More stories

  • in

    Republican who wanted Trump to declare ‘Marshall’ law only regrets the misspelling

    Republican who wanted Trump to declare ‘Marshall’ law only regrets the misspellingText from Ralph Norman to Mark Meadows, Donald Trump’s final chief of staff, urged president to declare martial law A Republican who urged the Trump White House to declare martial law to stop Joe Biden taking office has only one regret: that he misspelled “martial”.Ron DeSantis leads Donald Trump by 23 points in Republican pollRead moreThe text from Ralph Norman of South Carolina to Mark Meadows, Donald Trump’s final chief of staff, was given to the January 6 committee by Meadows and revealed by Talking Points Memo this week.On 17 January 2021, 11 days after the deadly Capitol attack and three days before Biden’s inauguration, Norman wrote: “Mark, in seeing what’s happening so quickly, and reading about the Dominion law suits attempting to stop any meaningful investigation we are at a point of no return in saving our Republic !! Our LAST HOPE is invoking Marshall Law!! PLEASE URGE TO PRESIDENT TO DO SO!!”No response from Meadows was revealed. On Tuesday, a HuffPo reporter asked Norman about the message.Norman said: “Well, I misspelled ‘martial’.”He added: “I was very frustrated then, I’m frustrated now. I was frustrated then by what was going on in the Capitol. President Biden was in his basement the whole year. Dominion was raising all kinda questions.”The reference to Biden’s basement was to the then Democratic candidate’s decision largely to stay off the campaign trail in 2020, the year of the Covid pandemic.Dominion Voting Systems has filed major lawsuits, notably against Fox News, regarding claims its machines were involved in voter fraud.Trump insists his defeat by Biden – by more than 7m votes and by 306-232 in the electoral college – was the result of electoral fraud. It was not.Norman was among 147 Republicans in the House and Senate who voted to object to results in key states, even after Trump supporters stormed the Capitol on January 6, a riot now linked to nine deaths including suicides among law enforcement.Trump was impeached for inciting an insurrection, proceedings which were ongoing when Norman texted Meadows.According to CNN, Marjorie Taylor Greene, the far-right Georgia congresswoman, also asked Meadows about “Marshall law” on 17 January, writing: “In our private chat with only Members, several are saying the only way to save our Republic is for Trump to call for Marshall law.”This week, Greene said that if she and Steve Bannon, Trump’s former strategist, had organised the Capitol riot, “we would have won”. She also said rioters “would’ve been armed”.Marjorie Taylor Greene: Capitol attack ‘would’ve been armed’ if I was in chargeRead moreAccording to the Congressional Research Service, “crises in public order, both real and potential, often evoke comments concerning a resort to martial law. “While some ambiguity exists regarding the conditions of a martial law setting, such a prospect, nonetheless, is disturbing to many Americans who cherish their liberties, expect civilian law enforcement to prevail, and support civilian control of military authority.”The CRS also says that since the conclusion of the second world war, “martial law has not been presidentially directed or approved for any area of the United States. Federal troops have been dispatched to domestic locales experiencing unrest or riot, but in these situations the military has remained subordinate to federal civilian management.”On Tuesday, Norman told HuffPost: “I was frustrated at the time with everything that was happening. It was a private text between a friend and myself, nothing more, nothing less.”TopicsRepublicansUS CongressHouse of RepresentativesUS elections 2020US Capitol attackUS politicsUS militarynewsReuse this content More

  • in

    In Congress, Party Switching Cuts Both Ways

    If history is any guide, Senator Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, the latest lawmaker to change her stripes, faces an uncertain future.WASHINGTON — When Phil Gramm, a conservative House member from Texas, left the Democratic Party in 1983, he immediately quit Congress and forced a special election that he won as a newly minted Republican six weeks later. He called his leave-and-start-from-scratch approach the “only honorable course of action,” since voters had elected him as a Democrat.Arlen Specter, a longtime centrist Republican senator from Pennsylvania, was blunt when he suddenly became a Democrat after backing some Obama administration initiatives in 2009. He said he had consulted his political strategist and been informed that polls showed he could not win a Republican primary; hence, he needed to switch parties if he was to have any hope of political survival. He lost anyway, suffering defeat in a Democratic primary the next year.Senator Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, who left the Democratic Party and proclaimed herself an independent last week, was less transparent about her move. She dismissed any suggestion that she had made it to better position herself for a 2024 re-election bid after angering Arizona Democrats by regularly bucking her party, even though poll numbers in the state clearly indicate that she would have a difficult time winning a Democratic primary.Though she asked Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader, to allow her to keep her committee slots on the Democratic side of the aisle, she refused to say she would align with Democrats, like two other Senate independents, Senators Angus King of Maine and Bernie Sanders of Vermont. She didn’t even want Democrats declaring that they still retained their new 51-to-49 majority, though that is clearly the result for Senate organizational purposes at the moment.Mr. Schumer on Tuesday even dared to utter those numbers.“Senator Sinema asked me to keep her committees and that keeps the Senate committees functioning in a 51-49 vein, and that’s what we want to do,” he said.The switch was another drama-filled episode featuring the enigmatic first-term senator. Democrats are hoping that once the immediate moment passes, Ms. Sinema will continue to work with them for the next two years as she has on numerous major pieces of legislation over the past two years, and that little will change except the letter after her name signifying her partisan affiliation.“She’s always been independent,” said Senator Mark Warner, the Virginia Democrat who has teamed up with Ms. Sinema in multiple bipartisan “gangs” to strike deals on issues such as gun control and infrastructure. “She’s been an effective legislator, and I will continue working with her.”A New U.S. Congress Takes ShapeFollowing the 2022 midterm elections, Democrats maintained control of the Senate while Republicans flipped the House.Divided Government: What does a split Congress mean for the next two years? Most likely a return to gridlock that could lead to government shutdowns and economic turmoil.Kyrsten Sinema: The Arizona senator said that she would leave the Democratic Party and register as an independent, just days after the Democrats secured an expanded majority in the Senate.A Looming Clash: Congressional leaders have all but abandoned the idea of acting to raise the debt ceiling before Democrats lose control of the House, punting the issue to a new Congress.First Gen Z Congressman: In the weeks after his election, Representative-elect Maxwell Frost of Florida, a Democrat, has learned just how different his perspective is from that of his older colleagues.But Democrats are also keeping a wary eye. Any further move away from the party by Ms. Sinema could thrust them back into the 50-50 split they were so thrilled to escape with the re-election of Senator Raphael Warnock in Georgia last week, only to have Ms. Sinema rain on their victory parade days later.Then there is Senator Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, who has his own 2024 re-election difficulties ahead. Mr. Manchin assured reporters this week that he had no plans to join Ms. Sinema in the stripes-changing camp, but also said he could not predict the future — a comment no doubt duly noted by his Democratic colleagues.While Mr. Warner is correct that Ms. Sinema has always been independent, her change of affiliation does offer her some distance from her old party if she wants to emphasize it. Both Republicans and Democrats will be watching to see if that translates into a new approach. She said in interviews, an op-ed and a video statement that she does not intend to operate any differently than she has to date.“I’m going to keep doing exactly what I do, which is just stay focused on the work and ignore all the noise,” she told CNN.But Republicans will no doubt try to capitalize on her new status. For instance, Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, used Twitter to urge the new independent to insist that Senate committees be evenly divided instead of the one-seat advantage Democrats are expecting to have beginning in January.“Now Sen Sinema is independent & she correctly states ppl tired of partisanship,” he said in a tweet. “One step she cld take even though she won’t caucus w Republicans is push to keep equal party numbers on committees like this congress. That wld result in more bipartisanship.”Such a move by Ms. Sinema, suffice it to say, would be frowned on by Democrats.Senator Mitch McConnell, the Kentucky Republican and minority leader, on Tuesday noted his own strong relationship with Ms. Sinema.“She and I talk all the time,” he said. “She has a lot of friends on our side of the aisle, including me, and I think she’s decided she’s genuinely an independent and is charting her own course, and I wish her well.”In her announcement, Ms. Sinema sought to emphasize her independent streak to diminish any criticism that she had played bait and switch with Arizona voters by running as a Democrat only to abandon the party label four years later when it appeared she might not fare well in a party primary.“When I ran for the U.S. Senate, I pledged to be independent and work with anyone to achieve lasting results,” she said.But she ran as a Democrat, benefiting from millions of dollars in party spending, and some Arizonans clearly feel cheated, judging by the swell of attacks on her emanating from the state. Mr. Schumer and other Democrats say it is way too early to weigh in on whether they would back her or a declared Democrat when 2024 rolls around.Party-switching on Capitol Hill gained steam in the Reagan years as multiple congressional Democrats from the South moved to the Republican side, in line with the sweeping political realignment coursing through the region. Sometimes it worked; sometimes it did not.Representative Bill Grant, a lifelong Democrat from Florida’s conservative Panhandle, was courted by President George H.W. Bush to jump the Democratic ship in 1989 by promising to campaign for him the next year.“This action is not going to change the way I vote,” Mr. Grant promised in an appearance with the president.It did change the way his constituents voted when it came to him. He was defeated by Democrat Pete Peterson the next year after Mr. Peterson, a former Vietnam prisoner of war, accused Mr. Grant of a breach of faith with voters by changing parties midstream.Senator Richard C. Shelby of Alabama, who is retiring this year after six terms, became an enthusiastic Republican after the party’s congressional election sweep in 1994, and has survived quite comfortably.“I got the same amount of votes as a Republican as I did as a Democrat,” Mr. Shelby said this week. “I was elected twice as a Democrat and four times as a Republican. I had no compunction about it. I have no regrets.”Ms. Sinema’s political fate is yet to be determined. Democrats just hope she sticks with them in the near future.“I’m sure it was an important and maybe difficult decision for her to make personally,” said Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat. “I am going to work with Kyrsten in her capacity as long as she’s working toward the same goals that I share.” More

  • in

    Biden signs bill protecting same-sex and interracial marriage rights – as it happened

    Joe Biden has signed the legislation into law, in a joy-filled ceremony on the south lawn at the White House.In attendance were the first lady, Jill Biden, as well as the vice-president, Kamala Harris, the second gentleman, Doug Emhoff, and hundreds of LGBTQ+ couples, senior members of Congress, including the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, and gay lawmakers looking on.Here’s the Guardian’s Washington Bureau chief, David Smith, who has witnessed the event:Joe Biden: “Today is a good day!… Marriage is a simple proposition. Who do you love and will you be loyal to that person you love? It’s not more complicated than that.” pic.twitter.com/ZsL2PEkLri— David Smith (@SmithInAmerica) December 13, 2022
    Biden made a short but spirited speech.Biden: “Now the law requires that interracial marriage and same sex marriage be recognised in every state in the nation.”— David Smith (@SmithInAmerica) December 13, 2022
    Biden pays tribute to many of those activists and campaigners gathered.Biden: “Those who believe in equality and justice, you never gave up… You put your relationships on the line, you put your jobs on the line, you put your lives on the line. From me and the entire nation, thank you, thank you, thank you.”— David Smith (@SmithInAmerica) December 13, 2022
    Here’s the president on Twitter:Today is a good day. Today, America takes another step toward equality. Toward liberty and justice not just for some, but for all. Because today, I sign the Respect for Marriage Act into law.— President Biden (@POTUS) December 13, 2022
    It’s been a lively though unusual day in US politics. We’re ending this live blog now and we’ll be back on Wednesday morning to bring you all the day’s developments as they happen.Here’s where things stand:
    Joe Biden signed the Respect For Marriage Act into law, in a joy-filled ceremony on the south lawn at the White House.
    The US president noted that: “Racism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia – they are all connected. But the antidote is love.”
    The January 6 House select committee will on 19 December vote on referring people they believe broke the law to the justice department, Politico reports, citing committee chair Bennie Thompson.
    Carolyn Maloney, chair of the oversight committee in the House wrote to the National Archives asking for a review of what’s been discovered at a storage unit at Donald Trump’s Florida residence, the Washington Post reported.
    Government energy officials announced that the US has taken “the first tentative steps towards a clean energy source that could revolutionize the world” through a successful fusion experiment.
    Biden cheered government data released today that showed inflation declining by a greater amount than expected in November, calling it proof that his economic policies were delivering Americans relief from the price increase wave battering the economy.
    Samuel Bankman-Fried is not testifying before Congress, because he was arrested in the Bahamas yesterday. Instead, the newly appointed CEO of FTX, the collapsed cryptocurrency exchange Bankman-Fried founded, is being grilled by lawmakers alone.
    Reforms to the Electoral Count Act intended to stop another January 6 may end up being included in year-end spending legislation Congress is negotiating.
    It’s official: rightwing lawmaker Lauren Boebert has been re-elected, after winning her unexpectedly close House race.
    Under sunny skies, the ceremony for Joe Biden to sign the Respect for Marriage Act was a lively one, just wrapping up now.The bill’s primary driver, Wisconsin Senator Tammy Baldwin, can be seen smiling broadly, just behind a beaming Nancy Pelosi.Joe Biden has signed the legislation into law, in a joy-filled ceremony on the south lawn at the White House.In attendance were the first lady, Jill Biden, as well as the vice-president, Kamala Harris, the second gentleman, Doug Emhoff, and hundreds of LGBTQ+ couples, senior members of Congress, including the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, and gay lawmakers looking on.Here’s the Guardian’s Washington Bureau chief, David Smith, who has witnessed the event:Joe Biden: “Today is a good day!… Marriage is a simple proposition. Who do you love and will you be loyal to that person you love? It’s not more complicated than that.” pic.twitter.com/ZsL2PEkLri— David Smith (@SmithInAmerica) December 13, 2022
    Biden made a short but spirited speech.Biden: “Now the law requires that interracial marriage and same sex marriage be recognised in every state in the nation.”— David Smith (@SmithInAmerica) December 13, 2022
    Biden pays tribute to many of those activists and campaigners gathered.Biden: “Those who believe in equality and justice, you never gave up… You put your relationships on the line, you put your jobs on the line, you put your lives on the line. From me and the entire nation, thank you, thank you, thank you.”— David Smith (@SmithInAmerica) December 13, 2022
    Here’s the president on Twitter:Today is a good day. Today, America takes another step toward equality. Toward liberty and justice not just for some, but for all. Because today, I sign the Respect for Marriage Act into law.— President Biden (@POTUS) December 13, 2022
    Joe Biden says love is the antidote to discrimination.“Racism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, they are all connected. But the antidote is love,” Biden just said at the White House, as he prepares to sign the Respect for Marriage Act into law.Biden reminds those gathered that the legislation was spurred by the signal made by supreme court justice Clarence Thomas that, having overturned Roe v Wade, access to contraception and the right to same sex marriage could be next on the conservative bench’s agenda.Joe Biden is now speaking and thanking the lawmakers who drove the legislation that he is about to sign into law as the Respect for Marriage Act.He thanks, to a huge cheer from those gathered, Wisconsin’s Democratic senator Tammy Baldwin, the first out gay person ever to serve in the US Senate, who introduced the legislation and helped steer it to victory.The US president thanked Maine Senator Susan Collins, a Republican, who joined Baldwin in pushing the bill forward and garnering bipartisan support.Biden is celebrating the new law that protects not just same sex marriage but also interracial marriage, which have federal protections via the US Supreme Court but are not codified in US legislation.As the nation saw when the right-wing supermajority on the supreme court in June ditched the federal abortion legalization afforded by Roe v Wade in 1973, without congressional support in the form of legislation, rights can be taken away overnight by the court.Biden just quoted the great Edie Windsor’s words about gay marriage: “Don’t postpone joy.”“The road to this moment has been long,” Biden said. He tips his hat to those who “put their jobs on the line” to fight for the rights “I’m about to sign into law.”Goodbye, Edie Windsor. Thank you for never giving up | Steven W ThrasherRead moreKamala Harris is speaking at the White House ceremony, and she recalls Valentine’s Day, 2004, when she performed some of the US’s first same sex marriages, in San Francisco city hall, when she was the district attorney in that city.She quotes the late Harvey Milk in saying: “Rights are won by those who make their voices heard.”The vice president talks of marrying friends, the tears of joy, and also recalls the victory, ultimately, over the ban on marriage equality in California that had been passed in 2008, known as Proposition 8. More

  • in

    Nephew calls Republican who tearfully opposed gay marriage bill a homophobe

    Nephew calls Republican who tearfully opposed gay marriage bill a homophobeCongresswoman Vicky Hartzler voted against bill protecting same-sex marriage but Andrew Hartzler, who is gay, was unimpressed The backlash to the Republican member of Congress who broke down in tears in her opposition to the same-sex marriage bill has included a familiar face – her nephew, who has called the lawmaker a “homophobe”.On Thursday, Vicky Hartzler, a Republican representative from Missouri, shed tears as she urged colleagues in the US House of Representatives to vote against the Respect for Marriage Act, which forces states without marriage equality laws to recognize LGBTQ+ marriages from other states.House passes landmark legislation protecting same-sex marriageRead moreHartzler’s high-profile objection to the bill, which passed the House following assent from the Senate and is now set for Joe Biden’s signature, prompted her own nephew to speak out against her in a TikTok video that has been seen more than 200,000 times.In the video, Andrew Hartzler said his aunt was crying “because gay people like me can get married”. He added: “So despite coming out to my aunt this past February I guess she’s still just as much as a homophobe.”Vicky Hartzler said the legislation was “misguided and dangerous” as it would threaten religious institutions opposed to marriage equality. The tenor of the bill was “submit to our ideology or be silenced”, the congresswoman claimed in her House speech.Her nephew pointed out that religious schools still receive federal funding even if they discriminate against LGBTQ students. The 23-year-old has said he was reported for “homosexual activity” when attending Oral Roberts University, an evangelical private college in Oklahoma, and is part of a federal class-action lawsuit against the US Department of Education for funding such institutions.The new legislation does not alter conditions for such funding and churches, mosques, synagogues and other houses of worship will not be required to perform LGBTQ marriages if it goes against their beliefs.“It’s more like you want the power to force your religious beliefs on to everyone else, and because you don’t have that power, you feel like you’re being silenced,” Andrew Hartzler said to his aunt on his video. “But you’re not. You’re just going have to learn to coexist with all of us. And I’m sure it’s not that hard.”Andrew Hartzler told Buzzfeed he isn’t close to his aunt, who is considered one of the most anti-gay members of Congress, and that his relationship with his conservative, religious parents has also become strained.“It was weird to me that she was crying. I would say that,” he said. “I don’t think that was a performance. Knowing my aunt, I think those were genuine tears.“I do feel compelled to speak out when I see this just to counter these messages. I don’t want my last name to be associated with hate. I want it to be associated with love.”Vicky Hartzler is just the latest Republican politician to be publicly criticized by close members of their family. In October, Adam Laxalt, a Republican candidate for a closely run Senate seat in Nevada, was faced with 14 members of his family endorsing his opponent, the incumbent Democrat, Catherine Cortez Masto. Laxalt went on to lose.In 2018, six of Republican Paul Gosar’s siblings backed his Democratic opponent in midterm elections for the far-right politician’s House of Representative district in Arizona. Gosar prevailed despite the familial acrimony.TopicsRepublicansLGBTQ+ rightsHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsSame-sex marriage (US)newsReuse this content More

  • in

    Oil firms have internally dismissed swift climate action, House panel says

    Oil firms have internally dismissed swift climate action, House panel saysDocuments show the fossil fuel industry ‘has no real plans to clean up its act’ and took steps to continue business as usual Some of the world’s largest oil and gas companies have internally dismissed the need to swiftly move to renewable energy and cut planet-heating emissions, despite publicly portraying themselves as concerned about the climate crisis, a US House of Representatives committee has found.Documents obtained from companies including Exxon, Shell, BP and Chevron show that the fossil fuel industry “has no real plans to clean up its act and is barreling ahead with plans to pump more dirty fuels for decades to come”, said Carolyn Maloney, the chair of the House oversight committee, which has investigated the sector for the past year.Biden accuses oil companies of ‘war profiteering’ and threatens windfall taxRead moreThe committee accused the oil firms of a “long-running greenwashing campaign” by committing to major new projects to extract and burn fossil fuels despite espousing their efforts to go green.In reality, executives, the documents show, were derisive of the need to cut emissions, disparaged climate activists and worked to secure US government tax credits for carbon capture projects that would allow them to continue business as usual. Maloney, a Democrat, said that “these companies know their climate pledges are inadequate, but are prioritizing big oil’s record profits over the human costs of climate change”.Ro Khanna, another Democrat who sits on the committee, said that the industry’s approach was one of “intimidation” towards critics, as part of a “cynical strategy” to avoid acting on the climate emergency. He added that the committee will pass on the documents to “other entities”, raising the possibility of charges laid by the US Department of Justice.Khanna rejected allegations from Republicans that the Democrat-led committee had engaged in a sort of corporate witch-hunt. “The industry was the one out there continuing to make false statements about climate change and climate legislation,” he said. “Our goal is to get them to stop engaging in climate misinformation.”Several of the company executives appeared before the committee, where they faced accusations their companies knew of the dangers of the climate crisis for decades, only to hide this from the public. Darren Woods, chief executive of Exxon, said last year that his company’s claims over climate change were “consistent with science” at the time.“Oil and gas will continue to be necessary for the foreseeable future,” Woods added in his testimony to the committee. “We currently do not have the adequate alternative energy sources.”Exxon, like most other large oil firms, has said it backs the Paris climate accords, where governments agreed to not allow the global temperature to rise 1.5C or more above pre-industrial times to help avoid worsening heatwaves, droughts, floods and other disastrous impacts.Privately, however, these companies downplayed any need to scale down their fossil fuel activity and even to ramp it up, the committee found.Internal documents from BP in 2017 show that the company intends to “significantly increase development in regions with oil potential” and to “focus primarily on projects in current basins that generate the highest rate of return”.One BP executive subsequently asserted in an internal email that the company had “no obligation to minimize GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions”, while another admitted that any of its divestments of fossil fuels “may not directly lead to a reduction in absolute global emissions”.Industry insiders communicated with Exxon consultants about doubts over the veracity of climate science, the documents show, while a strategy slide presented to the Chevron board by its chief executive, Mike Wirth, states that the company is to “continue to invest” in fossil fuels even if others retreat from oil and gas.A Shell tweet posted in 2020 asking others what they could do to reduce emissions resulted in a torrent of ridicule from Twitter users. A communications executive for the company wrote privately that criticism that the tweet was “gaslighting” the public was “not totally without merit” and that the tweet was “pretty tone deaf”. He added: “We are, after all, in a tweet like this implying others need to sacrifice without focusing on ourselves.”The UK-headquartered oil company also poured scorn on climate activists, with a communications specialist at the company emailing in 2019 that he wished “bedbugs” upon the Sunrise Movement, a youth-led US climate group.Climate campaigners said the committee’s work showed that the fossil fuel industry was continuing to lie over global heating by pretending to act on the issue.“The key revelation in this report is that big oil has no intention of actually following through on its climate commitments,” said Jamie Henn, director of Fossil Free Media.“It isn’t transitioning to clean energy, it’s doubling down on methane gas, and it’s actively lobbying against renewable energy solutions. This is the big tobacco playbook all over again: pretend you care about a problem, but continue your deadly business as usual.”TopicsOil and gas companiesHouse of RepresentativesFossil fuelsUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    House passes landmark legislation protecting same-sex marriage

    House passes landmark legislation protecting same-sex marriageFinal vote was 258 to 169, with 39 Republican members joining every House Democrat The House gave final passage on Thursday to landmark legislation protecting same-sex marriage, in a bipartisan vote that reflects a remarkable shift in public opinion just over a quarter-century after Congress defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman.The final vote was 258 to 169, with 39 Republican members joining every House Democrat in supporting the bill. One Republican, Burgess Owens of Utah, voted present.Virginia restaurant cancels reservation of anti-LGBTQ+ organizationRead moreThe vote was one of the final acts of this lame-duck Congress before the balance of power shifts and Republicans take control of the House in January. The bill, which provides a degree of relief for hundreds of thousands of same-sex married couples in the US, next goes to Joe Biden, who has said he will sign the legislation “promptly and proudly”.“Today, Congress took a critical step to ensure that Americans have the right to marry the person they love,” Biden said. “The House’s bipartisan passage of the Respect for Marriage Act – by a significant margin – will give peace of mind to millions of LGBTQI+ and interracial couples who are now guaranteed the rights and protections to which they and their children are entitled.”The historic legislation, known as the Respect for Marriage Act, requires federal and state governments to recognize same-sex and interracial marriages, prohibiting them from denying the validity of a marriage legally performed in another state on the basis of sex, race or ethnicity.During an emotional bill enrollment ceremony on Thursday, the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, wiped tears from her eyes as she thanked the many lawmakers and advocates who made the legislation a reality.“At last we have history in the making,” Pelosi said. “Not only are we on the right side of history, we’re on the right side of the future: expanding freedom in America.”Momentum for the bill began to build after the supreme court’s ruling overturning Roe v Wade in June raised fears that the conservative-leaning court might reverse same-sex marriage next. Writing in support of the majority’s decision, the conservative supreme court justice Clarence Thomas had suggested the court might also consider striking down “demonstrably erroneous” precedents set by rulings like Obergefell v Hodges, the 2015 decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide and ended bans in the states that had them.Tammy Baldwin, the first openly gay person elected to the Senate, said the newly passed bill would provide reassurance to all LGBTQ+ citizens living in fear of having their marriages invalidated.“Today we are making history, but we’re also making a difference for millions of Americans,” said Baldwin, who played a key role in crafting the bill. “With the passage of the Respect for Marriage Act, we can put to rest the worries of millions of loving couples who are concerned that some day an activist supreme court may take their rights and freedoms away.”Despite support from some Republican lawmakers, most still opposed the legislation, calling it unnecessary. During the House debate over the bill, a number of Republicans criticized the proposal as an insult to religious liberty and a Democratic attempt to force liberal policies on more conservative states.However, should Obergefell fall, the new law would not compel all 50 states to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples nor does it stop states from moving to ban or limit same-sex marriages. In a concession to win Republican support, the measure also includes an exemption for religious organizations, guaranteeing that they would not be required to provide goods, services or accommodations for a celebration of a same-sex marriage, and that such a refusal would not jeopardize their tax-exempt status or other benefits.Notably, the bill would also repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (Doma), which defined a marriage as the union between a man and a woman and denied federal benefits to same-sex couples. Though the supreme court struck down part of the law, it remained on the books.When Bill Clinton signed Doma into law in 1996, same-sex marriage was considered a divisive cultural issue. At the time, nearly seven in 10 Americans said marriages between same-sex couples should not be recognized by law as valid, according to Gallup. Now, decades later, almost exactly the same number of Americans – a record 71% – say same-sex unions should be legal.The former Democratic congressman Barney Frank, the first House member to voluntarily come out as gay, celebrated Doma’s demise at the bill enrollment ceremony on Thursday, where his arrival was greeted with applause.“I was here for the birth of Doma, so I am very grateful to be able to be here for the funeral,” Frank said.LGBTQ advocates, meanwhile, praised the legislation as a “clear victory for this country’s 568,000 same-sex married couples”. But they argued that there is still more to do to protect marriage equality and LGBTQ+ Americans, who continue to face threats and violence, including a deadly shooting at a gay nightclub in Colorado Springs last month.“Today’s vote in the House of Representatives sends a clear message: love is winning,” said Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign. “We eagerly await the president’s signature on this important legislation – and look forward to continuing to fight for full equality for everyone in our community, without exception.”While there was little question the bill would pass the Democratic-controlled House, proponents say its passage was not inevitable.Earlier this summer, House Democrats held what many expected would amount to a “show” vote demonstrating their commitment to protecting same-sex marriage while drawing a contrast with Republicans, whose midterm message targeted LGBTQ+ Americans.But 47 House Republican lawmakers unexpectedly voted for the measure, a bipartisan tally that suddenly gave advocates hope that the upper chamber could muster enough bipartisan support to overcome the filibuster’s 60-vote threshold. After months of negotiating, the Senate voted 61-36 to approve a version of the measure, sponsored by Baldwin. It drew the support of 12 Republican senators.“On the Senate side, I think we can say we defied political gravity,” Baldwin said on Thursday.The Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, heralded the legislation as a “very important step forward” in the nation’s “long but inexorable march towards greater equality”. Like many Americans, the issue of marriage equality is personal for Schumer. His daughter and her wife are expecting their first child next year.“Today, thanks to the tireless advocacy of many, many in this room and the dogged work by many of my colleagues, my grandchild will live in a world that will respect and honor their mothers’ marriage,” Schumer said at the enrollment ceremony.For Pelosi, who announced last month that she would step down from House leadership, the bill’s passage was not just a national achievement but also a personal milestone. When Pelosi joined the House in 1987, her first remarks on the floor were about fighting HIV/Aids. Now, after 35 years in office and two stints as speaker, one of the final bills she will send to the president will protect the rights of LGBTQ+ couples.Just before voting for the bill, Pelosi said: “Today, we stand up for the values the vast majority of Americans hold dear – a belief in the dignity, beauty and divinity – divinity, a spark of divinity in every person – an abiding respect for love so powerful that it binds two people together.”TopicsHouse of RepresentativesLGBTQ+ rightsUS politicsUS CongressDemocratsRepublicansnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is subject of House ethics investigation

    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is subject of House ethics investigationSpokesperson for New York Democrat ‘confident’ undisclosed matter ‘will be dismissed’ The New York Democratic congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is under investigation by the House of Representatives’ ethics committee, the leaders of the panel said.Republicans reflect and blame after Trump-backed candidate Walker losesRead moreThe Democratic acting chair, Susan Wild of Pennsylvania, and acting ranking member, Michael Guest, a Mississippi Republican, released a statement on Wednesday.They said: “The matter regarding Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez … was transmitted to the committee by the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) on 23 June.”The subject of the investigation was not revealed.The committee said: “The mere fact of a referral or an extension, and the mandatory disclosure of such an extension and the name of the subject of the matter, does not itself indicate that any violation has occurred, or reflect any judgment on behalf of the committee.”A spokesperson for Ocasio-Cortez said: “The congresswoman has always taken ethics incredibly seriously, refusing any donations from lobbyists, corporations, or other special interests. We are confident that this matter will be dismissed.”The House ethics committee said it would announce its “course of action” after the new Congress convenes in January.Ocasio-Cortez won her seat in Congress in 2018, after a shock primary victory over Joe Crowley, a senior House Democrat. She has since emerged as a leading figure among progressives, widely known as AOC and the target of rightwing invective and harassment.In September 2021, the American Accountability Foundation filed an ethics complaint against Ocasio-Cortez “for accepting an impermissible gift” to attend the Met Gala.Ocasio-Cortez made a splash at the $35,000-a-ticket New York society event, wearing a dress emblazoned with the slogan “Tax the Rich”. A spokesperson said: “She was invited as a guest of the Met. She also did not get to keep the dress.”In 2019, in a slightly bizarre twist, it was reported that Donald Trump had become “enamored” and “starstruck” by a politician half his age and his ideological opposite, and had compared her to a historical figure made famous in America at least by a Broadway musical.Trump calls Ocasio-Cortez ‘Evita’ in new book American CarnageRead more“I called her Eva Perón,” Trump said, according to the book American Carnage by Tim Alberta. “I said, ‘That’s Eva Perón. That’s Evita.”Perón, an actor married to the Argentinian president Juan Perón, championed working-class and female voters but died of cancer in 1952, aged 33.Outside Argentina she is largely known through Evita, a musical by Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice which premiered in London in 1978 and on Broadway in 1979 and which Trump has said is his favourite show, having seen it six times.Ocasio-Cortez responded: “I know that, like every woman of the people, I have more strength than I appear to have.”TopicsAlexandria Ocasio-CortezUS politicsHouse of RepresentativesUS CongressDemocratsNew YorknewsReuse this content More

  • in

    How Can Democrats Use Their Final Weeks in Power?

    This article is part of the Debatable newsletter. You can sign up here to receive it on Wednesdays.The Democratic Party’s success in securing a 51st Senate seat in the Georgia runoff Tuesday is certainly consequential, but it did nothing to avert an imminent shift in the national political environment: On Jan. 3, Republicans will take control of the House of Representatives, and it will be two years at least — if not much longer, given historical trends — before Democrats again have the power to enact major legislation.This period between an election and the transition of power is known as a lame-duck session, and in recent years, it’s often when Congress has been most productive. How will Democrats make use of this one? Here are just some of the most pressing legislative priorities on the party’s agenda that could be accomplished without fear of a Republican filibuster in the Senate, or with the possibility of enough Republican votes to block such a move.Keeping the government — and the global financial system — runningCongress is staring down a Dec. 16 deadline to pass a budget for the 2023 fiscal year. If it doesn’t, the government could be forced to shut down, as it did in 2013 and twice in 2018, depriving hundreds of thousands of government workers of pay and disrupting public services.But an even more urgent threat, German Lopez of The Times recently wrote, is that Republicans will refuse to raise the limit on how much money the government can borrow, which Congress frequently must do to fund the budget it has approved. If the government hits the debt ceiling, which could happen early next year, it could eventually lose the ability to make debt payments and be forced, for the first time, to default, with potentially calamitous effects for the global economy.Once a pro forma administrative task, raising the debt ceiling became a matter of high-stakes brinkmanship during the Obama administration, as Republicans repeatedly leveraged the threat of default to push for spending cuts and regulatory rollbacks. In October, Representative Kevin McCarthy, the minority leader hoping to become speaker, suggested that his party would deploy this strategy again to force “structural changes” to programs like Social Security and Medicare.Democrats have two options to avert financial crisis, Peter Orszag, a former director of the Office of Management and Budget and the Congressional Budget Office, explains: Win over enough Senate Republicans to form a filibuster-proof majority to raise the debt ceiling, or raise it unilaterally through the reconciliation process, which would require only 50 votes.“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 writes in The Washington Post.The trade-off, however, is that raising the debt ceiling with only Democratic votes would take much longer — about two weeks — than if Republicans were on board. “This might crowd out Democrats’ ability to pass almost any other legislative priority while they still control both chambers,” notes Catherine Rampell in The Washington Post.Preventing a repeat of Jan. 6Given concerns about the integrity of the 2024 presidential election, another major Democratic priority is modernizing the Electoral Count Act, a 1887 law governing the Electoral College counting procedure. The law’s ambiguous language became the legal basis for Donald Trump’s attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, culminating in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.Reforming the law to prevent such schemes has bipartisan support: Nearly 40 senators, including 16 Republicans, have signed on to a bill introduced in the Senate over the summer, and the House passed its own bill in September.“Both the Senate and House bills are far better than what we have right now, and either one would go a long way to ensuring that the electoral-count law cannot be used as a tool for subverting the election in 2024 or beyond,” the Times editorial board wrote last month. “Congress needs to pass the overhaul now, when it has willing majorities in both houses and well before anyone casts a ballot in 2024.”Reforming the immigration systemNearly two years after President Biden proposed the most comprehensive immigration reform since the Reagan administration, Democrats have made very little headway on the issue. But this week, there were signs of a potential breakthrough when a bipartisan pair of senators reportedly drafted a framework for legislation that would create a pathway to citizenship for two million DACA recipients and improve the asylum system. In exchange, it also contains provisions for expediting the deportation of migrants who fail to qualify for asylum and continuing the use of Title 42, a Trump-era emergency public health order that restricts the right to claim asylum.Some immigration advocates have called on congressional Democrats to seize the opportunity. “House Republicans are not likely to allow any measures to improve immigration matters to reach a vote, preferring to have the political issue for the next elections rather than solutions,” said Vanessa Cárdenas, executive director of America’s Voice. “This year and the remaining weeks in this Congress present the best opportunity to enact legislation.”But obstacles to a bipartisan immigration deal are formidable. Republican senators “might decide that the G.O.P. won’t get any credit even if the effort succeeds — that credit might go to President Biden — and that it’s better to retain the permanent ‘border crisis’ as an issue,” writes Greg Sargeant of The Washington Post. On the Democratic side, he adds, “the continuation of Title 42, which has been a human rights disaster, and the beefed up removal process might make it a nonstarter among progressives in both chambers.”De-escalating the war on drugsAs overdoses soar and public opinion turns against the war on drugs, proponents of drug law reform say there may be an opening for Congress to save lives by passing bipartisan measures like the Mainstreaming Addiction Treatment Act, which would increase access to medication used to treat opioid addiction, and the Medicaid Re-Entry Act, which would reduce disruptions in medical care for people who have just been released from jail or prison.Another bill called the EQUAL Act, which would end the federal sentencing disparity between crack cocaine and powder cocaine offenses, already has more than 10 Republican co-sponsors, “so it can withstand a filibuster and seems ripe for some action this lame-duck session,” Udi Ofer, a professor at Princeton’s School of Public and International Affairs, said last month.Staying ahead of the coronavirusThe Biden administration last month asked Congress for an additional $9 billion to fund its response to the coronavirus pandemic, which is still killing more than 280 Americans per day and remains a leading cause of death in the United States.Some of the $9 billion would go toward researching long Covid and ensuring continued access to vaccines and treatments, which have fallen out of reach for more and more uninsured Americans as federal money has dried up.About $5 billion would go toward creating a program in the mold of Operation Warp Speed, to develop next-generation therapeutics and vaccines, like nasal sprays that could block more infections and universal, variant-proof coronavirus shots.Many scientists believe that nasal vaccines could be crucial to reducing Covid’s disease burden, but the United States has lagged other countries in developing one because of underinvestment. Congressional Republicans have rebuffed requests for more pandemic funding, having accused the administration of mishandling previous allocations. They have also questioned the necessity of more aid, pointing to Biden’s declaration in September that “the pandemic is over.”Democrats now find themselves in the awkward position of trying to make the case for more funding without admitting error: “While COVID-19 is no longer the disruptive force it was when the president took office,” the White House wrote in a November letter to Congress, “we face the emergence of new subvariants in the United States and around the world that have the potential to cause a surge of infections, hospitalizations, and deaths, particularly as we head into the winter months.”Protecting marriage equalityOne major legislative effort that is likely to advance is the Respect for Marriage Act, which would enshrine federal protections for same-sex and interracial marriage. The issue took on newfound importance this summer after Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the court “should reconsider” the 2015 precedent establishing the right of gay couples to marry.Some conservatives have dismissed the bill as a response to an imaginary threat and one that endangers religious liberties; many liberals argue the bill doesn’t go far enough, since it wouldn’t prevent states from refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Nonetheless, the measure attracted enough Republican support to pass in the Senate last week and is expected to win final approval in the House.To some, the success of a bill that was considered just a few months ago to be dead on arrival suggests there might be opportunities for more congressional breakthroughs, albeit within a very limited window. “As with the same-sex marriage bill, bipartisan legislation revising the 19th century Electoral Count Act wasn’t politically possible before the midterm elections and wouldn’t be once Trumpian Republicans are in charge of the House schedule in four weeks,” writes Jackie Calmes, a columnist for The Los Angeles Times. “Enjoy these few weeks of what passes for bipartisanship as Congress waddles to its end. You won’t be seeing much of that over the next two years.”Do you have a point of view we missed? Email us at debatable@nytimes.com. Please note your name, age and location in your response, which may be included in the next newsletter.READ MORE“Can Republicans and Democrats Find a Way Forward on Immigration?” [The New York Times]“What should Democrats do in the lame-duck Congress?” [The Economist]“Same-Sex Marriage Bill Passes Senate After Bipartisan Breakthrough” [The New York Times]“Here’s how Congress can make the lame-duck session a mighty one”[The Washington Post] More