More stories

  • in

    Jan 6 hearing: Trump said ‘I don’t want to say the election is over’ in speech outtake one day after riot

    One of the most revelatory parts of this hearing are the outtakes from Trump’s video message on 7 January. “I don’t want to say the election is over,” he says in one clip. “I just want to say Congress has certified the results.”Here’s the clip:02:07One point Cheney made tonight was that it was often Donald Trump’s own appointees who spoke up against his actions on and leading up to January 6. “The case against Donald Trump in these hearings is not made by witnesses who were his political enemies. It is instead a series of confessions by Donald Trump’s own appointees, his own friends, his own campaign officials … his own family,” she said. But she also noted that the women who testified have had to brave especially vicious personal attacks. Of Cassidy Hutchinson, the former aide to Trump’s White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, who testified earlier, Cheney said: “She knew all along she would be attacked by President Trump, and by the 50-, 60-, 70-year-old men who themselves hide behind executive privilege.” Similarly, Sarah Matthews, was attacked on the House Republican conference Twitter account – despite the fact that she has worked for the House Republican conference – in a post that has since been taken down. – MSThe January 6 committee has just concluded its final scheduled hearing, but its work is far from over. The committee will hold more hearings in September, and vice-chairwoman Liz Cheney said “the dam has begun to break” on the details of what happened that day.Here’s more about what took place at tonight’s hearing:
    A Democratic congresswoman who led the day’s presentation said Trump “was derelict in his duty” before and during the storming of the Capitol.
    Secret Service agents feared for their lives during the attack.
    Republican Senator Josh Hawley, who raised his fist in solidarity with the protesters that would go on to attack the Capitol, was shown fleeing through its halls.
    Republican Adam Kinzinger said Trump “kept resisting” actions demanded by his staff to end the violence.
    In speech outtakes, Trump struggled to say that the 2020 election was “over”.
    Trump’s chief of staff Mark Meadows called for the president’s daughter Ivanka to help convince him to stop the attack.
    House Republicans attacked the committee on Twitter, including one of their own staffers who was a witness. (They later deleted the tweet).
    The video of Josh Hawley running away not long after he cheered on the January 6 mob is a moment that’s likely to endure for a while after this hearing. There was audible laughter in the room after the clip played. And now online it’s being set to various soundtracks:Josh Hawley running away to a variety of soundtracks. Pt. 1: Chariots of Fire #January6thCommitteeHearing pic.twitter.com/tVCf2R5tUD— Mallory Nees (@The_Mal_Gallery) July 22, 2022
    – Maanvi SinghBennie Thompson and Liz Cheney, who lead the committee, are now delivering closing remarks. Cheney ended with this thought: “Can a president who is willing to make the choices Donald Trump made during the violence of January 6 ever be trusted with any position of authority in our great nation again?”– Maanvi Singh“Whatever your politics, whatever you think about the outcome of the election, we as Americans must all agree on this: Donald Trump’s conduct on Jan 6 was a supreme violation of his oath of office and a complete dereliction of his duty to our nation,” Kinzinger said.It’s unclear whether these hearings will break through and convince many fellow Republicans. Polls prior to this hearing finale found that while the majority of Americans think Trump is responsible for the deadly insurrection, stark party divisions remain. A Monmouth poll found that fewer Republicans now see January 6 as an insurrection than did last year. – Maanvi SinghOne of the most revelatory parts of this hearing are the outtakes from Trump’s video message on 7 January. “I don’t want to say the election is over,” he says in one clip. “I just want to say Congress has certified the results.”Here’s the clip:02:07The day after the attack, White House staff pressed Trump to give another speech to the nation condemning the attack on the Capitol, which committee member Elaine Luria said Trump was motivated to do “because of concerns he might be removed from power under the 25th amendment, or by impeachment”.The committee just showed video of him recording that speech and struggling to accept that the election was finished.“But this election is now over. Congress has certified the results,” Trump said in the speech, before saying to his staff: “I don’t want to say the election’s over. I just want to say Congress has certified the results, without saying the election’s over, okay?”“One day after he incited an insurrection based on a lie, President Trump still could not say that the election was over,” Luria said.“Mike Pence let me down.” According to an unnamed White House employee, that’s what Trump said in the Oval Office following the attack, congressman Adam Kinzinger said.Meanwhile, administration officials were condemning the day’s events and planning to resign.“What happened at the Capitol cannot be justified in any form or fashion. It was wrong and it was tragic. And it was a terrible day. It was a terrible day for this country,” White House counsel Pat Cipollone told the committee.As the hearing resumed, congressman Adam Kinzinger asked viewers to put themselves in the shoes of the president on the day of the attack.“What would you have done if you had the opportunity to end the violence?” the Illinois Republican asked. “You would’ve told the rioters to leave. As you heard, that’s exactly what the senior staff had been urging him to do. But he resisted, and he kept resisting for almost another two hours.”Much of this hearing has focused on the efforts of various Trump administration official to get the president to act as the situation got ever more desperate at the Capitol.Once again tonight, we’re being reminded of House minority leader Kevin McCarthy’s 180 flip after January 6. Multiple witnesses have now recounted that. McCarthy first asked Donald Trump, and then Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, asking the president to call off the mob.. “Think about that. Leader McCarthy, who was one of the president’s strongest supporters, was scared and begging for help. President Trump turned him down,” Adam Kinzinger said. A week later, McCarthy went to see Trump at Mar-a-Lago. – Maanvi SinghThe hearing is now focusing on the tweets Trump sent as the Capitol was being stormed, which his former officials are testifying that they didn’t feel were strong enough to stop the violence.The committee has played voice clips from the Oath Keepers militia groups, apparently between members who took part in the attack and those who were elsewhere.After Trump tweeted, “Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!”, one of the Oath Keepers remarked, “That’s saying a lot, but what he didn’t say, he didn’t say not to do anything to the congressman.” The speaker then laughed.The committee showed Josh Hawley, the right-wing senator of Missouri, raising his fist in solidarity with the crowds on January 6 – and later fleeing as rioters breached the Capitol. Here’s that video: Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) — who raised his fist in support of the Capitol insurrectionists earlier in the day — runs for his life from the rioters inside the building in never-before-seen video. pic.twitter.com/GU1L8ttN8u— The Recount (@therecount) July 22, 2022
    Reporters in the room said there was audible laughter after the video of Hawley running played. Hawley was the first senator to declare he would object to certifying the election. – Maanvi SinghThe hearing has restarted with more from Pat Cipollone’s interview. He is describing White House officials as near-unanimous in wanting the rioters out of the Capitol as it was being attacked.“I can’t think of anybody, you know, on that day, who didn’t want people to get out of the Capitol,” Cipollone said.Asked what the president wanted, Cipollone appeared to invoke executive privilege.“Get Ivanka down here”. That’s what chief of staff Mark Meadows said as White House officials tried to figure out how to get Trump to stop the rioters at the Capitol, according to testimony from then-White House counsel Pat Cipollone.“I remember him getting Ivanka involved, said ‘get Ivanka down here.’ He felt that would be important”, Cipollone said.Ivanka Trump is, of course, the president’s daughter, who was an adviser in the White House and told the committee she never believed Trump’s claims the 2020 election was stolen.Ivanka Trump says she does not believe father’s claim 2020 election was stolenRead moreIt seems the House GOP twitter account has deleted tweets attacking Sarah Matthews and describing tonight’s testimony was “heresy”. Matthews, who has described herself as a “lifelong Republican” and has worked as a staffer for the House GOP, was previously derided as a “pawn” in Nancy Pelosi’s “witch hunt.”The Twitter account is run by Representative Elise Stefanik’s staff.– Maanvi SinghThe January 6 committee is now taking a 10-minute recess.Just before they broke, several former top officials confirmed that they believed ensuring a peaceful transfer of power was among the president’s duties, including White House counsel Pat Cipollone, Ivanka Trump’s husband Jared Kushner and Keith Kellogg, Pence’s national security adviser.“Rather than uphold his duty to the Constitution, president Trump allowed the mob to achieve the delay that he hoped with keep him in power,” congresswoman Elaine Luria said as the hearing’s first half concluded.Secret Service agents feared for their lives as the Capitol was stormed, an unnamed White House security official testified to the committee.“There’s a lot of yelling, a lot of… very personal phone calls over the radio,” the official said. Others “called to say goodbye to a family member”.“I think there were discussions of reinforcements coming, but again, it is just chaos. They’re just yelling”, the official continued. “It sounds like that we came very close to either the service having to use lethal options, or worse.” More

  • in

    Pence’s security detail wanted to call family, feared for their lives during Capitol riot

    Pence’s security detail wanted to call family, feared for their lives during Capitol riotA White House national security official said, ‘for whatever reason … the VP detail thought this was about to get very ugly’ In chilling new testimony about the January 6 attack on the US Capitol, the investigating House committee showed that members of the Secret Service detail for the vice-president, Mike Pence, so feared for his and their safety that they “screamed” that other officials should say goodbye to their families.Jan 6 hearing live updates: Trump ‘was derelict in his duty’, Republican Kinzinger saysRead moreA White House national security official whose identity and voice was obscured described the calls in testimony played by the January 6 committee in a public hearing on Thursday night.The official was asked why, after a mob that Donald Trump sent to the Capitol attacked Congress in an attempt to stop Pence certifying Joe Biden’s election win, staff at the White House officially recorded that, “Service at the Capitol does not sound good right now”.The official said: “The members of the VP detail at this time were starting to fear for their own lives. There was a lot of yelling. There were a lot of very personal calls over the radio, so it was disturbing. I don’t like talking about it.“There were calls to say goodbye to family members, so on and so forth … for whatever reason it was on the ground, the VP detail thought this was about to get very ugly.”Such terrified and panicked messages were relayed from the Capitol around the time Trump tweeted to his supporters a now infamous 2.24pm message in which he did nothing to calm the riot.The then president said: “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what was necessary.”News that members of the Secret Service thought they were going to be killed by the pro-Trump mob comes amid considerable tension between the Secret Service and the January 6 committee.The committee served the agency with a subpoena for all text communications on the day before the Capitol attack and the day itself. The Secret Service said the messages had been wiped. It subsequently delivered just one message to the committee.Nine deaths have been linked to the Capitol riot, including law enforcement officers who died by suicide. Nearly 900 people have been charged, some with seditious conspiracy. The committee is attempting to show grounds for criminal charges against Trump himself. The Department of Justice would have to bring any charges.In the primetime Thursday hearing about events on January 6, the national security official said: “I think there were discussions of reinforcements coming but again it was just chaos, they were just yelling.“If they’re getting nervous and they’re running out of options, it sounds like we came very close to either Service having to use lethal options or worse.“At that point I don’t know? Is the VP compromised? I don’t know. We didn’t have visibility. But if they’re screaming and saying things like ‘Say goodbye to the family’, the floor needs to know this is going to whole ’nother level soon.”Referring to controversy over the missing Secret Service texts, the presidential historian Michael Beschloss tweeted: “For all of those Secret Service agents who seem to love and venerate Trump, look at how he did nothing to defend Mike Pence’s agents on January 6 as they called their frightened families to say goodbye forever.”TopicsJanuary 6 hearingsSecret ServiceMike PenceUS Capitol attackUS politicsHouse of RepresentativesUS CongressnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Jan 6 hearing live updates: panel to show Trump broke the law by refusing to stop riot

    Good afternoon, US politics blog readers. In a few hours, the January 6 committee will hold its final scheduled hearing, in which House lawmakers will make the case that former president Donald Trump may have violated the law by not stopping the assault on the Capitol. As if that wasn’t a packed news agenda by itself, president Joe Biden announced earlier today he had tested positive for Covid-19 – joining his vice president Kamala Harris, much of Congress’s Democratic leadership and yes, Trump, in contracting the virus.Here’s what else has happened today:
    The House of Representatives passed a bill to guarantee access to contraception after supreme court justice Clarence Thomas mulled revisiting a decades-old ruling concerning the right. All Democrats voted for it, along with eight Republicans.
    Much of America is facing extreme heat. Some Democrats have called on Biden to declare a climate emergency, but he has yet to do so.
    Biden’s Covid-19 diagnosis has delayed the announcement of a plan to fight crime.
    Democratic senators have introduced a bill to legalize cannabis nationwide. More

  • in

    Pence Backs Trump Loyalists and Skeptics in House Elections

    WASHINGTON — As Representative Darin LaHood, Republican of Illinois, prepared to campaign with Mike Pence, the former vice president, in his district last month, he braced for a backlash from his party’s right-wing base.Just days before, the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol had re-created in chilling detail how Mr. Pence had resisted President Donald J. Trump’s orders to overturn his defeat in Congress — and how Mr. Trump’s demands had put the vice president’s life at risk.Mr. LaHood’s fears of MAGA protesters and hostility to Mr. Pence never materialized; the former vice president received a warm welcome from the crowd at a Lincoln Day dinner in Peoria and at a closed-door fund-raising lunch with the congressman in Chicago, according to people who attended. But the concerns about how Mr. Pence would be received highlighted the awkward dynamic that has taken hold as the former vice president quietly campaigns for Republican members of Congress ahead of the midterm elections.House Republicans helped Mr. Trump spread the election lies that brought Mr. Pence within 40 feet of a mob that stormed the Capitol clamoring for his execution, and the vast majority of them remain publicly loyal to Mr. Trump, still the biggest draw and the most coveted endorsement on the campaign trail.But privately, many of them hope their party might soon return to some version of its pre-2016 identity — when Mr. Pence was regarded on the right as a symbol of conservative strength, not cowardice — and want to preserve a relationship with him in that case.Mr. Pence, who served six terms as a congressman from Indiana, has been eager to campaign for congressional candidates, particularly in the Midwest. He is seeking to carve out a viable lane of his own for a potential presidential run in 2024, even if it means helping some lawmakers who continue to spout the election lies that imperiled him.Mr. Pence spoke at an event for Representative Darin LaHood, right, in Peoria, Ill., last month.Jamie Kelter Davis for The New York TimesOver the past year, Mr. Pence has appeared at campaign events for more than a dozen members of Congress, happily attending steak fries, picnics and fund-raisers that have at times brought in half a million dollars apiece for candidates.Overall, his aides said, he has helped to raise millions of dollars for House Republicans, many of whom still see him as a well-liked former colleague who often played the role of Trump administration emissary to Congress. On Wednesday, his alliance with congressional Republicans will be on display when he speaks on Capitol Hill as a guest of the Republican Study Committee, a conservative caucus.That followed an appearance Tuesday night at a “Young Guns” fund-raising dinner hosted by Representative Kevin McCarthy, Republican of California and the minority leader, at Del Frisco’s Double Eagle Steakhouse in Washington. Mr. Pence’s appearance there was described by an attendee as akin to a homecoming for him. Mr. Trump was mentioned only in the context of discussing the “Trump-Pence accomplishments.”Key Themes From the 2022 Midterm Elections So FarCard 1 of 5The state of the midterms. More

  • in

    Secret Service turned over just one text message to January 6 panel, sources say

    Secret Service turned over just one text message to January 6 panel, sources sayHouse committee wants all communications from day before and day of Capitol attack but agency indicates such messages are lost The Secret Service turned over just one text message to the House January 6 committee on Tuesday, in response to a subpoena compelling the production of all communications from the day before and the day of the US Capitol attack, according to two sources familiar with the matter.Primetime January 6 hearing to go ahead despite chairman’s positive Covid testRead moreThe Secret Service told the panel the single text was the only message responsive to the subpoena, the sources said, and while the agency vowed to conduct a forensic search for any other text or phone records, it indicated such messages were likely to prove irrecoverable.House investigators also learned that the texts were seemingly lost as part of an agency-wide reset of phones on 27 January 2021, the sources said – 11 days after Congress first requested the communications and two days after agents were reminded to back up their phones.The disclosures were worse than the committee had anticipated, the sources said. The panel had hoped to receive more than a single text and was dismayed to learn that the messages were lost even after they had been requested for congressional investigations.It marked a damaging day for the Secret Service, which is required to preserve records like any other executive branch agency, and now finds itself in the crosshairs of the select committee examining its response with respect to the Capitol attack.The circumstances surrounding the erasure of the Secret Service texts have become central to the January 6 committee’s work as it investigates how agents and leaders planned to move Donald Trump and Mike Pence as violence unfolded at the Capitol.The controversy – and the subpoena – over the lost text messages came last week after the Department of Homeland Security inspector general, Joseph Cuffari, the watchdog for the Secret Service, revealed many messages from the time in question had gone missing.In a letter to Congress, the inspector general said some Secret Service texts from 5 and 6 January 2021 were erased amid a “device replacement program” and indicated that the agency was stonewalling his investigation by slow-walking the production of evidence.The Secret Service has said the missing texts were purged as part of a planned agency-wide reset of phones and replacement of devices. Agents were told to back up data to an internal drive, one source said, but that directive appears to have been ignored.Hours after the complaint letter from Cuffari, the chair of the January 6 committee, Bennie Thompson, met the panel’s staff director, David Buckley, and his deputy, Kristin Amerling, before convening members to request a closed-door briefing from the inspector general.The Guardian first reported the inspector general told the committee the Secret Service’s account of why the texts went missing kept changing, among other issues, prompting the panel to issue a subpoena for the texts and after-action reports later the same day.But even as the Secret Service complied with the subpoena, and produced thousands of pages of documents related to decisions made on the day of the Capitol attack, the agency could provide just one text message, the sources said.The Secret Service was also unable to provide any after-action reports, the sources said, because none were conducted. Cuffari said the agency opted to use his review as the after-action report – only for personnel to slow-walk his investigation, the sources said.A spokesman for the Secret Service could not immediately be reached for comment.The fallout from the missing text messages episode, as well as testimony from former Trump aide Cassidy Hutchinson describing a fracas inside the presidential vehicle on January 6 as Trump tried to reach for the steering wheel, has renewed questions over credibility.According to the Secret Service, the sequence of events was as follows: agents were told of a forthcoming update in December 2020, Congress requested communications on 16 January 2021, agents were reminded to back-up data on 25 January and the update went through on 27 January 2021.The agents were told in the reminder about “how to save information that they were obligated or desired to preserve so that no pertinent data or federal records” were lost, though the note seemingly went unheeded and texts were purged.House investigators are currently discussing with the inspector general the possibility of reconstructing the lost texts, the sources said, examining options including acquiring specialized software and forensic tools.The justice department inspector general has been able to retrieve lost texts, recovering messages in 2018 from two senior FBI officials who investigated former presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and Trump and exchanged notes criticizing the latter.The Secret Service was not responsible for security at the Capitol on January 6 – that is performed by US Capitol police – but agents led protection details for Trump, Pence, and other executive branch officials across Washington that day.But Secret Service actions have become a focus for House investigators as they investigate whether and when the agency knew Trump wanted to go to the Capitol, and whether it intended to remove Pence from the complex as rioters sought to stop certification of Joe Biden’s election win.The missing texts are also the subject of a new investigation, after the National Archives told the Secret Service to launch an internal review and issue a report within 30 calendar days, if it found that any texts were “improperly deleted”.TopicsJanuary 6 hearingsSecret ServiceUS Capitol attackUS politicsUS CongressHouse of RepresentativesTrump administrationnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Carolyn Maloney Uses Personal Fortune in Primary Against Jerrold Nadler

    Representative Carolyn Maloney of New York holds a commanding financial advantage over her crosstown Democratic primary opponent, Representative Jerrold Nadler, thanks to a familiar benefactor: herself.She personally lent her campaign $900,000, according to new filings released late Friday. The loan, combined with another $600,000 or so in outside donations in the second quarter, gives Ms. Maloney $2 million in the bank before the Aug. 23 primary, a closely watched and highly abbreviated contest between two long-serving House committee leaders.“There was never a doubt that I would continue to fight for the people in my district,” Ms. Maloney, 76, who is one of the richest members of Congress, said of the race in New York’s 12th Congressional District. “Thus, I decided to use some of my retirement savings to invest in this campaign.”Bob Liff, a spokesman for Ms. Maloney, clarified that the funds had come from her House retirement account.Mr. Nadler, 75, reported $500,000 in contributions, but he did not lend his campaign any money, leaving him with $1.2 million in cash.“I’m the son of a chicken farmer — no fortune over here!” Mr. Nadler wrote on Twitter, gently knocking Ms. Maloney. Julian Gerson, a co-manager of Mr. Nadler’s campaign, added that Mr. Nadler would “have the resources we need to run a campaign that’ll talk to every voter.”A third candidate campaigning on a platform of generational change, Suraj Patel, ended the quarter with about half that amount of cash, filings show.Mr. Patel blasted both his opponents for accepting campaign contributions from corporate donors, a practice he avoids. “The 60 years of incumbency in this race are desperate to hold onto their seats,” he said.Ms. Maloney’s loan came in late May, after New York’s courts had invalidated congressional districts drawn by Democrats in Albany, and unexpectedly drew replacements that combined her longtime district rooted on the East Side of Manhattan with Mr. Nadler’s on the West Side.The same reshuffling created an outright melee among more than a dozen Democrats in the neighboring 10th District, which stretches from Lower Manhattan into Brooklyn.Friday’s filings showed that Representative Mondaire Jones had extended a commanding fund-raising lead with $2.8 million in cash on hand. Mr. Jones, who jumped from the suburban Westchester County district he currently represents to the new 10th District to avoid a messy party primary with a fellow incumbent, entered the race with a significant head start. But he will likely need every penny in order to introduce himself to unfamiliar voters and overcome accusations of carpetbagging.Other candidates were also assembling sizable campaign war chests.Daniel Goldman, a former federal prosecutor who worked on the first impeachment of former President Donald J. Trump, quickly raised $1.2 million and ended the quarter with more than $1 million in cash. Bill de Blasio, the former New York City mayor, raised over $500,000; Carlina Rivera, a Manhattan city councilwoman, collected just over $400,000 in contributions; and Yuh-Line Niou, an assemblywoman from Chinatown, reported $240,000 in donations.Mr. de Blasio’s haul included substantial contributions from New York City’s real estate industry and several of his former mayoral appointees, including $1,000 from Dean Fuleihan, Mr. de Blasio’s deputy mayor, and $500 from Steven Banks, the head of social services under Mr. de Blasio. More

  • in

    House approves legislation to protect abortion access across US

    House approves legislation to protect abortion access across US Vote was largely symbolic as two bills stand all but no chance of overcoming Republican opposition in the evenly-divided Senate The House of Representatives on Friday approved legislation that would protect abortion access nationwide, the first action by Democrats in Congress to respond to the supreme court decision in late June overturning Roe v Wade.The vote was largely symbolic – the bills stand all but no chance of overcoming Republican opposition in the evenly divided Senate, where 60 votes are needed to move legislation forward.US employers’ support for workers’ abortion care leaves serious gapsRead moreBut the action, the first in the post-Roe era, begins what Democrats promise will be an all-out, potentially years-long, political campaign to restore abortion rights in all 50 states.Already, Republican-led legislatures in states across wide swaths of the south and midwest are moving quickly to enact restrictions or bans on abortion that were once unlawful under the precedent set by the landmark 1973 Roe v Wade ruling by the supreme court, while Democratic-led states have acted to expand access and protections for women seeking the procedure.The June ruling was expected to lead to bans in nearly half of US states, though lawsuits and legislative delays vary when they would take effect.US president Joe Biden and party leaders are under mounting pressure from their supporters, who are furious over the court’s decision to invalidate a half-century constitutional right to abortion and frustrated that their party leaders appeared to lack a cogent plan of action.Before the vote, the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, and a coalition of Democratic women, all wearing green, a color that has come to symbolize abortion rights, stood on the steps of the Capitol chanting: “We are not going back.”During her remarks on the floor, Pelosi warned that Republicans would seek a “barbaric” national ban on abortion if they win control of the chamber.Many Democrats highlighted the case of a 10-year-old Ohio girl who was raped and then had to cross state lines into Indiana in order to get an abortion because of tighter restrictions in her own state, as an example of the tragic consequences of the supreme court’s ruling. Many conservatives cast doubt on the veracity of the story, which was confirmed when a man was arraigned in the rape.House Democrats approved two measures on Friday. One would protect the right to travel across state lines for abortion services, a new flashpoint in the debate as anti-abortion groups push legislation that would block women from traveling out-of-state. That passed the House by 223 votes to 205 no votes.The measure would also shield healthcare providers who perform abortions on out-of-state patients from legal repercussions.The other bill, a version of which already passed the House last year, would establish abortion rights in federal law, effectively overturning a flurry of state restrictions and bans and giving a national legislative underpinning to a federal right that had been dictated by the court.The measure would guarantee abortion access until fetal viability, the point at which a human fetus is widely deemed able to survive outsidethe uterus, roughly considered to be around 24 weeks, or after that point if the mother’s health or life are at risk. It passed by 219 yes votes to 210 no votes.It would also prohibit what its authors say are medically unnecessary restrictions designed to restrict abortion access under the guise of protecting women’s health.“You should not have more rights if you get pregnant in California than if you get pregnant in Texas,” said Congresswoman Judy Chu, a Democrat from California and the author of the Women’s Health Protection Act.Friday’s action was also an attempt to put Republicans on the record on an issue Democrats believe will galvanize their ranks in November’s midterm elections.Only a narrow sliver of Americans believe abortion should be banned, and consistent majorities oppose the supreme court’s decision to overturn Roe. Republicans uniformly opposed the bills. A number of Republican lawmakers have embraced a nationwide ban on abortion, promising a flurry of new federal restrictions if they win control of Congress in the midterm elections.There are two Republican senators in the House who support abortion rights, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine. They do not support the House’s bill codifying Roe, saying it goes further than the supreme court precedent. They have introduced alternative legislation, but even so, it is unlikely to persuade enough Republican senators to overcome the 60-vote threshold.Asked whether Democrats should work with these Republican senators on a compromise plan, Pelosi told reporters: “We’re not going to negotiate a woman’s right to choose.”Joe Biden has faced widespread criticism from Democrats disappointed with his response to the overturning of Roe, which they viewed as belated and overly cautious. The president has since displayed a more aggressive tone on the issue and directed his administration to take additional steps to protect access.But ultimately he said the only way to “truly” protect abortion rights was for Congress to act, and to do that voters needed to elect at least two more Democratic senators in November.“We must ensure that the American people remember in November,” Pelosi said, “because with two more Democratic senators we will be able to eliminate the filibuster when it comes to a woman’s right to choose and to make reproductive freedom the law of the land.”TopicsHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsRoe v WadeAbortionnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Gerrymandered Redistricting Maps Have Become the Norm

    The downtown of Denton, Texas, a city of about 150,000 people and two large universities just north of Dallas, exudes the energy of a fast-growing place with a sizable student population: There’s a vibrant independent music scene, museums and public art exhibits, beer gardens, a surfeit of upscale dining options, a weekly queer variety show. The city is also racially and ethnically diverse: More than 45 percent of residents identify as Latino, Black, Asian or multiracial. There aren’t too many places in Texas where you can encounter Muslim students praying on a busy downtown sidewalk, but Denton is one of them.Lindsey Wilkes, left, and Kimberlyn Spain with friends from the Muslim Student Association near the University of North Texas.Drive about seven hours northwest of Denton’s city center and you hit Texline, a flat, treeless square of a town tucked in the corner of the state on the New Mexico border. Cow pastures and wind turbines seem to stretch to the horizon. Texline’s downtown has a couple diners, a gas station, a hardware store and not much else; its largely white population is roughly 460 people and shrinking.It would be hard to pick two places more different from one another than Denton and Texline — and yet thanks to the latest round of gerrymandering by Texas’ Republican-dominated Legislature, both are now part of the same congressional district: the 13th, represented by one man, Ronny Jackson. Mr. Jackson, the former White House physician, ran for his seat in 2020 as a hard-right Republican. It turned out to be a good fit for Texas-13, where he won with almost 80 percent of the vote.Denton’s bustling downtown square is a gathering point for the city’s diverse population.The city’s soccer facilities provide meeting grounds for families from all walks of life.Enjoying live music is a multigenerational undertaking, as the Rojas family did one afternoon at a performance of Latin funk at Harvest House.This was before the 2020 census was completed and Congress reapportioned, which gave the Texas delegation two more seats for its growing population, for a total of 38. State Republicans, who control the governor’s office and both houses of the Legislature, were free to redraw their district lines pretty much however they pleased. They used that power primarily to tighten their grip on existing Republican seats rather than create new ones, as they had in the 2010 cycle. In the process, they managed to squelch the political voice of many nonwhite Texans, who accounted for 95 percent of the state’s growth over the last decade yet got not a single new district that would give them the opportunity to elect a representative of their choice.Marsha Keffer, a volunteer and precinct chair, looking over district maps at the the Denton County Democratic Party headquarters.A development of multistory homes under construction in Denton.Denton offers a good example of how this played out. Under the old maps, downtown Denton, where the universities lie, was part of the 26th District — a Republican-majority district, but considerably more competitive than the 13th. If Texas politics continue to move left as they have in recent years, the 26th District could have become a tossup. The liberal residents of Denton could have had the chance to elect to Congress a representative of their choosing.Now that the downtown has been absorbed into the 13th District and yoked to the conservative Texas panhandle, however, they might as well be invisible. Even with the addition of all those younger and more liberal voters, the 13th remains a right-wing fortress, with a 45-point Republican lean, according to an analysis by the website FiveThirtyEight. (The redrawn 26th District, meanwhile, will likely become a few points more Republican in the absence of Denton’s downtown.)Families enjoyed a custom ride after attending a Spanish-language church service in Krum, a town in Denton County in the newly redrawn 13th Congressional District.Recycled Books, a used book, record, CD and video game store, fills several floors of an old opera house in the middle of Denton Square.This is the harm of partisan gerrymanders: Partisan politicians draw lines in order to distribute their voters more efficiently, ensuring they can win the most seats with the fewest votes. They shore up their strongholds and help eliminate any meaningful electoral competition. It’s the opposite of how representative democracy is supposed to work.A music and film festival drew Chelsey Danielle, left, and Stefanie Lazcano to the dance floor.Kinsey Davenport getting inked at Smilin’ Rick’s tattoo shop in Denton.The kitchen staff at Boca 31, an upscale Latin street-food restaurant, during a Saturday afternoon rush.Ross Sylvester, right, and Chuck Swartwood joined a crew of volunteers at a food distribution site run by First Refuge in Denton.How is it supposed to work? Politicians are elected freely by voters, and they serve at the pleasure of those voters, who can throw them out if they believe they aren’t doing a good job. Partisan gerrymanders upend that process. Politicians redraw lines to win their seats regardless of whether most voters want them to; in closely fought states like Wisconsin and North Carolina, Republicans drew themselves into control of the legislatures even when Democrats won a majority of votes statewide.When these gerrymanders become the norm, as they have in the absence of meaningful checks, they silence the voices of millions of Americans, leading people to believe they have little or no power to choose their representatives. This helps increase the influence of the political extremes. It makes bipartisan compromise all but impossible and creates a vicious circle in which the most moderate candidates are the least likely to run or be elected.A music class for infants and toddlers at the Explorium, a children’s museum and play and education center in Denton.Texas Republicans have been especially ruthless at playing this game, but they’re far from alone. Their counterparts in Wisconsin, North Carolina, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Kansas have taken similar approaches to stack the deck against Democrats. Democrats have likewise gone on offense in states where they control mapmaking, such as in Illinois and Oregon, where lawmakers drew maps for 2022 that effectively erased swathes of Republicans.After a virtual home wedding for family members in Moldova and Mexico, Matt Lisovoy and Diana Lisovaya celebrated with ice cream on the square.Diya Craft and her punk-fusion band, Mutha Falcon, playing at a nonprofit social club featuring local bands and craft beers.Iglesia Sobre la Roca serves a varied population from Mexico and Central America with Spanish-language services.The Austin-based rock band Holy Death Trio at Andy’s Bar on the square.The Supreme Court had an opportunity in 2019 to outlaw the worst of this behavior, but it refused to, claiming it had neither the authority nor any clear standards to stop gerrymanders that “reasonably seem unjust.” This was nonsense; lower federal courts and state courts have had no problem coming up with workable standards for years. Court intervention is essential, because voters essentially have no other way of unrigging the system. But the Supreme Court’s conservative majority stuck its head in the sand, giving free rein to the worst impulses of a hyperpolarized society.As Justice Elena Kagan wrote in dissent: “Of all times to abandon the court’s duty to declare the law, this was not the one. The practices challenged in these cases imperil our system of government. Part of the court’s role in that system is to defend its foundations. None is more important than free and fair elections.”The view in Texline, Texas, on the far western edge of the 13th Congressional District.The Supreme Court isn’t the only institution to shirk its responsibility to make maps fairer. Congress has the constitutional authority to set standards for federal elections, but Republicans have repeatedly blocked efforts by Democrats to require independent redistricting commissions. It doesn’t help matters that most Americans still don’t understand what redistricting is or how it works.The Amarillo office of Representative Ronny Jackson is on the far west side of the district.Visitors to Amarillo can find an astonishing selection of cowboy boots and other western wear at Cavender’s.They can also take in a film at the American Quarter Horse Foundation Hall of Fame and Museum.Left to their own devices, states are doing what they can. More than a dozen have created some type of redistricting commission, but the details matter greatly. Some commissions, like California’s and Michigan’s, are genuinely independent — composed of voters rather than lawmakers, and as a result these states have fairer maps.Isaiah Reed mastering his trampoline basketball skills in his backyard in Texline.Commissions in some other states are more vulnerable to partisan influence because they have no binding authority. In New York, the commission plays only an advisory role, so it was no surprise when Democrats in power quickly took over the process and redrew district lines to ensure that 22 of the state’s 26 seats would be won by their party. The state’s top court struck the Democratic maps down for violating a 2014 amendment to the State Constitution barring partisan gerrymanders — a good decision in a vacuum, perhaps, but the result is more chaos and infighting, because the final maps are forcing several top Democratic lawmakers to face off against one another. Meanwhile in Ohio, where the State Constitution has a similar provision barring partisan gerrymanders, the State Supreme Court repeatedly invalidated Republican-drawn gerrymanders for being unfairly biased, but Republicans have managed to ignore those rulings, and so will end up with the maps they want, at least for this cycle.A truck driver making a pit stop in Conway, Texas, which is in the 13th District.Palo Duro Canyon State Park, home to the second-largest canyon in the United States, is part of the arid landscape of northwestern Texas.Bushland, a suburb of Amarillo.Drew Merritt’s “The Chase” in downtown Amarillo.The patchwork of litigation and different outcomes around the country only strengthens the case for a national standard, which is nowhere in sight. It’s a maddening situation with no apparent solution — until you widen the lens and look at the larger structure of American government. When you do, it becomes clear that extreme partisan gerrymandering is more a symptom than a cause of democratic breakdown. The bigger problem is that the way we designed our system of political representation incentivizes the worst and most extreme elements of our politics.On the federal level, at least, there are clear solutions that Congress could adopt tomorrow if it had the will to do so.The 190-foot-tall cross in Groom, Texas, is among the largest in the country.First, expand the House of Representatives. As The Times’s editorial board explained in 2018, the House’s membership, 435, is far too small for America in the 21st century. It reached its current size in 1911, when the country had fewer than one-third as many people as it does today, and the national budget was a tiny fraction of its current size. In 1911, each representative had an average of 211,000 constituents — already far more than the founders had envisioned. Today that number is more than 750,000. It is virtually impossible for one person, Ronny Jackson or anyone else, to accurately represent the range of political interests in a district of that size.In the Texas Panhandle, which lies almost entirely in the 13th District, wind turbines dot the landscape, and cattle outnumber voters.The region is littered with desolate downtowns like Shamrock, where a stray cat was among the few signs of life.On the far northwestern edge of the district, in Texline, Carlos Mendoza tossed a few pitches to his neighbor Sebastian Reed. They live about 450 miles from the opposite corner of the district.Why are we still stuck with a House of Representatives from the turn of the last century? The founders certainly didn’t want it that way; the original First Amendment to the Constitution, which Congress proposed in 1789, would have permanently tied the size of the House to the nation’s population; the amendment fell one state short of ratification.Still, as the country grew Congress kept adding seats after every decennial census, almost without fail. After 1911, that process was obstructed by rural and Southern lawmakers intent on stopping the shift in political power to the Northern cities, where populations were exploding. In 1929, Congress passed a law that locked the House size at 435 seats and created an algorithm for reapportioning them in the future.A bigger House is necessary to more accurately reflect American politics and to bring the United States back in line with other advanced democracies. But on its own it wouldn’t solve our failure of representation. The larger culprit is our winner-take-all elections: From the presidency down, American electoral politics gives 100 percent of the spoils to one side and zero to the other — a bad formula for compromise at any time, and especially dangerous when the country is as polarized as it is today. But at least some of that polarization can be attributed to the manner in which we choose our representatives.Texline is at one end of the 13th District.Tattoos of a musician in Denton.In Congress, districts are represented by a single person, which is harmful in two ways: First, it’s hard to see how one person can adequately represent three-quarters of a million people. Second, even though representatives are supposed to look out for all their constituents, the reality of our politics means most people who didn’t vote for the winner will feel unrepresented entirely.The solution: proportional multimember districts. When districts are larger and contain three or even five members, they can more accurately capture the true shape of the electorate and let everyone’s voice be heard. And if the candidates are chosen through ranked-choice voting, then Republicans, Democrats and even third parties can win representation in Congress in rough proportion to their vote share. It’s no longer a zero-sum game that leaves out millions of Americans.A farm in Texline at the New Mexico border. The founders were comfortable with multimember districts, just as they were with a House of Representatives that kept expanding. In fact, such districts were common in the early years of the Republic, but Congress outlawed them at the federal level, most recently in 1967, partly out of a concern that Southern lawmakers were using them to entrench white political power — a problem that ranked-choice voting would solve.These reforms may sound technical, but they are central to saving representative democracy in America.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: [email protected] The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More