Biden, Joseph R Jr

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Texas Migrant Law Is Latest Test of America vs. Its States

      by

      The partisan gridlock gumming up Washington has prompted states controlled by one party to set off on their own.The face-off between Texas and the federal government over whether the state can enforce its own immigration policy reflects a broader and recurring feature of American politics: a number of hot-button issues have become proxy battles over who gets to decide.During the Trump administration, Democratic-run states like California and blue cities like New York waged legal fights over their right to pass sanctuary laws to protect migrants. Now, the conflict over whether Texas can arrest and deport migrants is just one part of a larger campaign that red states have directed at the Biden administration.A coalition of Republican state attorneys general has also gone to court to thwart the administration’s efforts to regulate methane emissions from oil and gas drilling, to block a program that allows humanitarian entry to migrants from specific countries, and to halt an effort to crack down on gun accessories, among others.The balance of power between the national government and states has been a source of tensions in the United States since its founding, leading to the Civil War. But in the 21st century, as partisan polarization has intensified, it has morphed into a new dynamic, with states controlled by the party opposed to the president regularly testing the boundaries.The political issues run the gamut — and include topics like abortion, gun control, same-sex marriage and even marijuana legalization — but the larger pattern is clear: Whenever one party wins control of the central government, the other party uses its control of various states to try to resist national policies.“We’re seeing stuff we’ve never seen in the modern era,” said Heather K. Gerken, the dean of Yale Law School who has written about contemporary federalism. “It’s really stunning what kind of proxy war is taking place. It’s all because the vicious partisanship that has long been a feature of Washington has now filtered down to the states.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Kennedy Family, Sans R.F.K. Jr., Poses With Biden at the White House

      by

      Under normal circumstances, a visit by the Kennedy family to the White House on St. Patrick’s Day — a storied political family with Irish roots, hosted by a president of Irish heritage — might not be particularly newsworthy. But this year, the gathering had an undertone of family drama and political repudiation. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is running an independent bid to supplant President Biden, breaking with the Democratic Party and with many members of his family, who have condemned his campaign as “dangerous.”They have also pointedly backed Mr. Biden. On Sunday, Kerry Kennedy — one of Mr. Kennedy’s sisters — posted a picture of the family on X at the White House with Mr. Biden. “President Biden, you make the world better,” she wrote. Mr. Biden responded to the post: “From one proud Irish family to another — it was good to have you all back at the White House.”Among the other Kennedy family members in attendance was Joseph P. Kennedy III, the U.S. special envoy to Northern Ireland. Robert F. Kennedy Jr’s presidential run has put him at odds with his family even as he repeatedly invokes their shared legacy on the campaign trail, and leans on Kennedy nostalgia. Mr. Kennedy, 70, an environmental lawyer, gained notoriety during the pandemic when his longstanding skepticism about vaccines and embrace of political conspiracy theories came to the fore.Mr. Kennedy had his own message for the Biden White House on St. Patrick’s Day: A complaint, shared in an email from his campaign Sunday morning, that his request for Secret Service protection had been once again denied. The Secret Service protects major candidates for president, but it is up to the homeland security secretary in consultation with a congressional panel to determine who qualifies. Mr. Kennedy, who is the son of the former attorney general and Senator Robert F. Kennedy and a nephew of former President John F. Kennedy, also appeared Sunday on The Volpe Report, a Pennsylvania public-access podcast, where he discussed the 60th anniversary of a speech his father made in Scranton — the birthplace of Mr. Biden. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Biden and Irish Leader Use St. Patrick’s Day Visit to Address Gaza

      by

      Prime Minister Leo Varadkar, at the White House, referred to his own country’s struggles when saying that “the Irish people have such empathy for the Palestinian people.”President Biden on Sunday used what is normally a festive St. Patrick’s Day celebration at the White House to acknowledge the growing international concern, including among the Irish, over the humanitarian situation of Palestinians amid Israel’s military action in Gaza.“The taoiseach and I agree about the urgent need to increase humanitarian aid in Gaza and get the cease-fire deal,” Mr. Biden said alongside Leo Varadkar, Ireland’s prime minister, or taoiseach, an outspoken critic of Israel’s war against Hamas in response to the Oct. 7 terrorist attack. As hundreds of Irish American leaders and government staff members applauded, Mr. Biden said that a two-state solution for Israel and the Palestinians was “the only path to lasting peace and security.”The celebration in the White House, with plenty of green dye, shamrocks and Guinness, is typically a chance for Mr. Biden to break from speeches about foreign policy and threats to American democracy to celebrate his Irish American heritage. But during his trip to the United States, Mr. Varadkar made clear that he would raise his concerns over the war in the Middle East with the American president.The prime minister in a way was speaking to a domestic audience back in Ireland, which, given its own history of resistance to British rule, is one of the more supportive European nations to Palestinians. Ireland was the first European Union nation to call for a Palestinian state and the last to permit the opening of a residential Israeli embassy.“Mr. President, as you know, the Irish people are deeply troubled about the catastrophe that’s unfolding before our eyes in Gaza, and when I travel the world, leaders often ask me why the Irish people have such empathy for the Palestinian people,” Mr. Varadkar said. “The answer is simple: We see our history in their eyes.”While Mr. Varadkar said that he supported the administration’s efforts to secure a deal for a temporary cease-fire in exchange for the release of hostages, he also directly called out Israel’s bombing tactics. While Mr. Biden has struck a sharper tone recently with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, the White House has said there are no plans to leverage military aid to Israel.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      What Really Causes Poor Performance in School

      by

      More from our inbox:Becoming a Republican to Vote Against TrumpCountering Propaganda From the Fossil Fuel Industry Wayne Miller/MagnumTo the Editor:Re “We’re Not Battling the School Issues That Matter,” by Nicholas Kristof (column, March 7):I completely agree with Mr. Kristof’s column. The situation is serious, not only for education but also for our embattled democracy.I would like to add some nuance. I have been working on a state-by-state analysis of the possible influence of racism, specifically anti-Black racism, on educational achievement.What I have found so far indicates that some children are taught quite well: those in private schools, of course; Asian American children (particularly those whose families are from India); white children of families prosperous enough to be ineligible for the National School Lunch Program; children of college-educated parents; and Hispanic children who are not English-language learners.Some students are in groups that are not likely to be taught to read effectively: Native Americans, children who are poor enough to be eligible for the National School Lunch Program and Black children.None of this will be news to Mr. Kristof. What is surprising to me is the sheer extent and arbitrary nature of the failure by school authorities. Almost everywhere that urban schools, in particular, are failing, socioeconomically similar children are being taught much more effectively in the nearest suburban districts.Part of the reason is money: Per-student expenditure is associated with educational achievement.But part of the problem — most of it — is a matter of administrative decisions: placing the best teachers in schools with the “best” students; equipping schools, in effect, in accordance with parental income; offering more gifted and talented classes to white students — all the perhaps unconscious manifestations of everyday racism.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 75 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      What Trump’s TikTok Flip-Flop Tells America

      by

      When the House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly last Wednesday to pass a bill that would require TikTok to divest its Chinese ownership or face an American ban, it provided a glimmer of hope in a dreary political time. This is exactly what a nation should do when it’s getting serious about the national security threat posed by the People’s Republic of China.It makes no strategic sense for America to permit one of its chief foreign adversaries to exercise control over an app that both vacuums up the personal information of its more than 150 million American users and gives that adversary the opportunity to shape and mold the information those users receive.Indeed, in one of the more astonishing public relations blunders in modern memory, TikTok made its critics’ case for them when it urged users to contact Congress to save the app. The resulting flood of angry calls demonstrated exactly how TikTok can trigger a public response and gave the lie to the idea that the app did not have clear (and essentially instantaneous) political influence.Moreover, the vote demonstrated that it’s still possible to forge something approaching a foreign policy consensus on at least some issues. When a threat becomes big enough — and obvious enough — the American government can still act.Or can it? The bill is now slowing down in the Senate, and there is real doubt whether it will pass. The app, after all, is phenomenally popular, and Congress is not often in the business of restricting popular things.But there’s another reason to question the bill’s prospects. And it not only threatens this particular piece of legislation, but also is yet another indication of the high stakes of the 2024 election: Donald Trump has abruptly flip-flopped from supporting the TikTok ban to opposing it — and that flip-flop is more important than most people realize.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Biden’s $53 Million February Haul Fuels Money Edge Over Trump

      by

      President Biden’s re-election campaign said on Sunday that it had raised more than $53 million in February together with the Democratic Party, an influx of cash that is expected to widen the Democrats’ cash advantage in a general-election contest against former President Donald J. Trump.Mr. Biden, the Democratic Party and their shared accounts now have $155 million cash on hand — up from $130 million at the end of January, his campaign said. The campaign credited strong support from small-dollar donors for its February fund-raising.So far in the race, Mr. Biden and the Democrats have built a substantial fund-raising advantage over Mr. Trump and the Republican National Committee, which reported around $40 million in cash on hand between them at the end of January. The Trump campaign has not released its February fund-raising figures but has said it also had its strongest month among small donors — topping the $22.3 million raised last August. Mr. Trump and the R.N.C. formed a formal joint fund-raising account only last week.“The fact that we have $155 million in cash on hand — which is 100 percent going to building out the campaign and focused on the six or seven states that are going to determine the outcome of this election — is just a huge competitive advantage,” Jeffrey Katzenberg, a co-chair of the Biden campaign, said in an interview.Mr. Trump has been schmoozing with donors at Mar-a-Lago, his private club and residence in Palm Beach, Fla., trying to lessen the financial disparity he faces against Mr. Biden. The former president is also confronting the financial pressure of his legal bills, which are being paid by one of his political action committees.Both campaigns must disclose details of their finances on March 20, with a more complete picture due on April 15.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 188 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Says Some Migrants Are ‘Not People’ and Predicts a ‘Blood Bath’ if He Loses

      by

      Former President Donald J. Trump, at an event on Saturday ostensibly meant to boost his preferred candidate in Ohio’s Republican Senate primary race, gave a freewheeling speech in which he used dehumanizing language to describe immigrants, maintained a steady stream of insults and vulgarities and predicted that the United States would never have another election if he did not win in November.With his general-election matchup against President Biden in clear view, Mr. Trump once more doubled down on the doomsday vision of the country that has animated his third presidential campaign and energized his base during the Republican primary.The dark view resurfaced throughout his speech. While discussing the U.S. economy and its auto industry, Mr. Trump promised to place tariffs on cars manufactured abroad if he won in November. He added: “Now, if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a blood bath for the whole — that’s going to be the least of it. It’s going to be a blood bath for the country.”For nearly 90 minutes outside the Dayton International Airport in Vandalia, Ohio, Mr. Trump delivered a discursive speech, replete with attacks and caustic rhetoric. He noted several times that he was having difficulty reading the teleprompter.The former president opened his speech by praising the people serving sentences in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol. Mr. Trump, who faces criminal charges tied to his efforts to overturn his election loss, called them “hostages” and “unbelievable patriots,” commended their spirit and vowed to help them if elected in November. He also repeated his false claims that the 2020 election was stolen, which have been discredited by a mountain of evidence.If he did not win this year’s presidential election, Mr. Trump said, “I don’t think you’re going to have another election, or certainly not an election that’s meaningful.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Assessing Donald Trump’s Claims That He Would Have Done Better

      by

      The war in Ukraine. Hamas’s attack on Israel. Inflation. The former president has insisted that none would have occurred if he had remained in office after 2020.Aside from falsely insisting that he did not lose the 2020 election, former President Donald J. Trump has peddled a related set of theories centered on one question: What would the world have looked like had he stayed in office?Mr. Trump, in rallies and interviews, has repeatedly asserted — more than a dozen times since December, by one rough count — that three distinct events, both in the United States and abroad, are a product of the 2020 election.“There wouldn’t have been an attack on Israel. There wouldn’t have been an attack on Ukraine. And we wouldn’t have had any inflation,” he declared during a rally in January in Las Vegas. The next month in South Carolina, he baselessly claimed that Democrats had admitted as much.Politicians routinely entertain what-ifs, which are impossible to prove or rebut with certainty. But Mr. Trump’s suppositions underscore the ways in which he often airs questionable claims without explanation and which might not be supported by the broader context.And unlike simply attacking an opponent’s record or making a campaign promise, such alternative realities enjoy the benefit of being untestable.“People already grapple with how to hold elected officials accountable,” said Tabitha Bonilla, an associate professor of political science at Northwestern University who has researched campaign promises and accountability. “And what is super interesting here is that there’s no way to hold someone accountable at all, because there’s no way to measure any of this.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More