More stories

  • in

    Senate Clears $460 Billion Bill to Avert Partial Government Shutdown

    President Biden is expected to sign the legislation, the product of a bipartisan deal, ahead of the midnight shutdown deadline — but the spending fight isn’t over yet.The Senate gave final approval on Friday to a $460 billion spending bill to fund about half the federal government through the fall, sending the legislation to President Biden’s desk with just hours to spare to avert a partial shutdown.The lopsided 75-to-22 vote cemented a resolution to at least part of a spending stalemate that consumed Congress for months and has repeatedly pushed the government to the edge of shutdown. Mr. Biden was expected to sign it ahead of a midnight deadline to keep federal funding flowing.But top lawmakers were still negotiating spending bills for the other half of the government over the same period, including for the Pentagon, which Congress must pass by March 22 to avert a shutdown. Several thorny issues, including funding for the Department of Homeland Security, have yet to be resolved.The legislation passed on Friday packages together six spending bills, extending funding through Sept. 30 for dozens of federal programs covering agriculture, energy and the environment, transportation, housing, the Justice Department and veterans.“To folks who worry that divided government means nothing ever gets done, this bipartisan package says otherwise,” said Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader. “It helps parents and veterans and firefighters and farmers and school cafeterias and more.”The package adheres to the funding levels negotiated last year by Mr. Biden and the House speaker at the time, Kevin McCarthy, keeping spending on domestic programs essentially flat — even as funding for veterans’ programs continues to grow — while allowing military spending to increase slightly.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

  • in

    Biden the President Wants to Curb TikTok. Biden the Candidate Embraces Its Stars.

    At a party for social media influencers at the White House this week, President Biden’s political concerns collided with his national security concerns.The White House is so concerned about the security risks of TikTok that federal workers are not allowed to use the app on their government phones. Top Biden administration officials have even helped craft legislation that could ban TikTok in the United States.But those concerns were pushed aside on Thursday, the night of President Biden’s State of the Union address, when dozens of social media influencers — many of them TikTok stars — were invited to the White House for a watch party.The crowd took selfies in the State Dining Room, drank bubbly with the first lady and waved to Mr. Biden from the White House balcony as he left to deliver his speech to Congress.“Don’t jump, I need you!” Mr. Biden shouted to the young influencers filming from above, in a scene that was captured — naturally — in a TikTok video, which was beamed out to hundreds of thousands of people.Thursday’s party at the White House was an example of Mr. Biden’s political concerns colliding head-on with his national security concerns. Despite growing fears that ByteDance, the Chinese parent company of TikTok, could infringe on the personal data of Americans or manipulate what they see, the president’s campaign is relying on the app to energize a frustrated bloc of young voters ahead of the 2024 election.“From a national security perspective, the campaign joining TikTok was definitely not a good look — it was condoning the use of a platform that the administration and everyone in D.C. recognizes is a national problem,” said Lindsay Gorman, head of technology and geopolitics at the German Marshall Fund and a former tech adviser for the Biden administration.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

  • in

    How Did Biden Do at the State of the Union? Readers Weigh In.

    We asked 10 Times columnists and contributors to watch the State of the Union address on Thursday and rate President Biden’s performance. (A rating of one meant that the night was a disaster, 10 that it was a triumph.) Most were impressed. Some were a bit surprised. “Where has this Joe Biden been hiding these past three years?” Bret Stephens asked. Michelle Goldberg wrote, “What an unexpectedly rousing speech!”We also wanted to know what our readers thought, so we asked you to rate the speech and share what you thought were the best and worst moments. More than 1,000 of you wrote back. Here are a selection of your responses, edited for length and clarity:Rating Biden’s speech10: I found myself clapping alone in my living room and thinking, “Give ’em hell, Joe.” The Republicans needed a smack down. And his staring down the Supreme Court justices while quoting Samuel Alito? Women will show up and vote in record numbers. — Marguerite Dee, 72, Tampa, Fla.6: Was it feisty or angry? While I support most of President Biden’s positions, the delivery came across as an old man yelling at kids to get off his lawn. I wanted more calm and confidence to reinforce he is still up to the job. — Mike Wade, 67, Berlin, Md.10: Biden was spot on. With our reproductive and voting rights at stake, health care and the middle class being threatened with dissolution, what a comfort to see our president at his pugilistic best defending the very essence of America, and leaning forward to consolingly whisper, “I won’t let them.” — Brandi Lynn Ryder, 51, Sonora, Calif.2: He’s out of touch with younger voters like me. We don’t want the A.C.A., we want universal health care. He talks about walls of the past — what about walls he supports today? He kept repeating “history is watching.” He’s not wrong. — Daphna Thier, 36, BrooklynWe 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

  • in

    America’s Reaganesque Mom: How to Praise Katie Britt, Even Before She Speaks

    Talking points from the Alabama senator’s team, helpfully sent out before the State of the Union address, suggested how to extol her delivery of the Republican response.Senator Katie Britt’s team hopes viewers see her response to President Biden’s State of the Union as Reaganesque — but also, very maternal.Before President Biden even arrived at the Capitol on Thursday night, a close ally of the Alabama Republican sent a document of talking points to conservative influencers suggesting words of praise they could offer after Ms. Britt’s speech.“She came off like America’s mom — she gets it,” the document helpfully suggests. “She’s one of us. That’ll be families’ takeaway watching this.”But Ms. Britt also came across like Ronald Reagan, it declared. “The conclusion of her border section was a real ‘Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall,’ moment,” another talking point said, referring to Reagan’s historic speech in Berlin.Ms. Britt, who at 42 is the youngest Republican woman ever elected to the Senate, is on Donald J. Trump’s short list of potential running mates, according two people with direct knowledge of the list.The talking points compared her State of the Union response to some of the most famous oratory in American history, calling it “reminiscent of Reagan’s message of that Shining City on a Hill.”Comparing Ms. Britt to Mr. Biden, the document suggested saying that “it wasn’t just the massive age gap/contrast between the two” but that Ms. Britt “exposed a relatability gap — a truly generational schism.”Mr. Biden is 81. Mr. Trump is 77.A spokesman for Ms. Britt did not immediately respond to a request for comment.“His speech was tone deaf,” the talking points declared, before either Mr. Biden or Ms. Britt had uttered a word. “Hers was the perfect pitch.” More

  • in

    Miguel Cardona Is the Designated Survivor During State of the Union

    President Biden has selected his education secretary, Miguel Cardona, to be the so-called designated survivor during Thursday night’s State of the Union address, a grim moniker meant to ensure at least one decision maker survives if a calamity were to wipe out the nation’s leadership assembled at the Capitol for the speech.Secretary Cardona will follow the evening’s proceedings from an undisclosed location, becoming the latest member of a tradition that dates back to the Cold War tensions of the 1950s. The first survivor to be publicly disclosed was Terrel Bell, who served as education secretary to Ronald Reagan, in 1981.There are few moments in American life when so many of the country’s top leaders are gathered in one place. Those gathered in the House chamber on Thursday will include many members of the Supreme Court, most of Mr. Biden’s cabinet, a great number of lawmakers and top military officials.Those attending are in line to become president if something were to happen to Mr. Biden, as established by the Presidential Succession Act of 1947: the vice president, the speaker of the House, the president pro tempore of the Senate, the secretary of state, the secretary of the Treasury, the secretary of defense and the attorney general. (Beyond that, the succession proceeds through the rest of the cabinet.)But that line of succession could be disrupted if there were an attack or disaster at the Capitol, which is why one cabinet member is chosen to skip the event. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo was chosen as Mr. Biden’s designated survivor during his State of the Union speech in 2022. Marty Walsh, who was secretary of labor in 2023, was the survivor last year.Mr. Biden did not select a designated survivor for his joint address to Congress in 2021. The speech was much more sparsely attended because of Covid, and most members of the cabinet and other top officials were watching from remote locations anyway.William J. Burns, the C.I.A. director who was made a member of the cabinet last July, will also not be at the State of the Union. Mr. Burns, according to a U.S. official, was in Doha, Qatar on Thursday, meeting with Qatari officials, as part of an effort to push forward talks on a temporary ceasefire and hostage release in Gaza.Because Mr. Burns will not be in the secure location away from Washington, he will not be the official designated survivor. But since he will be away from the Capitol building, in the event of a catastrophe, he could be considered, unofficially, a second backup survivor. More

  • in

    George Santos Attends State of the Union Address After His Expulsion

    When former Representative George Santos, the serial fabulist, was expelled from Congress by his colleagues in December, he left in a huff, declaring, “to hell with this place.”On Thursday night, the Tom Ripley of Congress was back.Dressed in a crystal-encrusted collar, Mr. Santos took a seat on the House floor in a surprise appearance ahead of President Biden’s State of the Union address, putting to use the lifetime floor privileges conferred on former members of the House — even the ones who are expelled.There, he was greeted more warmly than he was ever treated when his colleagues wanted nothing to do with him.On Thursday night, he sat and chuckled with Representatives Lauren Boebert of Colorado and Matt Gaetz of Florida. Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia greeted him with a warm embrace. Even members who had been publicly critical of him in the past, like Representative Claudia Tenney of New York, stopped to snap his picture, while others made a beeline to greet him.It was fair to say that the disgraced former congressman, who is scheduled to go on trial in September on federal fraud charges that include accusations of stealing money from campaign donors for personal expenses, was doing something akin to holding court.Since leaving Congress, Mr. Santos has tried to launch a career on the video app Cameo, monetizing on his strange slice of fame by charging hundreds of dollars a pop for his short personalized videos. But interest in micro-celebrities can be fleeting.And he had been carefully planning his splashy return. Mr. Santos told some members of the press corps that he planned to return on Thursday night to seize back the spotlight, but swore them to secrecy.It was not clear what high jinks he had planned, aside from the fact of his presence alone. At last year’s State of the Union address, Mr. Santos got in a confrontation with Senator Mitt Romney, Republican of Utah, who told him, bluntly, “you don’t belong here.” Mr. Santos had stationed himself close enough to the action to reach out for a presidential handshake.Speaker Mike Johnson earlier Thursday tried to encourage members to show decorum during Mr. Biden’s speech.Not everyone was willing to make that promise.Mr. Santos appeared to be staking out a seat near the corridor where Mr. Biden was set to enter the chamber, along with some of the hard-right members of the Republican conference, such as Ms. Boebert.“Oh, you think I plan that stuff?” Ms. Boebert said, when asked how she planned to behave during the speech. “I’m more spontaneous than you think.”But minutes ahead of the speech, without a seat saved, Mr. Santos moved himself to the back of the chamber. More

  • in

    La campaña de Biden cambia su estrategia para abordar el tema de la edad

    Parte del nuevo plan de la Casa Blanca consiste en destacar más los viajes del presidente fuera de Washington y los encuentros individuales con votantes en las redes sociales.Lleva lentes oscuros de aviador y gorras de béisbol. Visita heladerías y asadores y pide reunirse con influentes que puedan difundir imágenes suyas en TikTok e Instagram. Habla más a menudo con los periodistas y responde a preguntas sobre Medio Oriente, los republicanos y, por supuesto, su edad.Nada de esto es una coincidencia. Mientras el presidente Joe Biden se enfrenta a lo que las encuestas muestran como una preocupación significativa por sus 81 años y a unas elecciones muy reñidas contra su virtual oponente, Donald Trump, la estrategia de la Casa Blanca es que salga de su burbuja protectora y afronte directamente las preocupaciones de los votantes.El tema se sobrecargó el mes pasado cuando Biden se defendió airadamente de un informe del fiscal especial que lo describió como un “hombre bienintencionado de edad avanzada con mala memoria”. El presidente se convirtió con rapidez en el chiste favorito de los presentadores de los programas nocturnos de entrevistas, lo que enfureció a sus aliados, quienes reconocen que aunque Biden no puede volver atrás en el tiempo, al menos puede intentar reajustar la imagen que los votantes tienen de él.“Llevo varios meses diciéndole a la campaña: ‘Por favor, déjenlo ser Joe Biden’, y lo mismo han dicho muchos otros”, comentó en una entrevista el senador demócrata por Delaware Chris Coons, aliado cercano del presidente. “No solo es bueno para la campaña. Es bueno para él y es bueno para el país que Joe Biden tenga la oportunidad de bajarse del podio y ser menos el presidente Joe Biden y más Joe”.Con ese fin, se espera que Biden plantee la cuestión de la edad en su beneficio al destacar sus logros legislativos en su discurso sobre el Estado de la Unión del jueves por la noche. El argumento que esgrimirá, según sus ayudantes, es que sus logros como presidente podrían haber pasado desapercibidos para políticos con menos experiencia.Biden bromeó sobre memes en una aparición en el programa de televisión nocturno de Seth Meyers en febrero.Bonnie Cash para The New York TimesWe 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

  • in

    Should Either of These People Have Sole Authority on Nuclear Weapons?

    A large majority of Americans say they don’t trust a government run by the opposition party. So we must ask ourselves: Is it moral, just and wise to vest the ability to end other nations in the hands of one person?“As president, I carried no wallet, no money, no driver’s license, no keys in my pockets — only secret codes that were capable of bringing about the annihilation of much of the world as we knew it,” Ronald Reagan wrote in his autobiography.That’s right. President Biden this very minute could unilaterally decide to launch a devastating nuclear strike anywhere in the world in minutes — without a requirement to consult Congress or the courts. The missiles would be in flight before even the most plugged-in Americans knew they’d been launched.This is an enormous amount of power to grant any single person. That’s doubly true in undemocratic nations, several of which have nuclear arsenals of their own.It is time to explore what alternatives to the president’s sole nuclear authority could be, and that’s what my colleague W.J. Hennigan does in the latest installment of our series “At the Brink,” published this morning.Last year, Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Representative Ted Lieu of California introduced legislation that would prevent any American president from launching a first nuclear strike without congressional approval. Passing this bill or one like it is an obvious step.Yet the American public is owed a bigger plan on how countries around the globe can work together to reduce nuclear threats. Today nuclear weapons loom over international politics in ways not seen since the Cold War — a dynamic Times Opinion explored in the first installment of the series earlier this week.The phrase “serious debate” is often tossed around in campaign season. It’s a way to insist on talking about something, even if in a nebulous way. Fortunately, there are chances for a substantive public discussion of nuclear weapons, and we invite the country and the world to join in the conversation. Americans might be surprised to hear what those in other nations think.Times Opinion has invited President Biden and President Trump to explain in our pages what their next administrations would do to reduce these risks. We hope they will do so. We also hope this will be a subject in the upcoming presidential debates. Reporters covering the president and his competitor should press them on their policies and thinking around sole authority and other nuclear policies.Though Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden “will have to confront questions from voters about their mental acuity, competence and stamina to take on another four-year term,” as Hennigan writes today, “regardless of who wins this election or the next one, the American president’s nuclear sole authority is a product of another era, and must be revisited in our new nuclear age.”That should be something that most Americans can agree on. More