House of Representatives

Subterms

    More stories

    • 188 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Garland vows to hold January 6 attackers to account after Oath Keepers conviction – live

      by

      The House just voted to impose a labor agreement on rail workers, averting a potential rail strike that was to start in December. Though a majority of the dozen unions have supported the agreement, four have voted against it and were prepped to strike come December.The agreement includes a pay increase, a $1,000 annual bonus and a cap on healthcare premiums.Those against the agreement have decried its lack of paid sick leave for workers. The unions argue that workers have to use vacation when calling out sick else they are penalized.With a strike looming, Joe Biden called on Congress to intervene by voting on the agreement, which was made in September. In a statement, Biden said that he is “grateful” that the House voted to avert the strike and urged the Senate to “move quickly” on getting the bill passed.“Without action this week, disruptions to our auto supply chains, our ability to move food to tables, and our ability to remove hazardous waste from gasoline refineries will begin,” Biden said. “A rail shutdown would be devastating to our economy and families across the country.”NEW: Pres. Biden urges Senate to “act urgently” after House votes to impose agreement to block rail strike, warning “a rail shutdown would be devastating to our economy and families across the country.” https://t.co/2rpGhC5vln pic.twitter.com/9DMs2wbM2g— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) November 30, 2022
      The chair of the Georgia Republican Party cannot share lawyers with 10 other fake electors, a judge ruled. The AP reports: .css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}The chair and other fake electors cannot share lawyers in matters related to a special grand jury investigation into possible illegal meddling in the 2020 election in the state.
      A special grand jury was seated earlier this year to aid the investigation by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis into whether Republican former President Donald Trump and others committed crimes through their efforts to overturn his 2020 presidential election loss to Democrat Joe Biden.
      Willis has made clear that she is interested in the actions of 16 Republicans who signed a certificate declaring falsely that Trump had won and also declaring themselves the state’s “duly elected and qualified” electors, even though Biden had won the state, and a slate of Democratic electors was certified. Willis has said in a court filing that she notified lawyers for those 16 people that they are targets of her investigation, meaning that they could face criminal charges.
      Eleven of those fake electors, including Georgia Republican Party Chairman David Shafer, are represented by two lawyers who are paid by the party, Holly Pierson and Kimberly Debrow. Willis’ team in October filed a motion seeking to disqualify the two from representing all of those clients, saying it represented a conflict of interest.
      They argued that, if Pierson and Debrow continue to represent any of the 11, “there is a serious possibility of future ethical problems concerning confidentiality of information obtained in the course of their representation thus far.”
      In the clearest signal yet that Ron DeSantis is preparing a run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024, it was announced on Wednesday that the rightwing governor of Florida will publish a campaign-style book, mixing memoir with policy proposals.The Courage to Be Free: Florida’s Blueprint for America’s Renewal, will be published by Broadside Books, a conservative imprint of HarperCollins, on 28 February.The governor, his publisher said, will offer readers “a first-hand account from the blue-collar boy who grew up to take on Disney and Dr Fauci”.DeSantis has not announced a 2024 run, but he is widely reported to be considering one. His victory speech after a landslide re-election this month met with chants of “Two more years!”The cover of the governor’s book shows him smiling broadly in front of a US flag.With Donald Trump under fire over disappointing midterms results, looming indictments and a controversial dinner with a white supremacist, possible Republican opponents are rapidly coming into focus.Read more:Ron DeSantis book announcement a clear sign of presidential ambitionRead moreGarland’s remarks come after the recent appointment of Jack Smith as independent special counsel overseeing investigations into Donald Trump’s hoarding of top secret documents and involvement in the January 6 riot.From the Guardian’s prior explainer:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Smith has previously served as the chief of public integrity for the US justice department and dealt in particular with cases involving corruption, bringing cases against prominent Republicans and Democrats. In 2015 he was appointed first assistant US attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee. He is a registered independent, not aligned with either of the two dominant political parties in the US.
      Since 2018 he has been the chief prosecutor for the international criminal court in The Hague, the city on the North Sea that operates as the national administrative center of the Netherlands, and there has investigated and adjudicated war crimes that took place in Kosovo, in the Balkans.Read more:Who is Jack Smith, the special counsel investigating Donald Trump?Read moreAt a press conference, Merrick Garland spoke on the justice department’s recent lawsuit against the city of Jackson, Mississippi for violating the Clean Drinking Water Act. In August, flooding caused failure of the area’s water treatment plant, leaving residents without clean drinking water for a week.The lawsuit, if won, would revoke the city’s control over its water system.The DOJ’s new department of environmental justice, which got its first appointed leader earlier this month, is in charge of the suit against the city.“Although environmental justice can happen anywhere, injustice can happen anywhere. Communities of color, Indigenous communities and low-income communities often bear the brunt,” Garland said. “We will continue to prioritize cases like this one that will have the greatest impact on communities most vulnerable to environmental harm.”​​US attorney general Merrick Garland is speaking on yesterday’s conviction of Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes for creating the violent plot to overturn the 2020 presidential election results.Garland praised the justice department for its effort to bring a case against Rhodes and his five co-conspirators. Rhodes was found guilty of seditious conspiracy, a rare charge, by a 12-person jury.“The verdict in this case makes clear department will work tirelessly to hold accountable those responsible for crimes related to the attack on our democracy on January 6, 2021,” Garland said.In the daily White House press briefing, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre is responding to heat Joe Biden is getting for pushing Congress to impose an agreement – one that multiple unions did not approve – on rail workers to avert a strike.Jean-Pierre on Republican Kevin McCarthy’s border invitation: “He’s been there, he’s been to the border. Since he took office the president has been taking action to fix our immigration system and secure the border.”— David Smith (@SmithInAmerica) November 30, 2022
      Some rail workers are saying Biden “blew it” by giving Congress the greenlight to intervene, though Biden has been emphasizing the economic impact a rail strike would have on the country.The House voted to give rail workers seven days of paid sick leave, a key point of tension in contract negotiations between unions and rail companies.The vote was close – 221 to 207 – and it is unclear whether the provision can get enough support in the Senate.The vote was separate from a vote the House made earlier today to impose an agreement on rail workers that includes a pay raise, annual bonus and cap on healthcare premiums. The agreement, made in September, does not include paid sick leave. The House ultimately took up the agreement to avoid a rail strike in December.Union members had drawn out contract negotiations over paid sick leave, arguing that workers were subject to unfair conditions, having to use vacation days when sick or face penalties.In the Senate, Bernie Sanders is leading the fight for the seven days of sick leave. At least 12 Democrats have joined him in their support for the measure so far, though it is unclear whether Democrats can get an extra 10 Republican votes to get the measure passed.12 Dem senators, led by Sanders, call for Senate to adopt House leave resolution. “Guaranteeing 7 paid sick days to rail workers would only cost the industry $321 million a year – less than 2 percent of their total profits.”— Arthur Delaney 🇺🇸 (@ArthurDelaneyHP) November 30, 2022
      Maya Yang reports:Two men convicted of fraud for targeting Black voters with phony robocalls before the 2020 election must spend 500 hours registering voters in low-income neighborhoods of Washington DC, an Ohio judge ruled.The calls told people they could be arrested or forced to receive vaccinations based on information they submitted in votes by mail.Jacob Wohl, 24, of Irvine, California, and Jack Burkman, 56, of Arlington, Virginia – rightwing operatives with a history of targeting Democrats and other public figures – pleaded guilty last month, each to a single felony count of telecommunications fraud.The judge in Cuyahoga county common pleas court, John Sutula, also fined each man $2,500 and placed them on two years’ probation. They were ordered to spend six months in home confinement, beginning at 8pm each day.“I think it’s a despicable thing that you guys have done,” Sutula said, comparing their actions to violence used to suppress Black voters in the south in the 1960s.Wohl and Burkman were indicted in October 2020, accused of arranging for a voice broadcast service to make about 85,000 robocalls to predominantly Black neighborhoods in Ohio, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania and Illinois in the run-up to the 2020 general election.Prosecutors said the pair were responsible for 3,500 calls to residents of Cleveland and East Cleveland.Rightwing election robocall fraudsters must spend 500 hours registering votersRead moreThe House just voted to impose a labor agreement on rail workers, averting a potential rail strike that was to start in December. Though a majority of the dozen unions have supported the agreement, four have voted against it and were prepped to strike come December.The agreement includes a pay increase, a $1,000 annual bonus and a cap on healthcare premiums.Those against the agreement have decried its lack of paid sick leave for workers. The unions argue that workers have to use vacation when calling out sick else they are penalized.With a strike looming, Joe Biden called on Congress to intervene by voting on the agreement, which was made in September. In a statement, Biden said that he is “grateful” that the House voted to avert the strike and urged the Senate to “move quickly” on getting the bill passed.“Without action this week, disruptions to our auto supply chains, our ability to move food to tables, and our ability to remove hazardous waste from gasoline refineries will begin,” Biden said. “A rail shutdown would be devastating to our economy and families across the country.”NEW: Pres. Biden urges Senate to “act urgently” after House votes to impose agreement to block rail strike, warning “a rail shutdown would be devastating to our economy and families across the country.” https://t.co/2rpGhC5vln pic.twitter.com/9DMs2wbM2g— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) November 30, 2022
      Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell suggested the Fed will continue to raise interest rates, though at a slower pace if inflation continues to go down.Powell said that he believes the labor market needs to cool to get the inflation rate down. The Fed has set a goal of 2% inflation. In October, the 12-month inflation rate was at 7.7% – the lowest it’s been since the beginning of the year. “The time for moderating the pace of rate increases may come as soon as the December meeting,” Powell said. He indicated that a raise of half a percentage point would be suitable. The Fed has been aggressively raising interest rates, with four consecutive 0.75-point rate raises over the last year. Powell noted that there is still “a long way to go in restoring price stability”, including tempering wage growth to a level that would be consistent with 2% inflation and a balancing of the labor market. The Fed will set interest rates at its next meeting on December 14.Chris McGreal reports …Two former senior US diplomats have made a highly unusual call for the Biden administration to cut weapons supplies to Israel if the incoming far-right government uses them to annex Palestinian land, expel Arabs or finally kill off the diminishing possibility of a Palestinian state.Daniel Kurtzer, a former US ambassador to Israel under George W Bush, and Aaron David Miller, a US Middle East peace negotiator during several administrations, have called for what they described as an “unprecedented and controversial” break from America’s largely unconditional military and diplomatic support for Israel if “the most extreme government in the history of the state” pursues the stated aims of some of its members.The pair warn that these could include “efforts to change the status of the West Bank”, in effect a warning against partial or wholesale annexation of Palestinian land to Israel. They also warned against increased use of force against Arabs in the occupied territories and Israel by incoming ministers who have espoused openly racist views, escalating settlement construction, and moves “to build infrastructure for settlers that is designed to foreclose the possibility of a two-state solution”.Full story:Biden urged to threaten Israel weapons halt over far-right concernsRead moreReuters reports the latest news on Joe Biden’s bid to avert a damaging rail strike, thus:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}A majority of the US House of Representatives has backed a bill to block a potentially crippling rail strike, but the fate of a separate proposal by lawmakers to mandate paid sick time remains uncertain.
      With voting ongoing, more than 250 members of 432 current House members had voted in favor of imposing a tentative contract deal reached in September on a dozen unions representing 115,000 workers after Biden warned of the catastrophic impact of a rail stoppage that could begin as early as 9 December. A separate vote is planned later on Wednesday on whether to require seven days of paid sick leave.Here at Guardian US, Michael Sainato reported earlier on disquiet among railroad unions:Railroad workers have expressed dismay at Joe Biden’s proposed solution to a looming strike that threatens to derail the US economy, which they say belies his image as the most pro-union president in generations.As a 9 December deadline looms for the long-running dispute between the US’s largest railway companies and their unions, Biden has called on Congress to intervene and block a strike that could cost the US economy about $2bn a day, by some estimates.The impending strike comes as the US struggles with a cost-of-living crisis driven by a 40-year high in inflation. Biden has said a railroad labor action could “devastate our economy”. On Wednesday, Congress is expected to pass legislation that will force a settlement.But union leaders are unhappy that Biden’s solution appears to be the imposition of a settlement reached in September that has been rejected by many for failing to address concerns about pay, sick days, staff shortages and time off.“Joe Biden blew it,” said Hugh Sawyer, treasurer of Railroad Workers United, a group representing workers from a variety of rail unions and carriers.“He had the opportunity to prove his labor-friendly pedigree to millions of workers by simply asking Congress for legislation to end the threat of a national strike on terms more favorable to workers. Sadly, he could not bring himself to advocate for a lousy handful of sick days. The Democrats and Republicans are both pawns of big business and the corporations.”Full story:US rail unions decry Biden’s proposal to impose settlement through CongressRead more More

    • 75 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      House Republicans Face a Triple Threat

      by

      In the new year, Republicans will hold a majority in the House of Representatives. They will have the opportunity to set the chamber’s agenda, conduct oversight of the White House and amplify their platform in the run-up to the 2024 presidential election.That’s the good news for the G.O.P. The bad news is that Democrats will still hold the presidency and control of the Senate. Also, with the new Congress in January, there will be no more than 222 Republicans in the chamber, just four more than a bare majority.A narrow majority is not in itself sufficient to cripple a majority party. In the past two years, Democrats in the House and Senate proved that.But House Republicans face low odds of success because of a triple threat: a fragile majority, factional divisions and untested leadership. Still, there are steps that party leaders should take to improve their chances of avoiding a partisan circus and perhaps even preside over a productive two years in power — and real risks if they defer instead to extremists in their ranks.The House Freedom Caucus, an assertive faction of 40-odd lawmakers, includes the likes of Jim Jordan of Ohio, Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Lauren Boebert of Colorado. Generally, the caucus embraces confrontation over compromise, is disdainful of party loyalty — which extends to the selection of its leaders — and has a track record of killing its party’s own bills. In a slim majority, it holds greater leverage over any legislation.Kevin McCarthy has made assiduous efforts to court the caucus over the past few years to become speaker, yet the caucus members’ skepticism of him in that role remains: In a recent vote for the party’s nominee for speaker, over 30 Republicans voted against him, and at least five conservatives have said that they will oppose him when the full House votes for its next speaker in January. That is more than enough to deny him the speakership, since the nominee must get a majority of the entire House, and no Democrat is expected to vote for Mr. McCarthy.This makes Mr. McCarthy vulnerable. Freedom Caucus members are making demands that could ultimately be fatal to any hope of Republican success in the House. They want rules changes that, among other things, would weaken the speakership by making bipartisan coalitions harder to build, allowing only bills supported by a majority of the G.O.P. to come to the floor. Such a rule would constrain the speaker’s agenda-setting power and make it extremely hard to pass much-needed legislation unpopular with Republicans, like raising the debt ceiling.Mr. McCarthy should not empower the Freedom Caucus at the expense of his own influence. Yes, he has to navigate a delicate path. But if he is elected speaker but gives away the store in the process, it will be a Pyrrhic victory.At the moment, he seems inclined to give away the store. By not refusing caucus demands, he has most likely put himself along a troubled path similar to those of his predecessors Newt Gingrich and John Boehner. Mr. McCarthy has vowed to block an increase in the debt limit unless Democrats agree to spending cuts and suggested that the Homeland Security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, could face impeachment.These ill-conceived pledges create false hopes among Republican lawmakers and voters of what the party can accomplish. It’s true that in seeking the speakership, Mr. McCarthy cannot simply ignore the Freedom Caucus, since it commands more than enough votes to torpedo his quest for speaker and any partisan Republican bill in the next Congress.But political power comes in part from perceptions. If Mr. McCarthy surrenders too much to the caucus, it will reinforce the impression that he is less a leader than a follower and erode the clout he will need to lobby lawmakers on tough votes.Furthermore, if as speaker he consistently defers to the Freedom Caucus, he risks alienating more moderate or swing-district Republicans (or both). Only a handful of these lawmakers would need to cross party lines in order for the minority party to get its way.Republicans have made it clear that we should expect a buzz of activity in oversight hearings and committee-led investigations — possibly of elements of the F.B.I. and the Justice Department and a heavy dose of Hunter Biden.Republican leaders can avoid making Congress look like a space exclusively for partisan show trials by being flexible in their agenda and seeking out majorities wherever they can find them. That could include partisan measures from the party’s Commitment to America platform, like funding for the police as well as some symbolic, non-consequential legislation that will please the party’s base. (Think resolutions that declare lawmaker opposition to “woke” teaching and illegal immigration.)The G.O.P. might also try to pursue bipartisan legislation in areas like health or family care, since securing the votes of minority-party members on bills can make up for any defections within their own ranks. Bipartisan bills also have at least a plausible chance of getting the approval of the Democratic-led Senate and White House that they will need to become law.When it comes to bills that the House must pass, like appropriations and an increase in the debt ceiling, Mr. McCarthy might have to follow in the footsteps of Speaker Boehner, who let party conservatives resist the passage of such measures until, facing economic catastrophe, he deferred to Republican moderates to pass them with Democrats.None of these strategies is a guarantee of success. And with such a slim majority, there is also the possibility, if remote, that the Republican Party loses power altogether because a few of its members resign or die in office or one or more members leave the party. In 1930, enough of the G.O.P.’s lawmakers passed away and were replaced by Democrats in special elections that the party was robbed of its majority.In 2001, Senate Republicans failed to heed the warnings of Senator Jim Jeffords of Vermont that he would leave the Republican Party. When he did, control of the Senate flipped to Democrats.Even if Republicans don’t lose power this way, the conditions are far from ideal for House Republicans to take advantage of being a governing party. Don’t be surprised if the next two years in the House of Representatives are more soap opera than substance.But if the party remains in charge in the House and can assuage its right flank, its leaders should take steps to temper expectations, protect their authority and be open to working with Democrats if they hope to build a record of legislative success in what will be a challenging political environment.Matthew N. Green is a professor of politics at Catholic University, a co-author of “Newt Gingrich: The Rise and Fall of a Party Entrepreneur” and the author of “Legislative Hardball.”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

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Donate This Holiday Season: The Rising Seas Institute Needs Your Help

      by

      Bret Stephens: Gail, I hope you had a lovely and restful Thanksgiving weekend. At the risk of turning the meaning of the holiday on its head, I wanted to ask you what you don’t feel grateful for, at least politically speaking.Gail Collins: Well, before we go there, let me start by saying I am very grateful I didn’t have a dinner date at Mar-a-Lago. Which I guess goes without saying. But gee, Donald Trump broke bread with Kanye West and Nick Fuentes, who is both a Holocaust denier and a white supremacist? Good lord.Bret: What’s shocking is that people are shocked. Still, it’s pretty nauseating to me that the Republican Jewish Coalition — whose unofficial motto should be “Hit me baby, one more time” — could not bring itself to condemn the former president by name.For my part, I’m emphatically not grateful to live in a country where there was a mass shooting last week at a Walmart in Virginia, which was preceded by a mass shooting at a gay club in Colorado, which was preceded by a mass shooting at the University of Virginia, which occurred the same weekend that four students at the University of Idaho were stabbed to death, which came just a few days after four people were shot dead in a home in Maryland. And I’m just scratching the surface here.Gail: The Idaho tragedy expands the story beyond shootings, and I hope you’ve got thoughts on the nation’s overall pathology about violence.Bret: I know the research hasn’t proved this, but I suspect violent video games also have a lot to do with both socially isolating and numbing the minds of troubled teenage boys. If I ever get to be king of a small island, I’d probably ban them all — except, of course, Pac-Man and Donkey Kong.Gail: OK, am loving the idea of you as an anti-game crusader.But the bottom line in the vast majority of these terrible tragedies is guns. Easy access to firearms turns everyday psychopaths into mass murderers, and I can’t understand why the nation doesn’t rise up in outrage.People are talking about using red flag laws to report gun owners who might be dangerous, but I just don’t buy that as an answer. The stories we hear after these tragedies suggest most of them involve shooters whose families would never pursue such an effortful, seeking-outside-help approach.Bret: We’re in total accord. Any sane society would raise the legal age to buy guns to at least 21, even 25, limit magazine sizes, impose draconian penalties on illegal weapons traffic and possession and restore stop-question-frisk as a legitimate police tactic so long as it isn’t used in a racially discriminatory manner.Gail: Well, we’ve finally coasted to a disagreement there at the end. Try convincing law-abiding young Black men that if police are encouraged to stop and frisk, they won’t misuse the go-ahead.But please, let’s get back to guns.Bret: I’m reminded of Justice Robert Jackson’s line about how the Bill of Rights shouldn’t be turned into a suicide pact. We need to bring that idea back to life when it comes to the Second Amendment.Gail: President Biden just called for a ban on assault weapons, but it’s not gonna happen. Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, the leader on this issue, says he doesn’t have the votes now, and it sure isn’t going to pass once Kevin McCarthy takes over.Bret: Democrats and moderate Republicans need to get smarter about the gun debate. Calling for blanket bans just won’t work in this political climate. But I bet most Americans can be won over to the idea that if you can’t buy a beer, you shouldn’t be able to buy a gun. Not that it will sway House Republicans this term, but I’m thinking longer term.Gail: We’ll see. But to digress, tell me who you’re rooting for on the political front now.Bret: You mean Congress? Well, let me start by rooting for Herschel Walker’s defeat in Georgia’s runoff election. And I say that as someone who isn’t exactly sympathetic to his opponent.Gail: Yeah, Walker’s accidental announcement on Fox that “this erection is about the people” was certainly a comment that launched a thousand memes.And, of course, a reminder of why he’s such a disaster as a candidate for a partial term, let alone a full one.Bret: If his entire campaign has made one thing clear, it is that we would all be better off if he were to lose both.As for the House, the most I can hope for is that they do as little harm as possible. Couldn’t the 118th Congress just take a very long nap?Gail: Well, they certainly have stuff to do. Like, um, keeping the government in operation. Which would require raising the debt limit.Could be tricky even with the current competent Democratic leadership. Are you onboard?Bret: Yes. I’m all for curbing government spending, but the debt limit is the dumbest way to achieve it. It’s like trying to keep an alcoholic sober by locking up his liquor stash in a glass box.Gail: We’re certainly in the holiday spirit. Love your analogy.Bret: I also think Congress can do some good if it pushes the administration to give Ukraine the kinds of arms it needs to defeat Russia and Taiwan the weapons it needs to deter China. That’s why I’m glad Mike Rogers of Alabama will be head of the Armed Services Committee, and Michael McCaul of Texas will be head of foreign affairs. They’re serious men.Gail: Well, as you know, I try not to talk about foreign affairs …Bret: On the other hand, having Ohio’s Jim Jordan as head of the Judiciary Committee is about as enticing as a pimple-popping video on YouTube: You’ll watch in horrified fascination and then you’ll want to throw up.Gail: Ha! Happy to just say: Your party.Bret: Not any longer.Speaking of Congress, Gail, any thoughts on Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York as House minority leader?Gail: First, I should say again how great it was that Nancy Pelosi was ready to let some new folks have a turn in charge.And Jeffries seems like a fine pick. Well past time for a Black member of the House to take the top job for the Democrats, and in Jeffries you have a congressman with a long track record of progressive leadership combined with the skill to go moderate when the need arises.You have any thoughts? And how would you compare him with McCarthy on the Republican side?Bret: Jeffries was impressive as one of the House managers last year in Trump’s second impeachment. And he’s pro-Israel, which is a relief given the anti-Israel drift of some of his more progressive colleagues. I would probably disagree with him on most issues, but he seems like a good choice. And as for any comparison with McCarthy: I generally prefer vertebrates to invertebrates.Gail: Hehehehe.Bret: Gail, can I switch to something a bit more positive? In the spirit of the season, our bosses have asked us to suggest some charities we think are especially worthy of support. Last year, I endorsed the Hunts Point Alliance for Children, which provides educational opportunities for kids in one of New York’s most impoverished neighborhoods; Compass to Care, which helps defray the transportation costs of families with children who have cancer; and Minds Matter, which does amazing work helping gifted kids from underprivileged homes prepare academically for college.I continue to admire all of these organizations. This year I’ll add another: the Rising Seas Institute, which organized the trip I took last summer to Greenland and helped reorient my thinking about climate change. Its leader, John Englander, is one of the most thoughtful and gracious people I’ve ever met — even if we still disagree about a thing or three.What about you? More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      The Republican Party and the Scourge of Extremist Violence

      by

      .g-seriestitle-wrapper {
      width: 600px;
      margin: 0px auto;
      max-width: 100%;
      font-family: nyt-imperial;
      font-size: 16px;
      color: #696969;
      font-weight: 100;
      font-style: italic;
      line-height: 23px;
      border-bottom: 1px solid #ccc;
      padding-bottom: 15px;
      }

      section#violentextremism-seriestext {
      margin: 0px auto 15px;
      }

      .g-seriestitle-wrapper a:link, .g-seriestitle-wrapper a:visited {
      color: inherit;
      text-decoration: underline;
      text-decoration-thickness: 1px;
      text-underline-offset: 2px;
      text-decoration-color: #bbb;
      }

      This editorial is the fourth in a series, The Danger Within, urging readers to understand the danger of extremist violence — and offering possible solutions. Read more about the series in a note from Kathleen Kingsbury, the Times Opinion editor.

      On Oct. 12, 2018, a crowd of Proud Boys arrived at the Metropolitan Republican Club in Manhattan. They had come to the Upper East Side club from around the country for a speech by the group’s founder, Gavin McInnes. It was a high point for the Proud Boys — which until that point had been known best as an all-male right-wing street-fighting group — in their embrace by mainstream politics.The Metropolitan Republican Club is an emblem of the Republican establishment. It was founded in 1902 by supporters of Theodore Roosevelt, and it’s where New York City Republicans such as Fiorello La Guardia and Rudy Giuliani announced their campaigns. But the presidency of Donald Trump whipped a faction of the Metropolitan Republican Club into “an ecstatic frenzy,” said John William Schiffbauer, a Republican consultant who used to work for the state G.O.P. on the second floor of the club.The McInnes invitation was controversial, even before a group of Proud Boys left the building and violently confronted protesters who had gathered outside. Two of the Proud Boys were later convicted of attempted assault and riot and given four years in prison. The judge who sentenced them explained the relatively long prison term: “I know enough about history to know what happened in Europe in the ’30s when political street brawls were allowed to go ahead without any type of check from the criminal justice system,” he said. Seven others pleaded guilty in the episode.And yet Republicans at the New York club have not distanced themselves from the Proud Boys. Soon after the incident, a candidate named Ian Reilly, who, former club members say, had a lead role in planning the speech, won the next club presidency. He did so in part by recruiting followers of far-right figures, such as Milo Yiannopoulos, to pack the club’s ranks at the last minute. A similar group of men repeated the strategy at the New York Young Republicans Club, filling it with far-right members, too.Many moderate Republicans have quit the clubs in disgust. Looking back, Mr. Schiffbauer said, Oct. 12, 2018, was a “proto” Jan. 6.In conflicts like this one —  not all of them played out so publicly — there is a fight underway for the soul of the Republican Party. On one side are Mr. Trump and his followers, including extremist groups like the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers. On the other side stand those in the party who remain committed to the principle that politics, even the most contentious politics, must operate within the constraints of peaceful democracy. It is vital that this pro-democracy faction win out over the extremists and push the fringes back to the fringes.It has happened before. The Republican Party successfully drove the paranoid extremists of the John Birch Society out of public life in the 1960s. Party leaders could do so again for the current crop of conspiracy peddlers. Voters may do it for them, as they did in so many races in this year’s midterm elections. But this internal Republican Party struggle is important for reasons far greater than the tally in a win/loss column. A healthy democracy requires both political parties to be fully committed to the rule of law and not to entertain or even tacitly encourage violence or violent speech. A large faction of one party in our country fails that test, and that has consequences for all of us.Extremist violence is the country’s top domestic terrorist threat, according to a three-year investigation by the Democratic staff members of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, which reported its findings last week. “Over the past two decades, acts of domestic terrorism have dramatically increased,” the committee said in its report. “National security agencies now identify domestic terrorism as the most persistent and lethal terrorist threat to the homeland. This increase in domestic terror attacks has been predominantly perpetrated by white supremacist and anti-government extremist individuals and groups.” While there have been recent episodes of violent left-wing extremism, for the past few years, political violence has come primarily from the right.This year has been marked by several high-profile acts of political violence: an attempted break-in at an F.B.I. office in Ohio; the attack on Paul Pelosi, the husband of the speaker of the House; the mass shooting at a supermarket in Buffalo by a white supremacist; an armed threat against Justice Brett Kavanaugh; a foiled plan to attack a synagogue in New York. More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      What can Democrats push through Congress in the lame-duck session?

      by

      AnalysisWhat can Democrats push through Congress in the lame-duck session?Lauren Gambinoin WashingtonLegislation on the debt ceiling, civil liberties and elections is still possible before Republican House majority kicks in As a new era of divided government looms in the US, Democrats are rushing to complete a lengthy legislative to-do list that includes landmark civil liberties legislation, a routine but critical spending package and a bill to prevent another January 6.Trump is now effectively in control of the US House of Representatives | Sidney BlumenthalRead moreThere are only a handful of working days left before the balance of power in Congress shifts and Democrats’ unified control of government in Washington ends. In January, Republicans will claim the gavel in the House, giving them veto power over much of Joe Biden’s agenda.Meanwhile, Democrats will retain – and possibly expand, depending on the outcome of a runoff election in Georgia – their majority in the Senate, allowing them to continue confirming Biden’s judicial and administrative nominees.With a narrowing window to act, Democrats intend to use the end-of-year “lame duck” session to leave a legislative mark while they still control all the levers of power in Washington. But they are also under mounting pressure to act to raise the statutory debt limit, staving off a partisan showdown next year that many fear could lead to economic calamity.“We are going to try to have as productive a lame-duck session as possible,” the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, said at a post-election press conference. “It’s going to be heavy work, long hours to try and get much done.”Among the unfinished business is enacting legislation to keep the federal government funded past a 16 December deadline. Failure to do so would result in a government shutdown. Lawmakers must also reauthorize the annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a must-pass bill that sets US military policy for the coming year.Democrats must also decide whether to confront the debt limit. House Republicans have threatened to use the debt ceiling as leverage to extract deep spending cuts, a prospect that has raised alarm among economists and policymakers who are pleading with Democrats to defuse a dangerous fiscal standoff.In an interview with CNN, Congressman Hakeem Jeffries, who is poised to succeed Nancy Pelosi when she steps down as the House Democratic leader in January, said raising the debt ceiling before Republicans take control of the House was probably “the right thing to do” as a way to prevent conservatives “from being able to hold the American economy hostage”.The debt ceiling now stands at $31.4tn, a level that will need to be addressed by the third quarter of 2023, according to projections.Yet Democratic leaders have suggested that it is unlikely Congress will address the borrowing limit in the next few weeks.Schumer said last week that he would like to “get a debt ceiling done in this work period” but insisted that it would require Republican support, effectively ruling out a go-it-alone approach that would allow Democrats to unilaterally raise the debt limit. Speaking to reporters on the same day, the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, said he didn’t think Congress would take up the issue until “sometime next year”.In a Washington Post op-ed, Peter Orszag, the former director of the Office of Management and Budget and the Congressional Budget Office, implored Democrats to prioritize the issue, even if it takes up precious floor time to accomplish.“Any Democrats averse to taking such a painful vote now should consider how much leverage their party will lose once Republicans control the House – and how much higher the risk of default will be then,” he wrote. “It’s generally not a good idea to enter a negotiation with a ticking timebomb and a counter-party willing to let it go off.”While fiscal matters are at the center of negotiations on Capitol Hill, there are many more legislative items on the agenda.Schumer said the Senate will take a final vote on legislation to protect same-sex and interracial marriages when the chamber returns after the Thanksgiving recess. Earlier this month, 12 Republicans joined all Democrats to clear a major procedural hurdle that put the historic measure on track to passage.“Passing the Respect for Marriage Act is no longer a matter of if but only of when,” he said in recent remarks. A version of the bill passed the House earlier this year, with support from dozens of Republicans.Meanwhile, the Senate also hopes to enact reforms to a 19th-century elections law that Donald Trump attempted to exploit to reverse his defeat in 2020, which led to the insurrection at the Capitol.A bipartisan proposal would overhaul the Electoral Count Act, clarifying that the role of the vice-president, who presides over the certification of the electoral votes as president of the Senate, is purely ceremonial. That means the vice-president could not unilaterally throw out electoral votes, as Trump and his allies pressured his vice-president, Mike Pence, to do. If the bill passes, it would be the most substantive legislative response to the events of January 6.The White House is also eager for Congress to approve additional financial support for Ukraine, as the nation defends itself against a Russian invasion. The House Republican leader, Kevin McCarthy, who could be the next speaker if he can survive a revolt among hardline conservatives in his caucus, signaled that Republicans would use their majority to limit – or possibly oppose – future spending on the war.Previous aid packages to Ukraine have been approved with overwhelming bipartisan support, and the president and Democratic leaders are hopeful that a new package can be achieved. Fears that Republicans could cut off aid just as Ukraine forces Russia into retreat with the assistance of US weaponry may motivate lawmakers to authorize vast new spending for Ukraine. The White House has also asked for additional funding to prepare for a possible winter surge of coronavirus infections, though Republicans are unlikely to back the request.Constrained by the calendar and their narrow majorities, a host of other Democratic priorities will probably remain out of reach as the sun sets on their power in Washington.A group of Democrats is urging Congress to pass immigration reform and ensure legal protections for Dreamers, undocumented immigrants brought to the US as children, while efforts are under way to reach an agreement on cannabis-related legislation. Senator Raphael Warnock, whose Georgia runoff election will determine the margin of Democrats’ control next year, has continued his push to cap the cost of insulin.TopicsUS CongressHouse of RepresentativesUS SenateUS politicsRepublicansDemocratsUS domestic policyanalysisReuse this content More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      College Athletes and Ideals for Women’s Body Image

      by

      More from our inbox:Elizabeth Warren’s Election Analysis: We DisagreeEric Adams and the MidtermsSue Republican LiarsA Matter of SpaceAudra Koopman, who ran track and field at Penn State, said she felt pressured to avoid sweets and to trim down. But even as she did, she didn’t feel like she performed better.Rachel Woolf for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Women in College Sports Feel Pressure to Be Lean at Any Cost” (Sports, Nov. 14):Thank you for raising awareness about the risks of scrutinizing body composition in college athletes. I am a clinical psychologist specializing in eating disorders, and the highlighted profiles echo stories I have heard many times over.No evidence suggests that participating in a sport causes eating disorders, but rates of these illnesses among athletes are higher than the national average. Athletes who participate in endurance, weight-class or aesthetic-based sports are at heightened risk.A focus on metrics like body fat percentage and body weight may breed an unhelpful hypervigilance on restrictive eating, body size and burning calories. College-age men and women are often still maturing physically, and by taking drastic measures to change their bodies risk their physical and psychological well-being.They also risk missing out on the greatest pleasures of sports: being a good teammate and finding joy in competition even while competing at a high personal level.Deborah R. GlasoferNew YorkThe writer is an associate professor of clinical medical psychology, Columbia Center for Eating Disorders, New York State Psychiatric Institute.To the Editor:Women in college sports are simply the tip of the spear when it comes to our affluent culture’s widely promoted ideal of thinness for women. I lived in Nigeria for many years, and there plumpness in a woman is seen as a desirable signifier of affluence. So this ideal for women’s bodies is anything but universal or timeless.Athletes and dancers perform in public, and the moves that make up their routines are easier when there is less body fat to contend with.This fact extends into other areas of daily life. But though men perform these activities too, and can also have eating disorders, the fact that women are the focal point of this discussion, as they were when I was a professor of women’s studies at Rutgers, says something about the larger issue of gender ideals in our culture.Katherine EllisNew YorkElizabeth Warren’s Election Analysis: We Disagree Kenny Holston for The New York TimesTo the Editor:In “Democrats, Let’s Seize This Moment” (Opinion guest essay, Nov. 14), Senator Elizabeth Warren claims, “The so-called experts who called Democrats’ messaging incoherent were just plain wrong — and candidates who ignored their advice won.”I beg to differ. Surveys show that a large majority of Americans favor most Democratic policies — legal access to abortion, a fair and progressive tax structure, strong environmental regulations and worker protection, a reasonable minimum wage, not cutting Social Security or Medicare, and the Affordable Care Act. Yet many Democratic candidates barely squeaked by, and the Democrats lost control of the House of Representatives.It’s easy to know what Republicans stand for — even if it’s based on lies. It’s all over the media. I’m not sure that most Americans can say what Democrats stand for, although a large minority of Americans seem to think that we steal elections, and want to curtail the police, open the borders and hand out large sums of money to people who refuse to work. Why? Because the Republican message (often lies) is getting through.Democratic politicians may have great ideas, but they’re terrible at communicating them. Otherwise they’d have a much bigger majority in government.Shaun BreidbartPelham, N.Y.To the Editor:Democrats squeaking by in the midterms is not an overwhelming endorsement of President Biden’s spending and other policies. In many cases it’s voting for the least worst candidate.Has Elizabeth Warren not seen the polls about dissatisfaction with both former President Donald Trump and President Biden? If “none of the above” were a choice, it would likely have won on many ballots.As a centrist, I want elected officials to stop talking and writing about how great they are and how bad their opposition is. Rather, focus on what you will accomplish, bipartisan cooperation and problem solving.Many of my moderate Democratic friends would vote for Liz Cheney if she were a presidential candidate. Sure, she is more conservative, but she has demonstrated integrity, bipartisanship and intelligence. That would be a refreshing change.Gail MacLeodLexington, Va.Eric Adams and the MidtermsMayor Eric Adams views the Democrats’ poor performance in New York as validation of his messaging about crime and his brand of moderate politics.Sarah Blesener for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Democrats See Adams at Root of State Losses” (front page, Nov. 18):Mayor Eric Adams did not lose four New York congressional seats. Asserting that he is to blame says, in essence, that the majority of voters who elected Republicans in swing districts chose poorly and that if voters had not been told crime was a problem, the Democratic candidates in those districts would have won.Mr. Adams has identified crime as a priority for his administration. By virtue of winning election, he is entitled to set his agenda. Whether the current increase in crime is a surge or a blip can be debated, certainly, but the idea that he should soft-pedal concerns about public safety to help other Democratic candidates is inappropriate.On the other hand, the fact that Republicans exploited perceptions about crime for electoral gain may be deplorable, but it is well within the rules of the game.The Democrats’ loss of New York congressional seats resulted from hubris around redistricting and willful ignorance about public perception of issues like bail reform. Eric Adams had nothing to do with either.Rob AbbotCroton-on-Hudson, N.Y.Sue Republican LiarsTo the Editor:Re “Misinformation on Pelosi Attack Spread by G.O.P.” (front page, Nov. 6):The notion seems firmly rooted among Democratic political leaders that since politics is rough and tumble, they should rise above it when the G.O.P.’s fabrication machine spews ominous conspiracy theories and baseless slurs to obscure reality.But since Republican politicians aren’t restrained by shame, common decency or respect for the truth, tolerating their falsehoods only encourages the right wing to wallow in fact-free filth. Instead, the victims of right-wing slanders owe it to themselves — and to us — to seek money damages for defamation from reckless Republican liars.First Amendment law protects scorching invective. But there’s a limit. Under the constitutional principles that govern defamation law, a political speaker is not free to knowingly utter falsehoods or to speak with reckless indifference to truth or falsity.That principle plainly applies to unfounded Republican claims about Paul Pelosi. It likewise applies to Newt Gingrich’s assertion that John Fetterman has “ties to the crips gang,” and to Donald Trump’s lies about a voting machine maker.Multimillion-dollar damage awards might deter Republicans from fouling the political landscape with lies designed to conceal their lack of answers to America’s problems.Mitchell ZimmermanPalo Alto, Calif.The writer is an attorney.A Matter of Space Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Dimming Hope Office Buildings Will Ever Refill” (front page, Nov. 18):Not enough housing? Too much office space? Go figure.Deborah BayerRichmond, Calif. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Five new members of the House of Representatives to watch

      by

      Five new members of the House of Representatives to watchMaxwell Frost, Becca Balint, Monica De La Cruz, Mike Lawler and Max Miller are standouts among the 2022 midterms intake Roughly 80 new members will join the House of Representatives when the 118th Congress convenes in January.How Democratic wins in key toss-up seats helped stave off the ‘red wave’Read moreAlong with their more seasoned colleagues, they will have to navigate the potentially tricky terrain of a narrow Republican majority in the House as Democrats control the White House and the Senate.The new members come from every part of the county, and they vary dramatically in terms of political ideology. Some are progressives who have demanded universal healthcare coverage, while others have embraced Donald Trump and his lies about widespread fraud in the 2020 presidential election.As the final ballots are counted and Americans prepare for another significant shift in the political landscape, here are five new members of the House to keep an eye on:Maxwell Frost, a Democrat of FloridaMaxwell Frost will become the first Gen Z member of Congress when he takes the oath of office in January. Just 25 years old, Frost won his Orlando-area seat by campaigning on implementing Medicare for all and reforming America’s gun laws.Frost, a March for Our Lives organizer who first became involved in politics after the shooting at Sandy Hook elementary school in 2012, has made it clear that he will be aggressive in addressing gun violence. After the recent shooting at an LGBTQ night club in Colorado Springs, Frost has repeated his call for Congress to advance an assault weapons ban.The House passed an assault weapons ban in July, but the bill stalled in the Senate. With Republicans now in control of the House, it will be nearly impossible to resuscitate the proposal, but Frost is undeterred.“I think it’s important to put it up for a vote even if it doesn’t pass because it gets people on the record,” Frost told NBC News on Monday. “We have to show the American people that this is a problem that our government is working on and we’re going to solve.”Frost’s determination to take action on his top policy priorities could ruffle some feathers within the House, but his persistence could also help keep Democrats motivated in the face of Republican obstruction.Becca Balint, a Democrat of VermontOne of Frost’s new colleagues in the Congressional Progressive Caucus will be Becca Balint, a Democrat of Vermont. Balint’s victory earlier this month made history; she will be the first woman and the first openly LGBTQ person to represent Vermont in Congress. Once Balint is sworn in, all 50 US states will have sent a woman to Congress, as Vermont was previously the sole outlier on that metric.Balint has described herself as “a scrappy little queer lady” who was initially written off in Vermont’s crowded Democratic congressional primary because of her lack of widespread name recognition or political connections.“What I did have was an amazing team that believed that I could do this if I got in front of enough Vermonters and spread a message of courage and strength and hope,” Balint said at a press conference earlier this month.“We did it because we tapped into the courage of working people across Vermont, regular people who want to have a voice again. That’s who I am. That’s who I will be in Congress.”Frost and Balint are just two members of an expanded progressive caucus that may be able to exert more influence over Democratic leaders starting in January.Monica De La Cruz, a Republican of TexasDe La Cruz’s win was a bright spot for Republicans on a generally disappointing election night. De La Cruz will be the first Republican to represent the 15th congressional district in southern Texas, where the party has been trying to make gains among Latino voters.Party leaders had hoped to win two other south Texas districts with Latina Republicans, reflecting their broader strategy this year of attempting to flip seats by running a more diverse slate of candidates. Mayra Flores ran in the 34th district, while Cassy Garcia competed in the 28th district. Together with De La Cruz, the three women were often dubbed the “Triple Threat” in conservative media, but of that group, only De La Cruz won her race.Overall, De La Cruz will be one of at least 45 Latino lawmakers serving in the 118th Congress, marking a new record for the US. Several newly elected members – including Democrat Yadira Caraveo in Colorado and Democrat Delia Ramirez in Illinois – will be the first Latinas to represent their states in Congress.Despite Republicans’ efforts to diversify their House caucus, they still trail Democrats on that front. At least 34 Latino Democrats will serve in the House starting in January, compared with at least 11 Latino Republicans. With the victories of John James in Michigan and Wesley Hunt in Texas, the number of Black Republicans in the House will also double in January – from two to four. In comparison, 58 Black Democrats are currently serving in the House.Mike Lawler, a Republican of New YorkMike Lawler’s victory made national headlines, as he defeated the incumbent congressman Sean Patrick Maloney, who served as the chair of House Democrats’ campaign arm this election cycle.Lawler was one of four Republicans who flipped House seats in New York, and those wins ultimately proved crucial in determining control of the lower chamber. When the “red wave” that many Republicans had expected failed to materialize on election day, the success of Lawler’s group helped them win back a narrow majority.Because of that slim majority, the incoming Republican speaker will be able to afford only a few defections within the party when trying to pass legislation. There are already signs of tension and disagreement within the House Republican caucus, and Lawler is one example of this. While most House Republicans continue to wholeheartedly embrace Trump and his divisive brand, Lawler has suggested that it may be time to move on from the former president, particularly after his endorsed candidates fared so poorly on election day.“I would like to see the party move forward,” Lawler told CNN earlier this month. “I think more focus needs to be on the issues and the substance of those issues than on personalities.”But many of Lawler’s new colleagues may not be ready to start a new chapter for the Republican party.Max Miller, a Republican of OhioMax Miller, who won the race to represent a newly reconfigured House district in Ohio, personifies Trump’s enduring hold on the Republican party and the House Republican caucus in particular.Most of Miller’s district is currently represented by Anthony Gonzalez, a lawmaker who was once considered a rising star in the Republican party but became a target of scorn after he voted to impeach Trump for inciting the January 6 attack on the Capitol. Following that vote, Miller received Trump’s endorsement to launch a primary challenge against Gonzalez, and the incumbent congressman later announced he would not seek re-election.Miller has his own connection to the January 6 insurrection, as he appeared before the House select committee investigating the Capitol attack over the summer. According to the committee, Miller participated in a meeting two days before the attack to discuss the rally that Trump held on the Ellipse immediately before a group of his supporters stormed the Capitol.Miller won his seat in Congress partly thanks to Trump’s endorsement, and he will probably be quite hesitant to distance himself from the former president. That hesitation could put him and his allies on a collision course with colleagues like Lawler, who say they want to chart a new course for the Republican party.The incoming Republican speaker will need to keep all factions of the caucus unified to get anything done. That task already appears immense.TopicsHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsRepublicansDemocratsUS midterm elections 2022featuresReuse this content More