Democratic Party

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Chuck Schumer Postpones Book Tour Amid Spending Bill Vote Backlash

      by

      Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, on Monday postponed a multicity tour to promote his forthcoming book, citing security concerns amid backlash to his decision to vote with Republicans for a stopgap spending bill to stave off a government shutdown.Mr. Schumer was scheduled to participate in promotional events in Atlanta, Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia and New York, as well as a few stops in California, for his new book, “Antisemitism in America: A Warning.” Many Democratic activists, desperate for their leaders to stand up to President Trump, have been staging protests outside of Mr. Schumer’s Brooklyn home and calling for his resignation. Online, they have been organizing protests for every stop on his book tour.A spokeswoman for Mr. Schumer said that the tour was being rescheduled because of “security concerns.” But the move was immediately criticized by both the right and the left, who accused Mr. Schumer of being unwilling to face a restive public.Since voting on Friday for the stopgap bill, Mr. Schumer has been defending his decision to stave off a government shutdown, which he has said was the less devastating of two bad options that Senate Democrats were presented with. “I’ll take some of the bullets,” Mr. Schumer said of the vitriol directed at him.“There is no off-ramp,” for a government shutdown, Mr. Schumer said in an interview Friday from his office just off the Senate floor. “The off-ramp is in the hands of Donald Trump and Elon Musk and DOGE. We could be in a shutdown for six months or nine months,” he said, referring to Mr. Musk’s cost-cutting team, the Department of Government Efficiency.Mr. Schumer said that a shutdown would have allowed Mr. Trump to decide which programs were essential, and which were not. “The day after the shutdown, they can say all of SNAP is not essential, we’re not funding it,” Mr. Schumer said, referring to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. “In a shutdown, it is solely the executive branch that determines what is essential and what is nonessential. There is no court check.”Still, the backlash has been unrelenting.Over the weekend, Mr. Schumer met with Representative Hakeem Jeffries, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, in Brooklyn. The meeting was first reported by Punchbowl News. Mr. Jeffries and House Democrats, who stuck together to oppose the government funding bill in the House, have criticized Mr. Schumer’s decision. Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi called Mr. Schumer’s decision “unacceptable.” And Mr. Jeffries has avoided expressing any confidence in Mr. Schumer’s leadership since the vote.On Friday, asked at a news conference whether it was time for new leadership in the Senate, Mr. Jeffries responded curtly.“Next question,” he said. More

    • 88 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Signs Spending Bill to Fund Government

      by

      President Trump on Saturday signed the government funding bill passed by the Senate on Friday. The bill was passed just hours before a midnight deadline to avoid a lapse in funding, which would have shut down the government.The signing of the bill ended a week of drama on Capitol Hill. On Tuesday, the House passed the legislation, which funds the government through Sept. 30, in a mostly party-line vote that reflected how Republican fiscal hawks have swallowed their concerns about spending in deference to Mr. Trump. The vote was 217 to 213, with only one Republican, Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky, voting against the legislation. One Democrat, Representative Jared Golden of Maine, voted yes.That sent the measure to the Senate, which spent the rest of the week deliberating whether to accept the Republican bill from the House, or send it back and shut down the government at 12:01 a.m. Saturday.The key vote came on Friday afternoon, after days of Democratic agonizing that divided the party. That procedural vote, which ended debate and moved the bill to a final vote, needed the support of some Democrats. Senator Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader, and nine other members of his caucus supplied the votes needed to effectively thwart a filibuster by their own party and prevent a shutdown.The final vote to pass the spending measure and send it to Mr. Trump to sign was 54 to 46, nearly along party lines.Carl Hulse More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      The Democratic Divide: Would a Shutdown Have Helped or Hurt Trump?

      by

      When Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, announced that he would vote with Republicans to clear the way for passage of a stopgap spending bill, he argued that a government shutdown would further empower President Trump and Elon Musk to defund government programs and shrink federal agencies.“Under a shutdown, the Trump administration would have full authority to deem whole agencies, programs and personnel nonessential, furloughing staff with no promise that they would ever be rehired,” Mr. Schumer said on Thursday.But many Democrats, who were stunned and enraged by Mr. Schumer’s stance, argued that it was in fact the spending extension that would clear the way for Mr. Trump’s executive orders and Mr. Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency to continue to reshape the government, running roughshod over Congress in the process.Behind the political divide over how best to push back against Mr. Trump was a practical question: Does the White House have more power or less when the government shuts down?It’s a complicated subject. Here’s what to know:What happens in a government shutdown?When the government shuts down, agencies continue essential work, but federal employees and contractors are not paid. Many employees are furloughed until Congress acts to extend new funding.Federal agencies typically make contingency plans that lay out who should keep working and what programs need to operate during a shutdown. But spending experts said the decisions about what is deemed “necessary” or “essential” ultimately rest with the White House Office of Management and Budget, currently run by Russell T. Vought.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Andy Beshear Slams Gavin Newsom for Having Steve Bannon on Podcast

      by

      “I don’t think we should give him oxygen on any platform — ever, anywhere,” the Democratic governor of Kentucky said of President Trump’s former chief strategist.Gov. Andy Beshear of Kentucky sharply disagreed with a decision by Gov. Gavin Newsom of California to host Steve Bannon, one of the architects of the MAGA movement, on Mr. Newsom’s new podcast this week, saying Mr. Bannon’s voice should not be elevated “on any platform ever, anywhere.”Mr. Beshear, a Democrat who was vetted to be former Vice President Kamala Harris’s running mate in 2024 and who is considered a possible candidate for president in 2028, made his comments on Thursday, shortly before speaking to House Democrats gathered for a planning retreat in Northern Virginia this week.“I think that Governor Newsom bringing on different voices is great,” Mr. Beshear told a small group of reporters. “We shouldn’t be afraid to talk and to debate just about anyone. But Steve Bannon espouses hatred and anger and even at some points violence, and I don’t think we should give him oxygen on any platform — ever, anywhere.”Mr. Beshear was speaking to the conference along with two other Democratic governors who are considered possible 2028 contenders: Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan.Mr. Newsom is also considered a potential 2028 candidate. He started a podcast this month, bringing on big-name conservatives including Mr. Bannon, a fierce Trump loyalist, and Charlie Kirk, who leads Turning Point USA, the conservative network.Mr. Newsom’s decision to host Mr. Kirk and especially Mr. Bannon has received some blowback. Adam Kinzinger, a former Republican congressman who did not run for re-election in 2022 after becoming a vocal Trump critic, said in a video that hosting them was “insane.”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 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Chuck Schumer: Trump and Musk Would Love a Shutdown. We Must Not Give Them One.

      by

      Over the past two months, the United States has confronted a bitter truth: The federal government has been taken over by a nihilist.President Trump has taken a blowtorch to our country and wielded chaos like a weapon. Most Republicans in Congress, meanwhile, have caved to his every whim. The Grand Old Party has devolved into a crowd of Trump sycophants and MAGA radicals who seem to want to burn everything to the ground.Now, Republicans’ nihilism has brought us to a new brink of disaster: Unless Congress acts, the federal government will shut down Friday at midnight.As I have said many times, there are no winners in a government shutdown. But there are certainly victims: the most vulnerable Americans, those who rely on federal programs to feed their families, get medical care and stay financially afloat. Communities that depend on government services to function will suffer.This week Democrats offered a way out: Fund the government for another month to give appropriators more time to do their jobs. Republicans rejected this proposal.Why? Because Mr. Trump doesn’t want the appropriators to do their job. He wants full control over government spending.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      For Black Women, Adrienne Adams Is More Than Just Another Candidate

      by

      The New York City Council speaker, who officially launched her mayoral campaign on Saturday, would be the first woman to lead City Hall.As Adrienne Adams officially kicked off her mayoral campaign on Saturday, she urged potential voters at a rally in Jamaica, Queens, to view her as an alternative to the city’s two most recognizable candidates, Mayor Eric Adams and former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo.But many of her supporters see her candidacy as something else: an opportunity for Democrats to elect a qualified Black woman to lead the country’s largest city, less than a year after the bruising loss of Kamala Harris, the first Black woman to lead a major party presidential ticket.Wearing a pink pantsuit, Ms. Adams entered to cheers at the Rochdale Village Shopping Center in southeast Queens and danced with supporters as “I’m Coming Out” by Diana Ross played.“No drama, no scandal, no nonsense, just competence and integrity,” Ms. Adams said at the rally, summing up her candidacy.Ms. Adams, the City Council speaker and a Queens native, faces a tough path to the mayor’s office amid a crowded primary field and her own considerable fund-raising lag. But to the city’s most steadfast Democratic voting bloc, Black women, Ms. Adams’s candidacy represents more than a litany of messaging and policy promises.Ms. Adams presenting the city budget alongside Mayor Eric Adams, left, in 2022.Benjamin Norman for 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

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      House Republicans Unveil Spending Bill to Avert Government Shutdown

      by

      House Republicans on Saturday unveiled a measure to fund the government through Sept. 30, boosting spending on the military and daring Democrats to oppose it and risk being blamed for a government shutdown that would begin after midnight Friday.The 99-page legislation would slightly decrease spending overall from last year’s funding levels, but would increase spending for the military by $6 billion, in a nod to the concerns of G.O.P. defense hawks that stopgap measures would hamstring the Pentagon. It would not include any funds for any earmarks for projects in lawmakers’ districts or states, saving roughly $13 billion, according to congressional aides.The bill provides a slight funding boost for Immigration and Customs Enforcement — an additional $485 million — but gives the administration more flexibility on how the agency can spend it. It also increases funding for the federal program that provides free groceries to millions of low-income women and children, known as W.I.C., by about $500 million.Speaker Mike Johnson in the Capitol this week. If Democrats are unanimously opposed to the Republicans’ spending bill, Mr. Johnson will have just a vote or two to spare to get the bill through the House next week.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesIt was unclear whether the legislation could pass the Republican-controlled Congress. Speaker Mike Johnson will need to navigate the bill through his extremely narrow House majority as early as Tuesday and has just a vote or two to spare if Democrats are unanimously opposed. The pressure would shift quickly to the Senate if House Republicans can pass the legislation, raising the question of whether Democrats would mount a filibuster against the bill and trigger a shutdown.While conservative House Republicans have in the past dug in and opposed such spending bills, forcing Mr. Johnson to rely on Democrats to keep the government open, President Trump called on Republicans to unite and push this measure through so he and Republicans on Capitol Hill could focus on their new budgetary and tax-cutting plans.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 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Department of Education Secretary Linda McMahon Says We Don’t Need the Agency

      by

      Education Secretary Linda McMahon delivered a stark message on Friday about the future of her agency. Asked on Fox News whether the United States “needs this department,” Ms. McMahon answered: “No, we don’t.”In the interview, her first since she was confirmed to her cabinet post this week, Ms. McMahon said that President Trump intended to sign an executive order aimed at closing her department, but she declined to give details on timing. She also did not address how the administration might persuade lawmakers to go along. The department cannot be closed without the approval of Congress.Such a move, in a closely divided Senate, would require support from Democrats, which appears unlikely after Ms. McMahon was confirmed along party lines. During the previous session of Congress, a proposal to eliminate the department failed in the Republican-controlled House when 60 Republicans voted against it.Asked about her message to parents and students concerned about what might happen should the department be eliminated, Ms. McMahon said, “We will see scores go up.”Republicans have pushed to close the agency by arguing that student test scores have not improved despite decades of funding from the federal government. Ms. McMahon has said she does not want to cut money for schools, but would rather deliver that funding to states with fewer restrictions.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