surprise visit to the war-riven country.Scholz defends Ukraine policy as criticism mounts in Germany Read moreThe president on Thursday had asked for the money for military and humanitarian support for Ukraine as it fights to repulse the Russian invasion now in its third month.Michael McCaul, a Texas Republican and ranking member of the House foreign affairs committee, went on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulous and said he expected the chamber would look favorably on the request in the coming weeks.McCaul’s comments came while Pelosi led a congressional delegation to Kyiv to meet the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy, and the House speaker promised on behalf of the US: “We are here until victory is won.”McCaul was asked if he believed Congress would quickly pass Biden’s requested package, which includes $20bn in military aid, $8.5bn in economic aid to Kyiv and $3bn in humanitarian relief.“Yes, I do,” McCaul said. “Time is of the essence. The next two to three weeks are going to be very pivotal and very decisive in this war. And I don’t think we have a lot of time to waste. I wish we had [Biden’s request] a little bit sooner, but we have it now.”McCaul added that he believed Republicans, who have supported the Democratic president’s previous financial requests for Ukraine, might have acted more expediently if they held the House majority.The chamber is not sitting during the coming week while members tend to in-district affairs, delaying debate and a vote on the aid package.“If I were speaker for a day, I’d call Congress back into session, back into work,” he said.“Every day we don’t send them more weapons is a day where more people will be killed and a day where they could lose this war. I think they can win it. But we have to give them the tools to do it.”Meanwhile, Bob Menendez, the Democratic New Jersey senator who chairs the upper chamber’s foreign relations committee, echoed Pelosi’s pledge that the US would continue to support Ukraine financially.“We will do what it takes to see Ukraine win because it’s not just about Ukraine, it’s about the international order,” he said on NBC’s Meet the Press.“If Ukraine does not win, if [Russia’s president Vladimir] Putin can ultimately not only succeed in the Donbas but then be emboldened to go further, if he strikes a country under our treaty obligations with Nato, then we would be directly engaged.“So stopping Russia from getting to that point is of critical interest to us, as well as the world, so we don’t have to send our sons and daughters into battle. That ability not to have to send our sons and daughters into battle is priceless.”Menendez said that the US and its allies needed to “keep our eye on the ball” over a possible Russian move into Moldova’s breakaway region of Transnistria, where explosions were heard in recent days.“I think that the Ukrainians care about what’s going to happen in Transnistria, because it’s another attack point against Ukraine,” he said.“We need to keep our eye on the ball. And that is about helping Ukraine and Ukrainians ultimately being able to defeat the butcher of Moscow. If we do that, the world will be safer. The international order will be preserved, and others who are looking at what is happening in Ukraine will have to think twice.”Samantha Power, administrator of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), laid out the urgent need for Congress to approve the package during an interview on CBS’s Face the Nation.“There are vast swaths of Ukraine that have been newly liberated by Ukrainian forces, where there is desperate need, everything from demining to trauma kits to food assistance, since markets are not back up and running,” she said, noting that from previously approved drawdowns “assistance is flowing”.But she said that 40 million people could be pushed into poverty, and demands for help would only grow.“We’re already spending some of that money, but the burn rate is very, very high as prices spiral inside Ukraine and outside Ukraine,” Power said. “So that’s why this supplemental is so important. It entails $3bn of humanitarian assistance to meet those global needs, which are famine-level, acute malnutrition needs.“And it includes very significant direct budget support for the government of Ukraine, because we want to ensure the government can continue providing services for its people.”“Putin would like nothing more than the government of Ukraine to go bankrupt and not be able to cater to the needs of the people. We can’t let that happen.”TopicsUS CongressRepublicansJoe BidenBiden administrationUS politicsUkraineNancy PelosinewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden’s top border official not worried about Republican impeachment threats

      by

      Biden’s top border official not worried about Republican impeachment threatsHomeland security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas forging ahead with plans to ease Covid-related immigration restrictions Joe Biden’s top border official said on Sunday he was unconcerned by threats from the top House Republican that the GOP could impeach him if it regains the majority after the midterm elections, as the Biden administration forges ahead with plans to ease a coronavirus-related immigration restriction.Republicans return to politics of immigration as midterm strategyRead moreSpeaking on CNN’s State of the Union, Alejandro Mayorkas, the homeland security secretary, addressed the remarks from the House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy.“I am incredibly proud to work with 250,000 dedicated and talented personnel and I look forward to continuing to do so,” Mayorkas said.“I am not [concerned about the possibility of impeachment] – I am focused on mission and supporting our incredible workforce.”Republicans are building a key part of their midterm strategy around a byzantine public health order invoked by Donald Trump’s administration in March 2020 to ostensibly control the spread of Covid-19 along the border with Mexico.Faced with pressure from immigration advocates and progressives, the Biden administration wants to lift the so-called title 42 restriction, which allows authorities to immediately expel migrants seeking entry instead of allowing them to remain while their claim for asylum is reviewed.But Republicans, and even some Democrats, argue that the federal government is not prepared for the projected increase in migrants making asylum claims if title 42 is lifted on 23 May as planned.The homeland security department anticipates as many as 18,000 migrants daily at the border in the wake of elimination of Title 42, up from 6,000.On Sunday, Mayorkas acknowledged “that is going to be an extraordinary strain on our system”. He also declined an opportunity to say whether or not he believed title 42 should remain, saying he was “not a public health expert” but rather an enforcer of laws.Nonetheless, Mayorkas insisted the administration was prepared for the consequences of lifting title 42 and expecting cooperation from Mexico and other countries south of the border.“We didn’t just start this,” Mayorkas said, echoing his message in more than eight hours of testimony on Capitol Hill over two days recently. “We’ve been doing it for months.”McCarthy invoked Mayorkas’s name during a trip to the border last month, as Republicans sought to tie the title 42 debate to election themes such as crime and voter fraud.Trump accepted ‘some responsibility’ for Capitol attack, McCarthy audio revealsRead moreThe top Republican in the House had just made headlines over audio recordings of him telling other lawmakers in his party he thought Trump should be impeached – if not resign – over the Capitol attack.McCarthy tried to deny he ever said any of that – before the release of the audio recordings.At the border, McCarthy said it was Mayorkas who should worry about impeachment if the Republicans flip Congress in the midterm elections, unless the homeland security secretary kept title 42 in place.“This is his moment in time to do his job,” McCarthy said. “But at any time if someone is derelict in their job, there is always the option of impeaching somebody.”Mayorkas also addressed criticisms aimed at him over his office’s recent creation of a so-called misinformation governing board tasked with counteracting misleading information about the border, whether from political enemies of the US or smugglers trying to convince migrants to hire them for help crossing into the country despite not having permission.Some lawmakers, mainly Republicans, have argued that the board could stifle free speech. But Mayorkas said the board would simply issue recommendations on how best to combat misrepresentations that in the past have fueled sudden surges of travel to the border and overwhelmed authorities there.“Those criticisms are precisely the opposite of what this small working group … will do,” Mayorkas said.TopicsUS immigrationUS politicsUS midterm elections 2022Biden administrationUS domestic policyUS CongressnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Rand Paul promises Covid review if Republicans retake Senate in midterms

      by

      Rand Paul promises Covid review if Republicans retake Senate in midtermsKentucky senator who has clashed publicly with Dr Anthony Fauci champions lab leak theory in remarks at rally The Kentucky senator Rand Paul promised on Saturday to wage a vigorous review into the origins of the coronavirus if Republicans retake the Senate and he lands a committee chairmanship.This Will Not Pass review: Trump-Biden blockbuster is dire reading for DemocratsRead moreSpeaking to supporters at a campaign rally, the senator denounced what he sees as government overreach in response to Covid-19. He applauded a recent judge’s order that voided the federal mask mandate on planes and trains and in travel hubs.“Last week I was on an airplane for the first time in two years and didn’t have to wear a mask,” he said, drawing cheers. “And you know what I saw in the airport? I saw at least 97% of the other free individuals not wearing masks.”Paul has clashed repeatedly with Dr Anthony Fauci, the top US infectious disease expert, over government policies and the origins of the virus.Paul, who is seeking a third term, said he was in line to assume a committee chairmanship if the GOP wins Senate control. The Senate has a 50-50 split, with the vice-president, Kamala Harris, the tie-breaking vote.“When we take over in November, I will be chairman of a committee and I will have subpoena power,” Paul said. “And we will get to the bottom of where this virus came from.”The senator, an ophthalmologist before politics, continued to offer his theory about the origins of the virus.02:49“If you look at the evidence, overwhelmingly, not 100%, but overwhelmingly the evidence points to this virus being a leak from a lab,” Paul said.Many US conservatives have accused Chinese scientists of developing Covid-19 in a lab and allowing it to leak.US intelligence agencies remain divided on the origins of the coronavirus but believe China did not know about the virus before the start of the global pandemic, according a Biden-ordered review released last summer.The scientific consensus remains that the virus most likely migrated from animals. So-called “spillover events” occur in nature and there are at least two coronaviruses that evolved in bats and caused human epidemics, SARS1 and MERS.At the Kentucky rally, the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, the state’s senior senator, also pointed to Paul’s opportunity to lead a committee. If that occurs, he said, Paul would become chairman of “one of the most important committees in the Senate – in charge of health, education, labor and pensions”.McConnell was upbeat about Republican prospects in November.“I’ve never seen a better environment for us than this year,” said McConnell, who is in line to again become majority leader.The rally featured other prominent Kentucky Republicans, including several considering running for governor in 2023, when Andy Beshear, a Democrat, will seek a second term.In his speech, Paul railed against socialism, saying it would encroach on individual liberties. The senator was first elected to the Senate in the Tea Party wave of 2010.02:21“When President Trump said he wanted to ‘Make America Great Again’, I said, ‘Amen,’” Paul said. “But let’s understand what made America great in the first place, and that’s freedom, constitutionally guaranteed liberty.”Charles Booker is by far the best known Democrats seeking their party’s nomination for Paul’s seat in the 17 May primary. Paul is being challenged by several little-known candidates. A general election campaign between Paul and Booker would be a battle between candidates with starkly different philosophies.Booker, a Black former state lawmaker, narrowly lost a bid for the Democratic nomination in 2020. He is a progressive who touts Medicare for all, anti-poverty programs, a clean-energy agenda and criminal justice changes.Paul, a former presidential candidate, has accumulated a massive fundraising advantage.Kentucky has not elected a Democrat to the US Senate since Wendell Ford in 1992.TopicsRepublicansRand PaulUS midterm elections 2022CoronavirusUS politicsDemocratsAnthony FaucinewsReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Republicans return to politics of immigration as midterm strategy

      by

      Republicans return to politics of immigration as midterm strategyHearings with homeland security secretary about the US-Mexico border also revealed rifts within Democrat ranks Four years after Republicans embraced Donald Trump’s nativist and often racist playbook in an attempt to keep control of Congress, the party is once again placing the volatile politics of immigration at the center of its midterm election strategy.Biden ends Trump-era asylum curbs amid border-region Democrat backlash Read moreFrom the US-Mexico border to the US Capitol, in hearing rooms and courtrooms, Republicans are hammering the issue. At the forefront of the debate is a once-obscure public health order invoked by the Trump administration in March 2020 ostensibly as a means for controlling the spread of the coronavirus along the south-western border.Seizing on a decision by the Biden administration to lift such “Title 42” border restrictions, Republicans have sought to paint Democrats as pursuing an extremist immigration agenda that they say has cost the nation its very sovereignty.The provocative and often misleading messaging campaign was on full display when Alejandro Mayorkas, the secretary of homeland security, testified on Capitol Hill.For more than eight hours, across two days, Republicans pelted Mayorkas with accusations and insults, demanding he accept the blame for what they described as dangerous and dire conditions along the 2,000-mile border with Mexico.“We’re all really border states now,” Congressman Steve Chabot of Ohio said darkly.In another tense exchange, Ken Buck of Colorado said his constituents believed Mayorkas was guilty of treason and deserved to be impeached – something conservatives have vowed to pursue if they win the House.“What you have just said – it is so profoundly offensive on so many different levels, in so many different regards,” Mayorkas responded, visibly upset. Mayorkas forcefully defended the administration’s handling of the border and said it was up to Congress to act.“We inherited a broken and dismantled system that is already under strain,” Mayorkas said. “It is not built to manage the current levels and types of migratory flows. Only Congress can fix this.”The hearings laid bare the tensions within Democratic ranks over Biden’s immigration actions, particularly over Title 42.For months, immigration advocates and progressives have been pressuring Biden to lift Title 42, which gives officials the authority to swiftly expel migrants trying to enter the US instead of allowing them to seek asylum and remain in the country while their claim is evaluated.“You’re essentially doing policymaking by crisis,” said Claudia Flores, an immigration policy expert at the left-leaning Center for American Progress thinktank. “And that’s just not effective.”As a matter of public policy, Flores said, it was dangerous to use a public health order to control immigration. Not only was the rule insufficient for addressing problems at the border, she added, but it had carried “grave humanitarian consequences” for asylum seekers.But some vulnerable Democrats have appealed to Biden to hold off on lifting the order, fearing it could be a political liability ahead of a difficult election cycle. Agreeing with Republicans, they have expressed concern that the administration lacks a comprehensive plan for dealing with the anticipated increase in migrants making asylum claims when the order is lifted in late May.“This is not good for Democrats in November,” the Texas congressman Henry Cuellar, a Democrat facing a progressive challenge for his border-district seat, told Fox News Digital.“You know, in talking with some of my Republican colleagues, they’re saying, ‘We can’t believe the White House is giving us this narrative. We can’t believe that they’re hurting Democrat candidates for the November election.’”In his testimony, Mayorkas argued that his department had a plan to handle the expected surge of migrants. He repeatedly directed lawmakers to a six-point plan, released in advance of the hearings, that outlined a more aggressive effort to enforce immigration laws after the public health rule is lifted. It also included efforts to partner with non-profits that help migrants in the US while their cases are processed and to work with countries across the region to address “root causes” of migration.“When the Title 42 public health order is lifted, we anticipate migration levels will increase, as smugglers will seek to take advantage of and profit from vulnerable migrants,” the memo stated.It did little to appease Republicans and some Democrats.“It’s clear to me that the federal government is not prepared – not even close,” Greg Stanton of Arizona, a border-state Democrat, said during the hearing.Biden has worked to reverse many hardline policies that were at the heart of Trump’s “zero tolerance” approach to immigration. The number of migrants attempting to cross the border has risen sharply.Biden has argued that the only way to address the migration is at the source – an ambitious plan that will probably take years to bear fruit. In the short term, his administration faces acute operational and political challenges.At a White House meeting last week, members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus urged the president to stand firm behind the decision to end the public health order.“Title 42 must end on 23 May,” the California congresswoman Nanette Barragán, a deputy chair of the CHC, said she told the president, while urging him to “not support legislation to extend the end-date”.With the prospects of legislative action dim ahead of the midterms, the caucus is urging Biden to use his executive authority to make good on some of his promises to Latino voters on immigration, the environment, healthcare and the economy. They have argued that it is both good policy and good politics, as Latino support for Democrats is waning amid concern over the economy and inflation.“After four years of traumatic, xenophobic and inhumane immigration policies being forced on our most vulnerable communities, we have a duty to deliver them the protection and support they and their families so desperately need,” the Democratic congressman Adriano Espaillat, of New York, said after the meeting.Fears over Title 42 are only one element of the Republicans’ messaging. Republicans have sought to tie illegal immigration to other potent themes like voter fraud and crime. Allegations of undocumented migrants voting in large numbers have been repeatedly disproved. Studies have found that migrants commit crime at lower rates than native-born citizens.Republicans have long used immigration as a political weapon – with mixed results. In 2018, they lost the House in a wave election fueled in part by fury over Trump’s hardline policies that separated migrant children from their parents. The same year they expanded control in the Senate.US immigration courts struggle amid understaffing and backlog of casesRead moreThe political winds have reversed. Republicans are heavily favored to take the House, and possibly the Senate. The national mood has soured on Biden and the Democrats as concerns over the economy and inflation deepen.But even as economic discontent dominates political debate, polling suggests immigration remains a pressing issue, particularly for Republicans. Four in 10 Americans, and nearly 70% of Republicans, say they worry a “great deal” about illegal immigration, according to a Gallup survey.During a tour of the border in Texas last week, the House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, chided a reporter for asking about his false claim that he never urged Trump to resign after the January 6 insurrection – comments captured by an audio recording.“After all this, that’s what you want to ask?” he said. “I don’t think that’s what the American people are asking. I think they want to know about what’s going to happen here and how we’re going to secure the border.”Democrats blame Republicans for whipping up fear while standing in the way of reform. It has been almost a decade since Congress seriously considered immigration reform, a bipartisan plan that was derailed by House conservatives.“Let me tell you why our Republican colleagues don’t want to do their job – why they won’t work with us or vote for any of the bills that we have brought forward in the House,” the Texas congresswoman Veronica Escobar said. “It’s because the status quo works for them.”“They love Title 42,” she said, arguing that it “helps them push this xenophobic rage machine that they believe will help them get elected and re-elected”.It is unclear how the administration plans to proceed if a court rules it cannot lift Title 42. Biden declined to say whether he would sign legislation delaying the removal, which is under consideration by a bipartisan group in Congress.Vanessa Cardenas, deputy director of America’s Voice, a pro-immigration group, said Democrats must be more aggressive in defending their vision for reform. Keeping Title 42, she said, would not only play into Republicans’ hands, but would be a major disappointment to voters, particularly Latino voters who helped Democrats win in 2018 and 2020.“In an election season where margins matter, in states like Arizona, Nevada and Georgia, where the presence and the vote of the Latino community can make a difference, it’s really important that Democrats are able to articulate a vision that is in contrast to the other side,” Cardenas said.Referring to Trump’s hardline adviser, she added: “A Stephen Miller-Lite approach to immigration is not going to motivate the base.”TopicsUS immigrationBiden administrationUS midterm elections 2022US politicsDemocratsRepublicansfeaturesReuse this content More