More stories

  • in

    Ilhan Omar, member of the ‘Squad’, wins Minnesota Democratic primary

    Representative Ilhan Omar of Minnesota has won the state Democratic primary for her seat, according to the Associated Press, in a rematch against Don Samuels that comes two years after she barely eked out a victory against him.With 216 of 217 precincts reporting results, Omar was leading Samuels 56.2%-42.9%, according to Minnesota Secretary of State tallies.“We run the politics of joy,” Omar told supporters in Minneapolis on Tuesday evening. “Because we know it is joyful to fight for your neighbors … We know it is joyful to make sure housing is a human right. We know it is joyful to fight for health care to be a human right. We know it is joyful to want to live in a peaceful and equitable world.”Tuesday’s race was the last in a series of heated primaries for the progressive “Squad” of House Democrats who have been vocal in their criticism of Israel’s war in Gaza. Fellow Squad members Jamaal Bowman of New York and Cori Bush of Missouri were recently defeated by candidates supported by a deluge of pro-Israel spending. Omar faced a lower-key race.The two-term congresswoman became the first woman of color to represent Minnesota in the US House of Representatives in 2019. While in office, she has allied herself with the left wing of the Democratic party, serving as the deputy chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and backing key progressive measures such as the Green New Deal and Medicare for All.Even before the 7 October Hamas attacks and Israel’s ensuing offensive, Omar had established herself as a vocal critic of Israel. She memorably drew criticism in 2019 for quipping that US politicians’ support for Israel was “all about the Benjamins”, in reference to donations from the American Israel Political Affairs Committee (Aipac). The comment drew accusations of antisemitism and she later apologized for it.In the wake of the 7 October attacks, and as Israel escalated its retaliatory war, Omar was among the first in Congress to call for a ceasefire. She has spoken out in support of the university encampments in solidarity with Gaza. Her daughter was suspended from Barnard College for taking part.These together would seem to make Omar a natural target of pro-Israel groups, but Samuels, a former Minneapolis city councilman has not drawn support from Aipac or its affiliated Super Pac, United Democracy Project. In contrast, UDP dropped more than $20m to unseat Bowman and Bush.The lobby groups have not said why they have not gotten involved in the Minnesota primary – but it is possible that Omar just did not provide them the fodder.Despite Aipac’s single-issue focus on Israel, its messaging against other Squad members has not focused on the issue.During Bowman’s race, his opponent George Latimer focused on Bowman’s vote against Joe Biden’s landmark infrastructure bill that numerous progressive lawmakers withheld support from in an attempt to build leverage to secure other progressive provisions. The idea that Bowman and Bush, who also voted against the infrastructure bill, had not played ball with Democrats became a centerpiece of Latimer’s campaign against Bowman and Wesley Bell’s against Bush.In her primary campaign, meanwhile, Omar has emphasized the money that she has been able to direct to her district and even featured Joe Biden in an ad. “Congresswoman Omar, I wanna thank you for being here – you never stop working to level the playing field,” Biden says in the ad.Additionally, Mark Mellman, the director of Democratic Majority for Israel – a pro-Israel group that also weighed in against Bush and Bowman – has cited the “vulnerability” of a candidate as a key factor informing whether the group gets involved in a race. Omar is popular in her district; internal campaign polling recently found her leading Samuels 60% to 33%.Samuels said he was “very disappointed” with his loss.“What I was hoping is that a strong ground game and an attention to the details of folks who felt left out would trump an overwhelming superiority in dollars,” he told the Associated press. “Clearly money matters a little more in politics than I had hoped.”Reuters contributed to this report More

  • in

    Democrats Turn to Their National Security Go-To for Trump Assassination Inquiry

    Representative Jason Crow of Colorado, whom Democrats tapped for impeachment, investigations and tough questioning of President Biden, is their top member of a task force investigating the shooting.Representative Jason Crow, a Colorado Democrat and former Army Ranger, had just ordered his second martini at a bar in Bucharest, Romania, when Representative Nancy Pelosi, the former speaker, called him with an urgent question: How quickly could he get to Ukraine?It was April 2022, weeks after Russia had invaded Ukraine and touched off an international crisis, and two Republican lawmakers had rushed to be the first to travel to the besieged country. Now Ms. Pelosi wanted to quickly arrange her own visit — and she wanted Mr. Crow, whose national security background distinguished him in his party, to come with her.A late-night phone call from Ms. Pelosi to Mr. Crow would have been improbable when he first came to Congress in 2019. Hailing from a competitive district in Colorado, he had run as a centrist and avowed detractor of the liberal Ms. Pelosi, and after he knocked off a Republican incumbent he pledged that he would not vote for her for speaker.But since then, his credentials — including three tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan and a Bronze Star, as well as a law degree and a background in private-sector investigations — have made Mr. Crow a go-to lawmaker for Democratic leaders on difficult national security issues.Ms. Pelosi tapped him in 2019 to manage the first impeachment of President Donald J. Trump. He was part of the whip operation to rally support for legislation to send tens of billions of dollars in aid to Ukraine. He was selected as the top Democrat on a subcommittee investigating the Biden administration’s botched withdrawal from Afghanistan.And last month, he was named the senior Democrat on a bipartisan task force to investigate the attempted assassination of Mr. Trump at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Pelosi has ‘never been that impressed’ with Biden’s political operation

    Nancy Pelosi has “never been that impressed” with Joe Biden’s “political operation”, the former US House speaker said, discussing a judgment that helped her conclude the president could not beat Donald Trump and should step aside.“They won the White House [in 2020]. Bravo. But my concern was: this ain’t happening, and we have to make a decision for [Biden’s withdrawal] to happen,” Pelosi told the New Yorker, in an interview published on Thursday.On 21 July, in a historic moment, the 81-year-old president finally heeded those who said he was too old to beat Trump and serve a full second term.Stepping aside as the Democratic nominee, Biden endorsed his 59-year-old vice-president, Kamala Harris, a move that transformed the election, placing Trump under pressure.Pelosi was widely reported to have played a key role in the switch.She told the New Yorker: “The president has to make the decision for that to happen. People were calling. I never called one person. I kept true to my word. Any conversation I had, it was just going to be with [Biden]. I never made one call. They said I was burning up the lines, I was talking to Chuck [Schumer, the Democratic Senate majority leader]. I didn’t talk to Chuck at all.“I never called one person, but people were calling me saying that there was a challenge there. So there had to be a change in the leadership of the campaign, or what would come next.”Pelosi said her goal was simple: “That Donald Trump would never set foot in the White House again.”Now 84, Pelosi is in her 19th term in the House. Having been speaker between 2007 and 2011 and 2019 and 2023, she remains vastly influential.Pelosi spoke to the New Yorker to promote her new memoir, The Art of Power. Last week, the Guardian first reported Pelosi’s descriptions of how she grew increasingly concerned about Trump’s mental fitness for office, even before his defeat by Biden and incitement of the January 6 attack on Congress.Pelosi told the New Yorker she hoped her role in ending Biden’s presidency would not destroy her relationship with a man three years younger but elected as a senator in 1972, 14 years before Pelosi won her seat in the House.“I hope so,” she said. “I pray so. I cry so.”She said she had lost sleep over the situation. Asked if she thought Biden was angry with her, she said: “I don’t know. We haven’t had a conversation. But … ”Pelosi said she thought Biden was “in a good state”, praising as “masterful” his handling of a large-scale prisoner swap with Russia which concluded last week.But Biden’s legacy “will go right down the drain if what’s-his-name ever [returns to] the White House”, Pelosi said, adding: “One of the reasons I ran again [in 2022] was to make sure that Donald Trump never stepped foot in the White House again.“He is a danger to our democracy … he’s a danger to the air our children breathe, the water they drink, their safety in terms of gun-violence prevention. Freedom of choice, the size, the timing of your family – all that.”Asked if she had met Trump since her time as speaker, Pelosi said she had not.“Oh, my God, what a horrible thought,” she said. “He knows he’s an impostor. He knows he shouldn’t be president of the United States.” More

  • in

    Pelosi Says She Pushed Biden to Step Aside Because of Need to Defeat Trump

    A new book by the former speaker details her clashes with the former president, but it was written before her most recent exercise of political might: helping persuade President Biden to end his re-election bid.To hear Representative Nancy Pelosi tell it, her quiet but firm push to get President Biden to withdraw from the 2024 race was a simple matter of the ruthless political math that she has spent decades honing a talent for on Capitol Hill.“My goal is defeat Donald Trump,” Ms. Pelosi, the former speaker, said in a recent interview before the release this week of a book on her years in Congress. “And when you make a decision to defeat somebody, you make every decision in favor of that. You don’t mess around with it, OK? What is in furtherance of reaching that goal? I thought we had to have a better campaign.”The book, titled “The Art of Power,” is Ms. Pelosi’s retelling of major moments of critical decision-making during the Iraq War, a catastrophic financial meltdown, the passage of the Affordable Care Act and multiple clashes with former President Donald J. Trump, among other events.But it may be her most recent deft exercise of political finesse and muscle — one that took place well after the book was written — that will stand as a final testament to Ms. Pelosi’s stature as the Democratic Party’s premiere powerhouse of recent decades. In a formidable display of her enduring clout, she helped persuade the incumbent president to abandon his re-election bid to give her party a better chance of holding the White House in November.Ms. Pelosi plays down her role in nudging Mr. Biden aside and insists the decision was his alone to make. In her focus on polls and fund-raising and in private conversations with the president and rattled Democratic colleagues, she said, she was driven by the single imperative of beating Mr. Trump.The former speaker said she did not initiate calls with colleagues, trying to dispel claims that she had orchestrated the ouster of Mr. Biden, a longtime ally. But if Democrats triumph this fall after staring down the prospect of a resounding defeat, the maneuvering by Ms. Pelosi — along with personal appeals to Mr. Biden from the Democratic congressional leaders Senator Chuck Schumer and Representative Hakeem Jeffries, both of New York — may turn out to be among her most significant acts.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Pro-Israel groups have set sights on unseating this progressive lawmaker. Will they succeed?

    Cori Bush was knocking on doors along Arsenal Street in southern St Louis where voters were not shy of asking hard questions of Missouri’s first Black female member of Congress. But none of them raised the one issue that looms over her re-election race like a spectre.Bush might have been expected to cruise to victory in Tuesday’s Democratic primary for Missouri’s first congressional district in St Louis as she did two years ago. But her path to re-election veered into rough territory after she characterised Israel’s assault on Gaza, following the 7 October Hamas attack, as a “collective punishment” of Palestinians and called for a ceasefire.“I strongly condemn Hamas & their appalling violations of human rights,” she wrote, “but violations of human rights don’t justify more human rights violations in retaliation.”Some Jewish and pro-Israel groups said Bush was denying Israel the right to defend itself and siding with terrorists. A coalition of St Louis Jewish organisations accused her of “intentionally fuelling antisemitism”.View image in fullscreenBush introduced a resolution calling for a ceasefire on 16 October. Within days, the St Louis prosecutor Wesley Bell announced he was dropping out of a race against a Republican for one of Missouri’s seats in the US Senate to challenge Bush for the Democratic nomination in the St Louis congressional district. It was swiftly apparent that Bell, who has firmly supported Israel’s actions, had the support of the US’s major pro-Israel groups which have now poured millions of dollars into trying to make him the Democratic candidate in one of the party’s safest congressional seats.Leading the way is the influential American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac). Its campaign funding arm, the United Democracy Project (UDP), has so far spent $8.5m to defeat Bush, accounting for more than 55% of all spending on the race outside of the campaigns themselves. Much of the UDP’s money comes from billionaires who fund Republicans in other races, including some who have given to Donald Trump’s campaign.In total, outside groups have spent more than $12m to support Bell as opposed to $3m for Bush.The UDP has committed more money in only one other primary contest so far this year: to defeat the New York congressman Jamaal Bowman, another member of the Squad of leftwing Democrats and outspoken critic of Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, which has claimed nearly 40,000 Palestinian lives, mostly civilians.UDP advertising has flooded St Louis airwaves and mailboxes but, as in other congressional races targeted by pro-Israel groups, almost none of it mentions the Gaza war or Bush’s call for a ceasefire, which is supported by a majority of Americans. Instead, the ads go after her on unrelated issues. They may be working.‘It’s very fishy’When Peggy Hoelting answered her door on Arsenal street, she recognised Bush and greeted her warmly. But Hoelting swiftly said she had some questions, and began regurgitating criticisms of the congresswoman’s voting record that have been the target of UDP ads that paint Bush as too leftwing, and claim she is voting against the interests of her constituents.Hoelting asked about Bush’s vote against Joe Biden’s trillion-dollar infrastructure bill in 2021, a focus of the UDP messaging blitz. Bush explained that it was a parliamentary manoeuvre to protect parallel legislation, the Build Back Better Act, that included help for families, expanded public healthcare and green energy jobs. She said she knew the infrastructure act was going to pass anyway but the vote has come back to haunt her.After Bush moved up the street, Hoelting told the Guardian her questions were prompted by UDP advertising landing at her door.“We get probably five or six ads in the mail every day. I sit down and look at them all. A lot of them are talking about her voting against Biden’s infrastructure bill. I don’t understand that so I wanted to hear what she had to say,” she said.Hoelting said she wasn’t wholly persuaded by Bush’s explanation but was keeping an open mind. She was unaware of Bush’s position on Gaza but, when it was explained to her, said that would be a reason to vote for her.“Absolutely I want a ceasefire in Gaza,” said Hoelting.View image in fullscreenBush has also been the target of ads for supporting the “defund the police” campaign. The representative said she wants to see money now spent on militarised vehicles and equipment which belong in war zones instead used to fund social workers and other services that would assist the police in dealing with people with mental health and addiction issues.Bush acknowledged that the UDP ads were having an impact.“The one thing that people ask me questions about is the infrastructure vote. There’s a lot of people who say, ‘tell me about the infrastructure bill, I just want to understand what happened’. So then I explain why I voted the way I voted,” she said.Bush said that most voters accept her reasoning but it leaves some undecided. In contrast, she said her position on Gaza almost never gets brought up on the doorstep.“The only time it has come up is when people have said to me, ‘thank you’,” she said.This leaves Bush all the more frustrated by the influence on the campaign of pro-Israel lobby money, much of which comes from billionaires who also donate to Republicans.The UDP’s single largest donor for the 2024 elections so far is Jan Koum, the billionaire founder of WhatsApp who has given $5m. Koum is also a major funder of a group that supports Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank and rightwing Zionist organisations.Other major funding has come from a long list of Republican donors including the billionaire hedge fund founders Jonathon Jacobson, Paul Singer and Bernard Marcus, the founder of Home Depot, all of whom are outspoken supporters of Israel.Bush accused the UDP of deceit because none of its advertising makes clear Aipac’s involvement or reference to Israel. She said Wesley Bell, her challenger, was complicit because, although legally his campaign cannot coordinate with the UDP or other outside groups, he has adopted their messaging.“It is confusing people. They’re wondering why Wesley Bell is allowing himself to be bankrolled by Republicans? People are asking, ‘is he a really Democrat?’ Some feel betrayed because he is allowing for Republicans to decide who is going to be their next representative. That benefits Republicans and that is shameful,” she said.Bush has called Bell “a faux-progressive, former Republican campaign operative” because he managed the 2006 congressional campaign of Mark Byrne, a Republican running for the seat Bush now holds. Bell put Byrne’s opposition to abortion to the fore of that ultimately unsuccessful campaign. Bell has played down the association by saying he was helping out a longtime friend.Bell has also denied being a stalking horse for pro-Israel groups. He claimed to have abandoned the race to unseat Missouri’s firebrand Republican Senator, Josh Hawley, because he kept hearing from Democrats that they were unhappy with Bush and wanted him in the US House of Representatives speaking for St Louis.Still, the timing of his switch has fuelled suspicions.Earlier this week, the St Louis television station KDSK revealed a recording of a phone conversation made a year ago between the now-rival candidates in which Bell assured Bush he would not challenge her.View image in fullscreen“I’m telling you on my word, I am not running against you. That is not happening,” he said.But days after the Hamas attack on Israel, Bell dropped out of the race against Hawley and announced he would run against Bush instead.Bell’s campaign manager, Jordan Sanders, told KDSK that when he made the statement, “Bell had no intentions to run against Cori Bush.”“He switched races and decided to run against her after being encouraged by stakeholders at the local, statewide and national level,” he aid.In downtown St Louis, Ernest Bradley, a former student development counsellor at a regional university, said he was not aware of Bush’s position on Gaza or the involvement of hardline pro-Israel groups in the election. But he was unhappy to see one Black candidate challenge another.“I respect Wesley but I think it’s bullshit. I think some money came his way and said to go this other way. I truly do. So when I hear that he’s getting money from the Republicans I wonder what’s really going on,” said Bradley.“I’m going to vote for Bush because it’s very fishy.”With Bush looking vulnerable, others have weighed in. The second largest spender in support of Bell after UDP is Fairshake, a group funded in good part by rightwing billionaires who also back Trump, such as Marc Andreessen, Ben Horowitz and the Winklevoss twins. Fairshake has spent more than $1m to defeat Bush.View image in fullscreenBush has also come under scrutiny for employing her husband to do security work, which she has defended as legal and not funded by her congressional office. The justice department said it was looking into the issue but a congressional ethics investigation concluded that the payments were legitimate.Bush’s largest backer is Justice Democrats which has spent more than $1.8m in support of her campaign with messages telling voters that Bell is backed by Aipac and Republican money, and accusing him of misusing public funds.Bush also has some important endorsements, including that of the father of Michael Brown, whose death at 18 at the hands of a Ferguson police officer 10 years ago fired up the Black Lives Matter movement.Ferguson is part of the first congressional district, and Bush emerged as an organiser of social justice campaigns there after Brown’s death. Bell was voted on to Ferguson city council on the back of the protests. Later he was elected county prosecutor on a pledge to put the white officer responsible for Brown’s death on trial.But that never happened. Now, Brown’s father, Michael Sr, is appearing in a campaign ad for Bush claiming that Bell failed the family.“I feel like he lied to us. He never brought charges against the killer. He never walked the streets of Ferguson with me. He failed to reform the office. He used my family for power and now, he’s trying to sell out St Louis. He doesn’t care about us,” Brown said in the ad.‘More than half of American Jews support a ceasefire’What little opinion polling there is no clear sign of who will win, but Bush acknowledges she has a fight on her hands – one that is also dividing St Louis’s Jewish population.In early July, a group of St Louis rabbis and cantors wrote to a local newspaper, the STL Jewish Light, describing Bush as “one of Israel’s most unashamed enemies”. The letter called on Jewish voters to turn out in support of Bell and pointed to Bowman’s defeat in New York as the “tested roadmap to follow”. It said that the turnout of Jewish voters, who account for about 3% of the population in the district, but is probably a higher proportion of those who vote, could decide the race.View image in fullscreen“The national pro-Israel community is engaged in this race, but they aren’t casting ballots on August 6. Only our community can do that,” the letter said.A new ostensibly non-partisan group, St Louis Votes, is working to get out the Jewish vote. Although its charitable status precludes it from backing a candidate, its organisers include people who worked to unseat Bowman. The group’s website urges Jews to vote because “antisemitism is on the ballot”.A group called Progressive Jews for St Louis has pushed back against the rabbis’ letter by accusing them of misrepresenting Bush’s record.“What bothers these rabbis is that Cori Bush’s concern extends to Palestinians also. She called for a ceasefire early because she wants to save lives,” the group said in response.Hannah Rosenthal, a member of Progressive Jews for St Louis, has been canvassing for Bush in Jewish neighbourhoods.“The institutional Jewish community, mainstream institutions, are trying to create this message that Cori’s antisemitic because of her calls for a ceasefire. But we’re finding that when you have conversations with people about what Cori actually stands for, her principled moral leadership, then people are swaying more from their undecided positions,” she said.View image in fullscreen“More than half of American Jews support a ceasefire at this time and they understand that criticising the policies and practices of the [Israeli] state are not antisemitic.”Bush said she was perplexed by accusations of antisemitism, given that she has spent her political career speaking up about racism.“I can’t understand why I am wrong for wanting Palestinians to live and have their own self-determination. I want Israelis to live, to be safe, have their freedom. I want the exact same thing for Palestinians. What about that makes me antisemitic?” she said.“What that says to me, though, is there is hatred and it’s not coming from me. There is hatred for people like me for loving Palestinians the same way that I love Israelis and Jewish people in this country. If that is a problem, then they need to check their own heart, they need to check their own issues not mine.”Nonetheless, speaking up on Gaza has exacted a political price. Is it one worth paying?“It’s been challenging and puts me in a place where I have to do a lot more to be able to win. But that does not take precedence. The price has been paid by the 40,000 [Palestinians] that lost their lives, the tens of thousands who are injured. So if I have to piss off some people politically to be able to help save lives, then that’s how it is,“ she said. More

  • in

    Abraham Hamadeh Wins G.O.P. House Primary in Arizona

    Abraham Hamadeh, an election denier who ran for attorney general in Arizona in 2022, won the Republican primary for the state’s Eighth Congressional District on Wednesday, according to The Associated Press.Mr. Hamadeh, a former prosecutor in Maricopa County, defeated Blake Masters, another Republican who has supported former President Donald J. Trump’s lies about the 2020 election.The victory by Mr. Hamadeh in the district, which encompasses suburbs north and west of Phoenix, came after an unusual last-minute turn in the race: Mr. Trump endorsed both candidates the weekend before the primary, effectively declaring that he had no preference for who won.Mr. Hamadeh emerges from a bitter primary fight, in which he and Mr. Masters lobbed harsh personal insults at each other as they tried to distance themselves from a field that also included Ben Toma, Arizona’s speaker of the House, and Trent Franks, a former U.S. representative.In their unsuccessful campaigns in 2022 — Mr. Masters had run for Senate — both men had aligned themselves with the former president in hopes of capturing his support. They each received his endorsement in their primaries that year.But both lost to their Democratic rivals in November. Mr. Masters was defeated by Senator Mark Kelly, who is under consideration to be Vice President Kamala Harris’s running mate this year, by nearly 5 percentage points. Mr. Hamadeh narrowly lost the attorney general’s race to Kris Mayes, falling short by 280 votes out of about 2.5 million votes cast.Mr. Hamadeh will most likely be favored this fall in his race against his Democratic opponent, Gregory Whitten, who did not face a primary challenger in the reliably Republican district.The candidates are running for a seat that has been held since 2018 by Representative Debbie Lesko, a Republican who did not seek re-election. More

  • in

    Washington Prepares for the ‘Super Bowl of Tax’

    Even with control of the White House and Congress up in the air, lawmakers and lobbyists are gearing up for a big debate next year over expiring measures in former President Donald Trump’s tax law.President Biden’s decision not to seek re-election is upending expectations about who will control Washington next year. But there is one thing lawmakers and lobbyists are certain of: A tax fight is coming.Across the nation’s capital, preparations are quietly starting for what some are calling the “Super Bowl of tax.” On Capitol Hill, Republicans and Democrats are holding strategy and education sessions. Lobbyists are pressing their case to lawmakers and preparing multimillion-dollar publicity campaigns to defend tax breaks for corporations. Think tanks are churning out research assailing or lauding elements of the byzantine tax code.On the line is the future of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which a Republican Congress passed and former President Donald J. Trump signed into law in 2017.To avoid blowing too large of a hole in the federal budget at the time, Republicans scheduled many of the tax cuts to expire after 2025. That deadline has created a rare opportunity to reshape federal tax policy next year, and lawmakers in each party intend to be ready to wield whatever power voters give them in November.“We’re studying and preparing,” said Senator Michael D. Crapo of Idaho, who as the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee has been holding meetings and gathering ideas about next year. “It’s preseason.”Many of the expiring tax measures are ones that benefit middle-class Americans, including a larger standard deduction, lower marginal income tax rates and a more generous child tax credit. Republicans chose to let those tax cuts expire — while making other measures like a lower 21 percent corporate rate permanent — in a bet that Democrats would eventually vote to protect them.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    How the Kids Online Safety Act Was Dragged Into a Political War

    The Senate was set to pass the Kids Online Safety Act on Tuesday, but the legislation faces an uphill battle in the House because of censorship concerns.Last week, the American Civil Liberties Union sent 300 high school students to Capitol Hill to lobby against the Kids Online Safety Act, a bill meant to protect children online.The teenagers told the staffs of 85 lawmakers that the legislation could censor important conversations, particularly among marginalized groups like L.G.B.T.Q. communities.“We live on the internet, and we are afraid that important information we’ve accessed all our lives will no longer be available,” said Anjali Verma, a 17-year-old rising high school senior from Bucks County, Pa., who was part of the student lobbying campaign. “Regardless of your political perspective, this looks like a censorship bill.”The effort was one of many escalations in recent months by those who oppose the bill. In June, a progressive nonprofit, Fight for the Future, organized students to write hundreds of letters to urge lawmakers to scrap it. Conservative groups like Patriot Voices, founded by the former Republican senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, are also protesting with an online petition.What was supposed to be a simple piece of legislation to protect children online has been dragged into a heated political war. At the heart of the battle are concerns about how the bill could affect free speech on culturally divisive issues, which both sides of the spectrum worry could be weaponized under the guise of child safety. Liberals worry about censorship of transgender care, while conservatives are concerned about the same with anti-abortion efforts. The tech industry has also latched onto the same First Amendment arguments to oppose the bill.The controversy stems from the specific terms of the Kids Online Safety Act, or KOSA. The legislation would require social media platforms and other sites to limit features that can heighten cyberbullying, harassment and the glorification of self-harm. The bill would also require tech companies to turn on the highest privacy and safety settings for users under 17 and let them opt out of some features that have been shown to lead to compulsive use.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More