More stories

  • in

    At No Labels Event, a Few Disagreements on Policy Seep In

    Senator Joe Manchin III and former Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. stressed that they were not a third-party presidential ticket — yet. And on issues like climate and guns, they debated their views.As the ostensibly bipartisan interest group No Labels discovered on Monday, consensus campaigning and governance is all well and good until it comes time for the details.At an event at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, N.H., the group had something of a soft launch of its potential third-party bid for the presidency when Senator Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, and Jon Huntsman Jr., the former Republican governor of Utah, formally released No Labels’ policy manifesto for political compromise.The two men took pains to say they were not the bipartisan presidential ticket of a No Labels candidacy, and that no such ticket would be formed if the Republican and Democratic nominees for 2024 would just embrace their moderation — “that won’t happen if they’re not threatened,” Mr. Manchin said threateningly.On the lofty matter of cooperation and compromise, both men were all in, as were their introducers, Joseph I. Lieberman, a former Democratic senator turned independent, Benjamin Chavis, a civil rights leader and Democrat, and Pat McCrory, a former Republican governor of North Carolina.“The common-sense majority has no voice in this country,” Mr. Huntsman said. “They just watch the three-ring circus play out.”But the dream unity ticket seemed anything but unified when it came down to the nuts and bolts.One questioner from the audience raised her concerns about worsening climate change, the extreme weather that was drenching New England and Mr. Manchin’s securing of a new natural gas pipeline in his home state.To that, Mr. Manchin fell back on his personal preference, promoted in No Labels’ manifesto, for an “all of the above” energy policy that embraced renewable energy sources, like wind and solar, as well as continued production of climate-warming fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas.Mr. Huntsman jumped in to propose putting “a price on carbon,” something usually done through fossil fuel emissions taxes, to curb oil, gas and coal use, proposals that Mr. Manchin, hailing from a coal and gas state, roundly rejected.Asked about gun control, the two could not even seem to agree on the relatively modest proposals in the No Labels plan: universal background checks on firearms purchases and raising the buying age for military-style semiautomatic weapons to 21 from 18.Mr. Manchin, who co-wrote a universal background check bill in 2012 only to see it die in the Senate, said “there’s a balance to be had” in curbing gun purchases. Mr. Huntsman fell back on his party’s decade-long dodge on stricter gun regulation — mental health care.They even seemed to disagree on Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, the far-right Republican from Georgia. Mr. Huntsman bristled at being asked about her statement that the United States should withdraw from NATO, saying serious policymakers are too often asked questions about “the flamethrowers.” Mr. Manchin said he would not speak ill of any sitting member of Congress.“All 535 people elected to Congress want to do good,” he said.One thing both men agreed on: No Labels need not divulge the big donors that are fueling the current drive toward a possible third-party bid for the White House. Democratic opponents of the effort have accused the group of hiding a donor list that leans heavily Republican, proof, opponents say, that the drive is all about electing former President Donald J. Trump to a second term.No Labels has denied that but declined to reveal its current donors.“I don’t think it’s right or good. I think there should be transparency and accountability,” Mr. Huntsman said of the group’s decision. “But that’s not the way you play the game.”He added, “The system sucks.” More

  • in

    Marjorie Taylor Greene Has a Dream

    Marjorie Taylor Greene, now one of the most influential Republicans in the House of Representatives, says it is time for Americans to consider a national divorce.“Tragically, I think we, the left and right, have reached irreconcilable differences,” Greene wrote a few days ago on Twitter. “I’ll speak for the right and say, we are absolutely disgusted and fed up with the left cramming and forcing their ways on us and our children with no respect for our religion/faith, traditional values, and economic&government policy beliefs.”And how will this national divorce work in practice? Greene says that “red” states and “blue” states will simply go their separate ways.On education, for example, “Red states would likely ban all gender lies and confusing theories, Drag Queen story times, and L.G.B.T.Q. indoctrinating teachers, and China’s money and influence in our education while blue states could have government-controlled gender transition schools.”On gun policy, in red states, “law abiding gun owners wouldn’t go to jail for shooting an attacker” while in blue states, “the left could achieve their dreams of total and complete lawlessness.”The federal government would still exist, Greene explains, but it would be a minimal state, devoted to border security and defense — an update, of sorts, of America under the Articles of Confederation. Everything else would be up to the discretion of the states, including voting and elections.“In red states,” Greene wrote, “they would likely pursue one day elections with paper ballots and require voter ID with only the red state citizens or even red state tax payers voting. And blue states would be free to allow illegal aliens from all over the world to vote freely and frequently in their elections like the D.C. City Council wants. Dead people could still vote. Criminals in jail could vote that is if blue states even have jails or prisons anymore.”You can probably tell, from the substance of Greene’s comments, that this “national divorce” is more paranoid fantasy than serious proposal. Even so, it rests on a set of ideas and tropes that are in wide circulation in the public at large.Let’s start with the idea that individual states constitute singular political communities, meaning that there is a real distinction between Americans who live in “big states” versus “small states,” between the residents of Montana and those of Massachusetts. There’s also the idea that partisan divides between states represent fundamental differences of culture and interest. And then there’s the idea, underneath all this, that states are, or ought to be, the fundamental unit of representation in the American political system.Taken together, those ideas make a “national divorce” seem, if not likely, then at least plausible. But there’s a problem. States are not actually singular political communities. There are partisan divides between states, even large ones, but they do not represent fundamental differences of culture and interest. And although states play an important role in the American political system, they are not the autonomous, nearly independent units of either Representative Greene’s imagination or the folk civics that shapes political understanding for tens of millions of Americans.It is true that in debates over representation during the Constitutional Convention of 1787 in Philadelphia, small-state delegates insisted on equal representation of states in at least one chamber of Congress, so that they might preserve their interests against those of the larger states. William Paterson of New Jersey worried that his state would be “swallowed up” by Virginia, Massachusetts and others if the Senate were apportioned by population, like the House. Likewise, Luther Martin of Maryland called apportion by population “a system of slavery for ten states.” For these delegates, the states were sovereign units with distinct interests that deserved representation in Congress.For James Madison, a fierce proponent of proportional representation in the House and Senate, this was nonsense. Far from unitary, each state was, in his view, a collection of diverse and divergent factions — of a “greater variety of interests, of pursuits, of passions” — that could only speak with a single voice on issues of broad agreement and consensus.On this question of representation and apportionment, the upshot of Madison’s theory of faction was that states, as states, did not have interests to represent in Congress.“States possessed interests,” the historian Jack Rakove explains in “Original Meanings: Politics and Ideas in the Making of the Constitution,” “but these were rooted in the attributes of individuals: in property, occupation, religion, opinion, and the uneven distribution of human faculties. Moreover, since congeries of interests could be found within any state, however small — witness Rhode Island — the principle of unitary corporate representation was further undercut.”Madison lost the battle for proportional representation in the Senate — small-state delegates threatened to torpedo the convention rather than accept an outcome that might undermine their influence in the national legislature. But he would return, years later, to this argument about the nature of the states, and the divergent interests within them, in a letter written just before his death.Addressed, in substance, to critics of majority rule like John C. Calhoun of South Carolina, Madison again challenged the idea that states represent distinct and singular political communities.In Virginia, he notes, there is “a diversity of interests, real or supposed” and “much disagreement” on questions of infrastructure and “public patronage.” If majority rule threatens abuse of power in national government — because one interest may grow in size over another — then it would have to do the same within each individual state, rendering “a majority government as unavoidable an evil in the States individually as it is represented to be in the States collectively.”But let’s say you could split each state into its constituent interests, so that majorities would not form against it. Well, then, Madison says, you would find yourself in the same situation as before: “In the smallest of the fragments, there would soon be added to previous sources of discord a manufacturing and an agricultural class, with the difficulty experienced in adjusting their relative interests, in the regulation of foreign commerce if any, or if none in equalizing the burden of internal improvement and of taxation within them.”No matter how small you go, in other words, you run into the simple fact that there’s no such thing as a truly homogeneous political community. There will always be differences of belief and interest, and the only way to deal with them in a representative, republican government is through deliberation and majority rule.What was true in the 18th and 19th centuries is true now. A “national divorce” is possible only if the states represent singular political communities. But they don’t. A conservative, deep “red” state like Oklahoma still has liberal, “blue” cities and suburbs with conflicting interests. If you tried to separate conservative rural areas from liberal urban ones, you’d quickly find that within those subdivisions lie profound political differences among both individual people and groups of people.We are not actually 50 separate communities tied together by a single document. We are a single, national community of diverse and divergent interests in every corner of the union. The states aren’t hard borders of culture and politics, and there’s no way to divide the country so that all Americans live in their own camp, with their own side. Perhaps if conservatives and Republicans win enough elections, we’ll have a much smaller and less expansive federal government than we do now. But that will not solve the problem of political conflict and majority rule; it will simply push the problem down to the next level of government.What advocates of a “national divorce” or some other separation want is a resolution of the struggle of democratic life, a point at which they must no longer contend with alternative and conflicting ways of living. But that is just another fantasy.The great virtue (or perhaps curse) of democracy is that it doesn’t settle — it keeps moving. There are no final victories, but there are no final defeats either. There is only the struggle for a more humane world or, for some among us, a more hierarchical one.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

  • in

    Haley Walks Treacherous Road for G.O.P. Women

    EXETER, N.H. — According to Nikki Haley, bullies are best subdued by a counter kick — in heels. Achieving a new vision for the country requires the leadership of a “tough-as-nails woman.” And generational change starts with putting a “badass woman in the White House.”In ways both overt and subtle, Ms. Haley, the former United Nations ambassador and South Carolina governor, is setting up her 2024 presidential bid as the latest test of the Republican Party’s attitudes about female leaders. No woman has ever won a state Republican presidential primary, let alone the party’s nomination — and Ms. Haley is the first one to mount a bid since former President Donald J. Trump, who regularly attacked women in extraordinarily graphic and vulgar terms, rose to the head of the party.The early days of Ms. Haley’s campaign, which she announced on Tuesday, quickly illustrated the challenges facing Republican women. For decades, female leaders in both parties have struggled with what political scientists call the double bind — the difficulty of proving one’s strength and competence, while meeting voters’ expectations of warmth, or of being “likable enough,” as former President Barack Obama once said of Hillary Clinton during a 2008 primary debate.But for Republican women, that double bind comes with a twist. There are conservative voters who harbor traditional views about femininity while expecting their candidates to seem “tough.” Several strategists suggested Republican primary voters would have little patience if a female candidate were to level accusations of sexism toward another Republican. And Mr. Trump, who remains a powerful figure in the party and is running again, has already attacked Ms. Haley with criticism some view as gendered.Strategists say Ms. Haley must try to win over conservatives who have traditional views of femininity but also expect candidates to appear tough.Haiyun Jiang/The New York TimesEven before she entered the race, Mr. Trump dismissed Ms. Haley as “overly ambitious,” which struck some observers as sexist. And soon after her official announcement, he suggested her appointment as U.N. ambassador was less a reflection of her credentials than of his desire to see her male lieutenant governor take over as governor. She also confronted a male CNN anchor, who asserted that Ms. Haley and women her age — 51, decades younger than Mr. Trump or President Biden — were past their “prime.”Ms. Haley, who could be joined by other female contenders, including Gov. Kristi Noem of South Dakota, is operating within a G.O.P. that has often dismissed debate about identity as the purview of the left, and has, in many corners, increasingly lambasted discussions of gender and race as “wokeness.”During her campaign trail debut this past week, Ms. Haley played into this trend, promoting a country that is “strong and proud, not weak and woke.” And while she winked at the history-making potential of her candidacy — “I will simply say this: May the best woman win” — she was quick to distance herself from “identity politics.”“I don’t believe in that. And I don’t believe in glass ceilings, either. I believe in creating a country where anyone can do anything,” she said Wednesday while campaigning in Charleston, S.C.Ms. Haley faces many hurdles that have nothing to do with gender. Mr. Trump and Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, who is generally seen as Mr. Trump’s strongest potential adversary, lead her significantly in early polling. And her occasional criticisms of Mr. Trump, after serving in his administration and often heaping praise on him, may leave her ill-defined in the eyes of voters.Many prominent women in the party — including Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia — have risen by emulating Mr. Trump’s hard-right politics.Stefani Reynolds for The New York TimesMany of the most prominent women in the party — Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, a conspiracy theory-minded Republican from Georgia; Ronna McDaniel, the chair of the Republican National Committee; Representative Elise Stefanik of New York, the chair of the House Republican conference — have risen by emulating or embracing Mr. Trump’s hard-right politics, not by challenging him.“If you want to know, what do you have to do to be an influential woman in the G.O.P. today, compare Marjorie Taylor Greene to Liz Cheney,” said Jennifer Horn, the former chair of the New Hampshire Republican Party who now considers herself an independent. “Which one of them actually brings gravitas and experience and genuine commitment to democracy to the table? And which one of them is currently serving in Congress?”Which Republicans Are Eyeing the 2024 Presidential Election?Card 1 of 6The G.O.P. primary begins. More

  • in

    Marjorie Taylor Greene and Others Heckle Biden at State of the Union Address

    His State of the Union address was not exactly a celebration of a unity agenda. But the president seemed to relish the scrimmage.WASHINGTON — President Biden was about midway through a speech of about 7,218-words on Tuesday when a Republican lawmaker tried to shut him down with a single one: “Liar!”It was Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, whom the president had baited by accusing Republicans of wanting to threaten entitlement programs like Social Security.Later in the speech, when Mr. Biden called for an end to the fentanyl crisis in the United States, another lawmaker yelled out, “It’s your fault!” — a reference to the amount of drugs that are smuggled across the U.S.-Mexico border. Another lawmaker yelled out an expletive.His second State of the Union address was punctuated by outbursts, jeers and peals of mocking laughter, but Mr. Biden turned the tables on his Republican opponents and argued in real time with the insurgents. It appeared to be the start of his re-election campaign.When the Republicans shouted back that no, they were not threatening Social Security, Mr. Biden smiled, appearing to relish the scrimmage, and ad-libbed that he was pleased they all agreed.“I’m glad to see — no, I tell you, I enjoy conversion,” Mr. Biden said. He is unlikely to win over a large number of Republicans to support legislation, but his reply to the contingent led by Ms. Greene was meant as an unsubtle reminder that he spent 36 years as a senator working to win Republican votes for his legislative efforts.Mr. Biden arriving in the House chamber for the speech.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesSpeaker Kevin McCarthy and Vice President Kamala Harris greeting President Biden at the address, in a break from the generally combative mood.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesMr. Biden walked into his speech facing low approval ratings and flashing-red polling numbers that suggest Americans do not feel that his economic policies have helped them. He also entered a chamber full of people who have quietly (and not so quietly) questioned how an 80-year-old president could run for re-election.Yet Mr. Biden appeared in control as he took his time “How are ya, man”-ning down the aisle of the House chamber before reaching the dais, where Vice President Kamala Harris and Speaker Kevin McCarthy, Republican of California, were waiting. Breaking from the combative mood of the chamber, Ms. Harris and Mr. McCarthy engaged in small talk, and the speaker greeted Mr. Biden warmly.Biden’s State of the Union AddressChallenging the G.O.P.: In the first State of the Union speech of a new era of divided government, President Biden called on Republicans to work with him to “finish the job” of repairing the unsettled economy.State of Uncertainty: Mr. Biden used his speech to portray the United States as a country in recovery. But what he did not emphasize was that America also faces a lot of uncertainty in 2023.Foreign Policy: Mr. Biden spends his days confronting Russia and China. So it was especially striking that in his address, he chose to spend relatively little time on America’s global role.A Tense Exchange: Before the speech, Senator Mitt Romney admonished Representative George Santos, a fellow Republican, telling him he “shouldn’t have been there.”The president had a shaky start on the teleprompter as he raced through his remarks and mangled some lines, although he had plenty of energy. He got an even bigger burst once the Republicans’ heckles and boos began, and was most animated when he veered off the teleprompter and addressed them directly before a live television audience of millions. At times, the House floor seemed like the British Parliament, where catcalls and shouted insults from the opposing party are tradition..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.In 2009, it was considered a travesty when Representative Joe Wilson, a South Carolina Republican, shouted “you lie” at President Barack Obama during a joint address to Congress. Back then, Mr. Wilson was formally rebuked by the whole House.Times have changed. Republican lawmakers shouted both “liar” and “bullshit” at parts of Mr. Biden’s speech, and no one appeared shocked. After the speech, Representative Andy Ogles of Tennessee defended yelling out “it’s your fault” as Mr. Biden described the fentanyl crisis, telling reporters it was “a visceral response.”Though Mr. McCarthy appeared willing to play peacemaker at moments when tensions threatened to boil over — the speaker shushed Republicans who yelled at Mr. Biden for calling to codify citizenship for Americans brought to the United States as children — his role over the next months will be to oppose virtually all of Mr. Biden’s agenda.On Tuesday, Republicans spent much of their time signaling that they would help in that mission. Some lawmakers even prepared to mock Mr. Biden in advance: Ms. Greene carried a white helium balloon around the Capitol, mocking Mr. Biden’s response to a giant Chinese spy balloon that traversed the United States this past week before an American F-22 blew it up off the coast of South Carolina.Mr. Biden spotlighted Rodney Wells and RowVaughn Wells, the stepfather and mother of Tyre Nichols, as he called for police reform.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesAt points, Mr. Biden turned down the volume, calling for police reform by spotlighting the grieving parents of Tyre Nichols, who died after a brutal beating on Jan. 7 at the hands of Memphis police officers. The president emphatically called for more research to end cancer. And he spoke directly to “forgotten” Americans who are struggling financially.“Jobs are coming back,” Mr. Biden said. “Pride is coming back, because of choices we made in the last several years.”When asked if Mr. Biden was prepared for the jeers from Republicans, a senior administration official said the news media had underestimated him — a common refrain from Mr. Biden’s advisers.Jeff Nussbaum, a former Biden speechwriter, praised Mr. Biden for “doing a great job of seeking common ground and defining sacred ground.”Much of the president’s speech was vintage Biden, full of well-worn phrasing he has used since the beginning of his first campaigns a half-century ago. The familiar seemed to help his comfort in taking on the Republicans.“There are some good things about doing something for 50 years,” said Greg Schultz, Mr. Biden’s first 2020 campaign manager. “He’s got some riffs that are just not going to ever change.”When the president returned to the White House late Tuesday night, the staff stood and applauded him.Catie Edmondson More

  • in

    Biden Makes His Business Case in the State of the Union Address

    The president took credit for strong job growth and his legislative agenda that’s boosted investment in infrastructure and clean energy projects.“I will make no apologies.”Pool photo by Jacquelyn Martin-Pool/Getty Images.Biden picks his battles President Biden delivered a State of the Union address to Congress on Tuesday night that was filled with dramatic moments, meant in part to jump start his 2024 re-election campaign.He also used the speech to press his economic priorities, from bolstering American manufacturing to extending his climate efforts. How far he advanced his causes, however, remains to be seen.Mr. Biden defended his record on the economy. He took credit for falling inflation and strong job growth, and listed promised benefits from his sweeping legislative agenda, including infrastructure, clean energy (even if he did acknowledge, “we’re still going to need oil and gas for a while”) and manufacturing laws that will pour trillions into the economy.He also urged Congress to back initiatives including raising a billionaires tax on the wealthy; expanding a measure in the Inflation Reduction Act that caps the cost of insulin at $35 a month; renewing the expanded child tax credit; and expanding Medicaid and affordable child care.He baited Republicans over social welfare programs. Mr. Biden accused some Republicans of threatening Social Security and Medicare, implying they wanted cuts in exchange for a deal to raise the debt ceiling. (That claim requires a bit of context.) Several lawmakers shouted in response; one, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, yelled “Liar!”Mr. Biden responded that he had somehow gotten unanimity on the issue. “We all apparently agree, Social Security and Medicare is off the books now, right?” he said, leading a bipartisan round of applause for seniors.He kept up pressure on ripe political targets. Though Mr. Biden didn’t directly address the Chinese spy balloon incident, he pledged to make America more competitive and less reliant on China. “I will make no apologies that we are investing to make America strong,” he said. “Investing in American innovation — in industries that will define the future, and that China’s government is intent on dominating.”Mr. Biden also called out tech companies, demanding stricter limits on their collection of personal data, and oil giants, which he accused of raking in record profits from high energy prices instead of using their huge coffers to increase domestic production.How much cooperation Mr. Biden will get from Republicans and business is unclear. In Republicans’ rebuttal, Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders of Arkansas accused him of perpetrating a culture war. Corporate America was more circumspect: Suzanne Clark, the head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, reiterated her group’s support for the infrastructure law, but urged Biden to focus on striking more trade agreements and pulling back from what she said was overregulation.HERE’S WHAT’S HAPPENING The U.S. trade deficit balloons to $948 billion. The export-import gap jumped 12 percent in 2022, to a record, as Americans continued to spend more on imported goods than travel and entertainment. Trade data also showed growing deficits in goods with the likes of Mexico and South Korea, as manufacturers seek bases outside China.Microsoft announces A.I.-powered consumer internet tools. The tech giant promised versions of its Bing search engine and Edge browser that incorporate chatbots, drawing on a partnership with the ChatGPT creator OpenAI. Microsoft’s ambitions may be bigger: It’s reportedly planning to create software to let companies make their own ChatGPT-powered chatbots.Zoom plans to lay off 15 percent of its staff. The videoconferencing company acknowledged it had hired too many people during its pandemic boom, and needed to retrench as growth has slowed. Its C.E.O., Eric Yuan, said he plans to cut his salary for the coming fiscal year by roughly 98 percent and forgo a bonus.A former Coinbase employee pleads guilty to insider trading. Ishan Wahi, who was a product manager at the crypto exchange, had been accused of tipping his brother and a friend about tokens it planned to list, bringing about $1.5 million in illegal profit. He’s the first crypto insider to admit insider trading.Chobani’s founder urges U.S. companies to fund recovery efforts for the earthquake in Turkey and Syria. Hamdi Ulukaya, a Turkish immigrant, has partnered with the Turkish Philanthropy Funds to aid in recovery from the quake, which has a death toll above 11,000. He told DealBook that he has personally donated $2 million to the cause.Jay Powell sees a “bumpy” path ahead America’s red-hot labor market suggests that the world’s biggest economy may yet avoid recession. But this same dynamic has also thrust the Fed into a policy conundrum, with pressure for higher interest rates to tamp down inflation.In a question-and-answer session at the Economic Club of Washington on Tuesday, the Fed’s chair, Jay Powell, said he could see “the very early stages of disinflation,” but added that the easing in prices was likely to follow a “bumpy” path, particularly with hiring and wage growth proving strong.January’s jobs data surpassed the Fed’s forecasts. Mr. Powell said last Friday’s knockout nonfarm payroll report, which announced that employers added 517,000 new jobs last month, was “certainly strong — stronger than anyone I know expected.”Other data offered more encouraging signs for the U.S. economy. The Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow tracker forecasts that the U.S. will grow by 2.1 percent in the first quarter; it was predicting 0.7 percent a week ago. And even bearish economists are dialing down their gloomy expectations: “A potential recession in 2023 will likely be short and shallow,” Jeffrey Roach, the chief economist for LPL Financial, wrote to investors on Tuesday, while Goldman Sachs economists this week lowered their estimate of the likelihood of a U.S. recession to 25 percent.Investors were relieved that Mr. Powell gave no hint of a sudden shift in the Fed’s strategy. He reiterated that the central bank planned to keep raising borrowing costs to rein in consumer spending. That was enough to reassure investors that no big policy changes were coming soon: The S&P 500 rallied after his comments, snapping a two-day losing streak.A hedge fund catches meme fever Hudson Bay Capital Management has emerged as the mystery backer of Bed Bath & Beyond’s bold plan to cash in on its meme-stock cachet to raise $1 billion in emergency funds and avert bankruptcy.The hedge fund’s involvement in the deal highlights the meme-stock frenzy’s pull on big institutions. Shares in the struggling retailer, which has closed 400 stores in the past year as revenues slide, are up nearly 86 percent in the past month in extremely volatile trading that’s been largely influenced by day-traders betting on its survival. But the stock nearly halved on Tuesday, after the company announced it would sell a flood of new shares, which will dilute existing shareholders.Hudson Bay has underwritten the initial $225 million worth of shares that Bed Bath & Beyond is selling. It plans to underwrite another $800 million over time, if certain unspecified “conditions are met.” Hudson Bay also receives warrants to buy further stock at an advantageous price, which could prove lucrative if the retailer were to turn its business around.The deal with Hudson Bay came together within the past several weeks, two people familiar with the negotiations told DealBook. Late last month, JPMorgan Chase, which gave Bed Bath & Beyond a lifeline last summer by expanding its credit line, froze the retailer’s credit accounts after deeming the company in breach of the terms of its debt. As Bed Bath & Beyond raced to find cash to pay its debts, it had also been preparing for a bankruptcy — and possible liquidation — if the needed funds didn’t arrive.Whether this only buys Bed Bath & Beyond a temporary reprieve remains to be seen. “The fundamental story for Bed Bath & Beyond is so broken at this point,” said David Silverman, a retail analyst at Fitch Ratings. “I don’t know that a short-term cash infusion that could buy them a few months, a couple of quarters, is going to change their fate.” The Wedbush Securities analyst Seth Basham seconded that opinion, cutting the stock price target to zero.“U.S. hog farmers look at the pictures of those farms in China, and they just scratch their heads and say, ‘We would never dare do that.’” — Brett Stuart, founder of the research firm Global AgriTrends, is worried about disease risks from China’s high-density pig farms, which in some cases pack the animals into tower blocks.Adam Neumann opens up about his next act Since leaving WeWork, Adam Neumann has (largely) kept quiet about his future plans, including Flow, a venture that Andreessen Horowitz invested $350 million in last year. But he is finally revealing more about the start-up, via a talk he gave to an Andreessen Horowitz-organized conference in November.The main — if still vague — takeaway is that Flow owns and operates apartment buildings that aim to persuade tenants to stay longer by making them “feel” as if they’re owners rather than renters. (How is left unsaid.) Mr. Neumann used plumbing to illustrate the business advantages of this approach, according to Bloomberg:An important element of the business proposition is that renters who stay longer are more profitable, Neumann said. His theory is that people who feel a sense of ownership will stick around.The plunger factor would be an added benefit for Flow. “If you’re in an apartment building and you’re a renter and your toilet gets clogged, you call the super,” he said. “If you’re in your own apartment, and you bought it and you own it and your toilet gets clogged, you take the plunger.” That’s the difference, he said, “when feeling like you own something.”THE SPEED READ DealsApollo is reportedly in talks to buy a stake in CS First Boston, the investment bank that will be spun out of Credit Suisse. (WSJ)Carlyle is said to be in negotiations to buy Cotiviti, a health care tech company, from Veritas Capital for nearly $15 billion. (Bloomberg)Oaktree Capital and other hedge funds have snapped up Adani Group bonds in recent days, restoring investor confidence in the beleaguered Indian conglomerate. (Bloomberg)PolicyMarty Walsh, the U.S. labor secretary, reportedly will step down to lead the N.H.L. players’ union. (Daily Faceoff)Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, said he wants to make 16 the minimum age to be allowed on social media in the U.S. (NBC News)Russia’s government is said to be pressuring the central bank to loosen fiscal policy as it enters the second year of its invasion of Ukraine. (Bloomberg)Best of the restAmerican start-ups laid off over 3,000 workers last month, up 1,700 percent from a year ago. Relatedly, Washington now has more tech vacancies than Silicon Valley. (Insider, WSJ)“The Secret Saudi Plan to Buy the World Cup.” (Politico)Voice actors say they’re increasingly being asked to sign away the rights to their voices — so they can be duplicated by A.I. (Vice)How Nestlé’s bet on a breakthrough treatment for peanut allergies went south. (Bloomberg Businessweek)LeBron James now owns the N.B.A.’s scoring record. (NYT)We’d like your feedback! Please email thoughts and suggestions to dealbook@nytimes.com. More

  • in

    How Kevin McCarthy Forged a Bond With Marjorie Taylor Greene

    The close alliance that has developed between the speaker and the hard-right Georgia Republican explains his rise, how he might govern and the heavy influence of the extremes on the new House G.O.P. majority.WASHINGTON — Days after he won his gavel in a protracted fight with hard-right Republicans, Speaker Kevin McCarthy gushed to a friend about the ironclad bond he had developed with an unlikely ally in his battle for political survival, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia.“I will never leave that woman,” Mr. McCarthy, a California Republican, told the friend, who described the private conversation on the condition of anonymity. “I will always take care of her.”Such a declaration from Mr. McCarthy would have been unthinkable in 2021, when Ms. Greene first arrived on Capitol Hill in a swirl of controversy and provocation. A former QAnon follower who had routinely trafficked in conspiratorial, violent and bigoted statements, Ms. Greene was then widely seen as a dangerous liability to the party and a threat to the man who aspired to lead Republicans back to the majority — a person to be controlled and kept in check, not embraced.But in the time since, a powerful alliance developed between Ms. Greene, the far-right rabble-rouser and acolyte of former President Donald J. Trump, and Mr. McCarthy, the affable fixture of the Washington establishment, according to interviews with 20 people with firsthand knowledge of the relationship, many of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss it.Their political union — a closer and more complex one than has previously been known — helps explain how Mr. McCarthy rose to power atop a party increasingly defined by its extremes, the lengths to which he will go to accommodate those forces, and how much influence Ms. Greene and the faction she represents have in defining the agenda of the new House Republican majority.“If you’re going to be in a fight, you want Marjorie in your foxhole,” Mr. McCarthy said. Both he and Ms. Greene agreed to brief interviews for this article. “When she picks a fight, she’s going to fight until the fight’s over. She reminds me of my friends from high school, that we’re going to stick together all the way through.”It is a relationship born of political expediency but fueled by genuine camaraderie, and nurtured by one-on-one meetings as often as once a week, usually at a coffee table in Mr. McCarthy’s Capitol office, as well as a constant stream of text messages back and forth.Mr. McCarthy has gone to unusual lengths to defend Ms. Greene, even dispatching his general counsel to spend hours on the phone trying to cajole senior executives at Twitter to reactivate her personal account after she was banned last year for violating the platform’s coronavirus misinformation policy.Ms. Greene, in turn, has taken on an outsize role as a policy adviser to Mr. McCarthy, who has little in the way of a fixed ideology of his own and has come to regard the Georgia congresswoman as a vital proxy for the desires and demands of the right-wing base that increasingly drives his party. He has adopted her stances on opposing vaccine mandates and questioning funding for the war in Ukraine, and even her call to reinvestigate the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol to show what she has called “the other side of the story.”Mr. McCarthy’s agenda, Ms. Greene said, “if he sticks to it, will easily vindicate me and prove I moved the conference to the right during my first two years when I served in the minority with no committees.”When Ms. Greene entered Congress in January 2021, she was viewed by Republican leaders as a headache.Anna Moneymaker for The New York Times‘Kevin Did This to You’It was a right-wing conspiracy theory that first came between Mr. McCarthy and Ms. Greene, but not in the way that many people think.When Ms. Greene entered Congress in January 2021, Republican leaders viewed her as a headache, and Mr. McCarthy regarded her as potentially beyond redemption. During her primary, social media posts had emerged in which she embraced the QAnon conspiracy theory and warned of “an Islamic invasion of our government.”A Divided CongressThe 118th Congress is underway, with Republicans controlling the House and Democrats holding the Senate.A Wide-Ranging Inquiry: The House approved the creation of a committee to scrutinize what Republicans say is the “weaponization” of government against conservatives. Democrats and historians see dark historical parallels.Abortion: As part of an anti-abortion rights effort, House Republicans pushed through a bill that could subject doctors who perform abortions to criminal penalties.I.R.S. Funds: Republicans in the House voted to cut funding for the Internal Revenue Service, as conservative lawmakers try to kneecap President Biden’s $80 billion overhaul of the agency.Nebraska: Former Gov. Pete Ricketts of Nebraska, a Republican, was appointed as the state’s next senator, replacing Ben Sasse, who resigned to become president of the University of Florida.Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the No. 2 Republican, had intervened to oppose Ms. Greene — an affront she would not forget — but Mr. McCarthy, who eschews confrontation and conflict, would not go that far. He issued a statement through a spokesman condemning the statements, but did not endorse her opponent.Weeks after Ms. Greene was sworn in, more conspiracy-laden posts surfaced, including diatribes in which she had questioned whether a plane really flew into the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001, and endorsed the executions of Democratic politicians including Speaker Nancy Pelosi and President Barack Obama.Outraged Democrats demanded that Mr. McCarthy oust her from congressional committees, and when he made no move to do so, they scheduled a vote to do it themselves. As the pressure built, some of Ms. Greene’s far-right allies told her yet another conspiratorial story that she believed: Mr. McCarthy, they said, was secretly working with Ms. Pelosi to strip her of power.Enraged, Ms. Greene stormed into Mr. McCarthy’s office in the Capitol late one night in February 2021 and handed him a letter signed by local Republican leaders in her district, urging him to keep her on her committees. They had received “countless” messages, they said, from their voters who were intent on supporting her.It served as a not-so-subtle warning to Mr. McCarthy that the Republican base would be outraged if he did not ensure she kept her committee seats. Mr. McCarthy tried to explain to Ms. Greene that he agreed that what Democrats were doing was outrageous, but that as minority leader, he had neither the power nor the votes to stop it..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}What we consider before using anonymous sources. Do the sources know the information? What’s their motivation for telling us? Have they proved reliable in the past? Can we corroborate the information? Even with these questions satisfied, The Times uses anonymous sources as a last resort. The reporter and at least one editor know the identity of the source.Learn more about our process.But Ms. Greene did not believe Mr. McCarthy, a person familiar with her thinking said. After she was booted off the Education and Budget Committees, members of her inner circle told her, “Don’t forget: Kevin did this to you.”Mr. McCarthy has gone to unusual lengths to defend Ms. Greene.Tom Brenner for The New York Times‘The Principal’s Office’The relationship remained fraught throughout Ms. Greene’s first year in Congress, as the same pattern played out again and again in their interactions. A controversy would erupt over an outrageous comment Ms. Greene had made, then Mr. McCarthy would summon her to deal with the matter privately.Ms. Greene would joke to friends, “Uh-oh, I’ve been called to the principal’s office.”But even as she continued to traffic in offensive conspiracy theories and spoke at a white nationalist rally, Mr. McCarthy refused to punish her and often refrained from even criticizing her comments until pressed by reporters. It was a calculated choice by Mr. McCarthy, who leads more by flattery and backslapping than through discipline.And by early 2022, Ms. Greene had begun to believe that Mr. McCarthy was willing to go to bat for her. When her personal Twitter account was shut down for violating coronavirus misinformation policies, Ms. Greene raced to Mr. McCarthy’s office in the Capitol and demanded that he get the social media platform to reinstate her account, according to a person familiar with the exchange.Instead of telling Ms. Greene that he had no power to order a private company to change its content moderation policies, Mr. McCarthy directed his general counsel, Machalagh Carr, to appeal to Twitter executives. Over the next two months, Ms. Carr would spend hours on the phone with them arguing Ms. Greene’s case, and even helped draft a formal appeal on her behalf.The efforts were unsuccessful at the time, but they impressed Ms. Greene and revealed how far Mr. McCarthy was prepared to go to defend her. It was part of a broader and methodical courtship of the hard right by Mr. McCarthy that included outreach to conservative media figures and Mr. Trump’s hard-line immigration adviser Stephen Miller.He had studied the two previous Republican speakers of the House, former Representatives John A. Boehner of Ohio and Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, a person familiar with his thinking said, and concluded that one of their fatal errors had been unnecessarily isolating far-right members, who in turn made their lives miserable. So Mr. McCarthy set out to do the opposite.Ms. Greene whipped votes on the House floor to support Mr. McCarthy during his fight to become speaker.Anna Moneymaker for The New York TimesApproaching SymbiosisStill, the alliance between Mr. McCarthy and Ms. Greene did not truly begin to flourish for several more months. At a party in the Dallas suburbs at the home of Arthur Schwartz, a G.O.P. consultant and outside adviser to Mr. McCarthy, Ms. Greene found herself in the corner of a great room chatting with Devin Nunes, the former top Republican on the Intelligence Committee and a committed Trump ally.Mr. Nunes told Ms. Greene about the time he had witnessed Mr. McCarthy yelling at Representative Steny H. Hoyer, the Maryland Democrat who was then the majority leader, for his party’s decision to remove Ms. Greene from her committees, and threatening that he would do the same to Democrats when Republicans came to power.Ms. Greene recalled it as the first time she had heard from somebody she trusted that Mr. McCarthy had defended her, rather than conspired with Democrats to blackball her. “That conversation had a big impact on me,” she said.From then on, the two settled into a kind of symbiotic relationship, both feeding off what the other could provide. Ms. Greene began regularly visiting Mr. McCarthy, frequently dropping by his office, and he began inviting her to high-level policy discussions attended by senior Republicans and praising her contributions.He was impressed not only by Ms. Greene’s seemingly innate understanding of the impulses of the party’s hard-right voters, but also by her prowess at building her own brand. He once remarked to allies with wonder at how Ms. Greene, as a freshman, was already known by a three-letter monogram: M.T.G. “She knows what she’s doing,” Mr. McCarthy marveled privately. “You’ve got A.O.C. and M.T.G.”After Republicans underperformed expectations in the midterm elections, winning only a narrow majority and guaranteeing that Mr. McCarthy would have a tough fight to become speaker, Ms. Greene was quick to begin barnstorming the right-wing media circuit as one of his top surrogates, using her conservative credentials to vouch for his. As her peers on the far-right flank of the party refused to support Mr. McCarthy, subjecting the Republican leader to a four-day stretch of defeats, Ms. Greene was unflinching in her support, personally whipping votes on the House floor and strategizing on calls with Mr. Trump.Ms. Greene’s support for Mr. McCarthy created a permission structure for other G.O.P. lawmakers to do the same.Representative Barry Moore, Republican of Alabama, said in an interview that when conservatives back home sought an explanation for his support for Mr. McCarthy, he would comfort them by replying: “Well, Jim Jordan and Marjorie Taylor Greene are standing with Kevin McCarthy. And so am I.”The relationship has also paid off for Ms. Greene, no longer the fringe backbencher stripped of her power. Republican leaders announced last week that she would serve on two high-profile committees: Oversight and Homeland Security. She is also likely to be appointed to a new Oversight select subcommittee to investigate the coronavirus, according to a source familiar with Mr. McCarthy’s thinking who was not authorized to preview decisions that have yet to be finalized.It is already clear that she is influencing Mr. McCarthy’s policy agenda.Ms. Greene has taken on an outsize role as an adviser to Mr. McCarthy.Haiyun Jiang/The New York TimesAfter Ms. Greene had told Mr. McCarthy that vaccine mandates were morally wrong and that he needed to stop them, he fought vociferously — and successfully — to include the repeal of the military coronavirus vaccine mandate in last year’s defense bill. After she told him that the party faithful could not understand why Congress continued to send money to help Ukraine secure its borders, when the United States’ southern border was not secure, Mr. McCarthy helped pave the way for Republicans on the Foreign Affairs Committee to put forward and support a bill sponsored by Ms. Greene, who does not sit on the panel, demanding that Congress audit American aid sent to Ukraine.And after she told Mr. McCarthy that many people imprisoned for their actions during the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol were being victimized, he signaled that Republicans would start an inquiry of their own digging into the work of the panel that was investigating the assault.“People need to understand that it isn’t just me that deserves credit,” Ms. Greene said. “It is the will and the voice of our base that was heard, and Kevin listened to them. I was just a vehicle much of the time.”In the early hours of Jan. 7, after Mr. McCarthy had finally clinched the speakership on the 15th ballot and pallets of champagne were being wheeled into his new office, Ms. Greene opted not to join the celebration. But she sent him a text message the next day telling Mr. McCarthy how happy and proud she was — and how she could not wait to get started.Kitty Bennett More