House of Representatives
Subterms
More stories
- in US Politics
Joe Biden dismisses bad polling and says domestic agenda set to pass
Joe BidenJoe Biden dismisses bad polling and says domestic agenda set to pass
President speaks to reporters at end of G20 summit in Rome
Progressives Sanders and Khanna optimistic on spending plan
Virginia: governor race becomes referendum on Biden
Victoria Bekiempis and Martin PengellySun 31 Oct 2021 16.35 EDTFirst published on Sun 31 Oct 2021 11.53 EDTJoe Biden sought to brush off concerns about bad polling on Sunday, telling reporters he expected Democrats to overcome internal differences and pass both his domestic spending plan and a bipartisan infrastructure deal in the week to come.Republican Adam Kinzinger: I’ll fight Trumpism ‘cancer’ outside CongressRead moreEarlier, an NBC News poll found that 54% of US adults disapproved of Biden’s performance, down six points since August, a period in which the president’s domestic agenda has stalled amid intra-party division.Biden spoke to reporters in Rome at the end of the G20, before traveling to Glasgow for the Cop26 climate summit.He said: “I didn’t run to determine how well I’m going to do in the polls. I ran to make sure that I follow through on what I said I would do as president of the United States.“I said that I would make sure that we were in a position where we dealt with climate change, where we moved in a direction that would significantly improve the prospects of American workers having good jobs and good pay. And further that I would make sure that we dealt with the crisis that was caused by Covid.“… I believe we will pass my Build Back Better plan. I believe we will pass the infrastructure bill. Combined, they have $900bn in dealing with climate resilience, the largest investment in the history of the world that’s ever occurred. And it’s going to pass in my view, but we’ll see. We’ll see.”Biden has staked his presidency on his spending plans but Democrats in Congress have been split between progressives and moderates led by two senators, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona. Biden delayed his departure to Rome to plead with Democrats to pass his spending agenda.“We are at an inflection point,” he reportedly told House members. “The rest of the world wonders whether we can function.”Whether Democrats can deliver could also have significant implications for the midterm elections next year. Historically, parties holding the presidency fail to keep the House.Top Democrats reportedly want a final version of Biden’s $1.75tn spending plan drafted by Sunday and passed by Tuesday. The price tag has come down dramatically, from $3.5tn, with concessions to Manchin and Sinema. The infrastructure deal is valued at $1tn.Discussions continued throughout the weekend. Bernie Sanders, the chair of the Senate budget committee, told CNN’s State of the Union: “I can tell you, we are working right now. I spent all of yesterday on the telephone … as soon as I leave the studio, I’m going to be going back home to get on the phone.”Sanders said he was optimistic and added: “This is not easy stuff, but what we are trying to do is put together the most consequential piece of legislation in the modern history of this country, which will transform the role of government in protecting the needs of working families.”Sanders said he was fighting for action on prescription drugs costs to be included in the spending bill, an issue on which he and Sinema are in very evident opposition.In a 50-50 Senate, and with no Republican support on spending, Manchin and Sinema are key. Democrats must use reconciliation, a way to pass budgetary initiatives via a simple majority rather than 60 votes. The vice-president, Kamala Harris, has the decisive vote.The Senate did pass the infrastructure bill in August via a bipartisan vote but House progressives stymied it in an attempt to win concessions on the spending plan. On Sunday Ro Khanna of California, a prominent House progressive, told CBS’s Face the Nation he expected success.“We are working to add things in,” he said. “The negotiations are taking place. I’m going to be a yes. I think we can have the vote by Tuesday … I’m yes on the framework.”Cabinet members also expressed optimism. The transportation secretary, Pete Buttigieg, told Fox News Sunday: “We are teed up for major action soon.”Asked if Congress would pass both pieces of legislation this week, he said: “We are the closest we have ever been.”Buttigieg also made a point sure to surface in the midterms if Biden is successful, telling ABC’s This Week he “wouldn’t let Republicans off the hook on voting for the family provisions too.“I know they probably won’t but it’s not too late for some of them to join Democrats who are united in believing that the time has come for us to actually put our money where our mouth is [and] support American families.”A Republican senator, Rick Scott of Florida, told Fox News Sunday Biden’s spending had “to end” as it was “causing inflation” and “hurting the poor families”.“We gotta live within our means like every family does,” Scott said.Huma Abedin says kiss from unnamed senator was not sexual assaultRead moreAsked if that meant Republicans should support repeal of tax cuts they passed under Donald Trump which are projected to add $2tn to the national debt, Scott said both taxes and spending should be cut.On NBC’s Meet the Press the energy secretary, Jennifer Granholm, suggested Biden’s polling would be boosted when Americans see his spending bill.“They’ll see that they’re going to get a continuation of that child tax credit,” Granholm said. “They’ll see people being put to work in clean energy all across this country.“They’re going to see the ability to have senior citizens and people with disabilities being cared for in their homes. They’ll see their costs of living come down as a result of having children. This bill and the real impacts that people will see will have an impact on those ratings.”In Rome, Biden told reporters: “You know, you all believed [the spending bill] wouldn’t happen from the very beginning, the moment I announced it, and you always seem amazed when it’s alive again. Maybe it won’t work. But I believe we’ll see by the end of next week at home that the bills have passed.”
The Associated Press contributed to this report
TopicsJoe BidenBiden administrationUS domestic policyUS politicsUS CongressUS SenateDemocratsnewsReuse this content More - in US Politics
Democratic leaders want House votes on Biden domestic agenda by Tuesday
Biden administrationDemocratic leaders want House votes on Biden domestic agenda by TuesdayAnonymous sources outline ambitious timetable for spending plan so far stymied by centrist senators Associated Press in WashingtonSat 30 Oct 2021 16.01 EDTDemocratic leaders are hoping for House votes as soon as Tuesday on the two pillars of Joe Biden’s domestic spending agenda, two Democrats said Saturday, as the party mounted its latest push to get the long-delayed legislation through Congress.Joe Manchin single-handedly denied US families paid leave. That’s just cruel | Jill FilipovicRead moreTop Democrats would like a final House-Senate compromise on Biden’s now $1.75tn, 10-year social and environment plan to be written by Sunday, the Democrats said.Talks among White House, House and Senate officials were being held over the weekend, said the Democrats, who described the plans on condition of anonymity.An accord could clear the way for House passage of that bill and a separate $1tn measure funding road, rail and other infrastructure projects, the Democrats said.It remains unclear whether the ambitious timetable can be met. To clear the Senate, any agreement will need the backing of centrist Democrats Joe Manchin, of West Virginia, and Kyrsten Sinema, of Arizona.The two senators have forced Biden to retreat from his plan for a $3.5tn social and environment bill and to remove some initiatives from the measure.Republican opposition to the social and environmental bill is unanimous. Democrats hold the House and Senate but in the latter are 10 votes short of the necessary super-majority to pass legislation.They must therefore use reconciliation, a process for budgetary measures which allows for a simple majority. As the Senate is split 50-50 and controlled via the casting vote of Vice-President Kamala Harris, Manchin and Sinema have a tremendous amount of power.The Senate approved the infrastructure bill in August on a bipartisan vote. House progressives have since sidetracked that bill, in an effort to pressure moderates to back the larger social and environment bill.TopicsBiden administrationJoe BidenUS domestic policyUS politicsDemocratsJoe ManchinUS CongressnewsReuse this content More
- in Elections
Court Filing Lists Documents Trump Seeks to Withhold From Jan. 6 Inquiry
The National Archives says the former president is asserting executive privilege over phone logs, notes and other records concerning the attack on the Capitol.WASHINGTON — Former President Donald J. Trump is seeking to block from release a wide range of documents related to the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, the National Archives said Saturday in an early-morning federal court filing detailing what Mr. Trump is fighting to keep secret.In the filing, in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, John Laster, the director of the National Archives’ presidential materials division, laid out for the first time exactly which documents Mr. Trump was asserting executive privilege over. The former president is hoping to prevent the documents from being reviewed by the House committee empowered to investigate the mob violence at the Capitol.According to the filing, Mr. Trump has asserted executive privilege specifically over 770 pages of documents, including 46 pages of records from the files of Mark Meadows, his former chief of staff; Stephen Miller, his former senior adviser; and Patrick Philbin, his former deputy counsel. Mr. Trump is also objecting to the release of the White House Daily Diary — a record of the president’s movements, phone calls, trips, briefings, meetings and activities — as well as logs showing phone calls to the president and to Vice President Mike Pence concerning Jan. 6, Mr. Laster wrote.Mr. Trump has also asserted executive privilege over 656 pages that include proposed talking points for Kayleigh McEnany, his former press secretary; a handwritten note concerning Jan. 6; a draft text of a presidential speech for the “Save America” rally that preceded the mob attack; and a draft executive order on the topic of election integrity, the filing states.Finally, Mr. Trump asserted executive privilege over 68 additional pages, including a draft proclamation honoring the Capitol Police and two officers who died after the riot, Brian D. Sicknick and Howard Liebengood, as well as related emails; a memo about a potential lawsuit against several states that Joseph R. Biden Jr. won in the November election; an email chain from a state official regarding election-related issues; and talking points on alleged election irregularities in one Michigan county.The filing comes in response to a lawsuit Mr. Trump filed this month against the National Archives seeking to block the disclosure of White House files related to his actions and communications surrounding the Jan. 6 riot.In that lawsuit, in a 26-page complaint, a lawyer for Mr. Trump argued that the materials must remain secret as a matter of executive privilege. The lawyer said the Constitution gave the former president the right to demand their confidentiality even though he was no longer in office — and even though President Biden has refused to assert executive privilege over them.The lawsuit touched off what is likely to be a major legal battle between Mr. Trump and the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack, in which a mob of his supporters stormed the Capitol seeking to disrupt Congress’s counting of electoral votes to formalize Mr. Biden’s victory. Its outcome will carry consequences for how much the panel can uncover about Mr. Trump’s role in the riot, pose thorny questions for the Biden administration and potentially forge new precedents about presidential prerogatives and the separation of powers.The leaders of the committee, Representative Bennie Thompson, Democrat of Mississippi, and Representative Liz Cheney, Republican of Wyoming, have condemned Mr. Trump’s lawsuit as “nothing more than an attempt to delay and obstruct our probe.”“It’s hard to imagine a more compelling public interest than trying to get answers about an attack on our democracy and an attempt to overturn the results of an election,” Mr. Thompson, the committee’s chairman, and Ms. Cheney, the vice chairwoman, wrote in a statement after the suit’s filing.Understand the Claim of Executive Privilege in the Jan. 6. InquiryCard 1 of 8A key issue yet untested. More
- in US Politics
Biden’s agenda remains unrealized as Democrats fail to close deal again
US politicsBiden’s agenda remains unrealized as Democrats fail to close deal againPelosi forced to postpone infrastructure vote on Thursday ahead of Biden’s meeting with world leaders in Rome Lauren Gambino in Washington@laurenegambinoFri 29 Oct 2021 13.53 EDTLast modified on Fri 29 Oct 2021 14.31 EDTJoe Biden’s nearly $3tn domestic agenda remains unrealized after an 11th-hour push to rally Democrats around a pared-down package that he framed as historic, failed to close the deal in time for his meeting with world leaders in Rome at the G20 summit.Capitol attack panel faces pivotal moment as Trump allies stonewallRead moreBut after a dramatic Thursday of bold promises and dashed hopes, the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, was forced to postpone a vote on a $1tn infrastructure bill for a second time in a month, as progressives demanded more assurances that a compromise $1.75tn social policy plan would also pass.It was a setback – though perhaps only a temporary one – for Democratic leaders, who had hoped to hand the president a legislative victory that he could tout during his six-day trip to Europe for a pair of international economic and climate summits.The delay underscored the depth of mistrust among Democrats – between the House and Senate, progressives and centrists, leadership and members – after a lengthy negotiating process yielded a plan that was about half the size of Biden’s initial vision.Biden’s proposal includes substantial investments in childcare, education and health care as well as major initiatives to address climate change that, if enacted, would be the largest action ever taken by the US Congress. Revenue would come from tax hikes on corporations and the wealthy.But in concessions to centrists like the West Virginia senator Joe Manchin and Arizona senator Kyrsten Sinema, paid family leave, free college tuition and efforts to lower prescription drug prices were stripped from the latest iteration of the plan. Progressives were left disappointed by the cuts but their desire to pass the legislation ultimately held little leverage to force major changes.In a speech before departing for Europe, Biden acknowledged the bill fell short of his legislative ambitions, but reflected the limits of what was politically possible given Democrats’ narrow governing majorities and unified Republican opposition.“No one got everything they wanted, including me,” he said. “But that’s what compromise is.”As lawmakers and activists digested the newly released details of the plan, there seems to be a growing consensus among progressives that, while insufficient, the plan makes critical investments in many of their top priorities, especially in the field of tackling the climate crisis.“The newly announced Build Back Better Act can be a turning point in America’s fight against the climate crisis – but only if we pass it,” leaders of the climate advocacy group Evergreen Action wrote in a memo on Friday.Julian Zelizer, a historian at Princeton University, said unified control of the White House and Congress can, perhaps paradoxically, make governing harder. Because these moments are rare and often fleeting, there is a rush by the president and his party to pursue an ambitious, legacy-defining agenda, he said.“But the challenges of legislating don’t go away,” Zelizer said. “And in some ways, the tensions within the party are exacerbated by the stakes being so high.”Some have argued that scaling back key programs could make it harder for Americans to feel the impact of the new benefits, despite the substantial size of the legislation. That could make it difficult for Biden, whose approval ratings have slid in recent weeks, to sell the plan he told House Democrats would determine the fate of his presidency and their political futures.TopicsUS politicsJoe BidenDemocratsHouse of RepresentativesUS SenateNancy PelosiRepublicansnewsReuse this content More
- in US Politics
Capitol attack panel faces pivotal moment as Trump allies stonewall
US Capitol attackCapitol attack panel faces pivotal moment as Trump allies stonewallQuestions about Trump’s role in 6 January may go unanswered unless House investigators can secure a breakthrough to obtain documents and testimony Hugo Lowell in WashingtonFri 29 Oct 2021 06.00 EDTLast modified on Fri 29 Oct 2021 16.20 EDTThe House select committee investigating the Capitol attack is confronting a pivotal moment as resistance from top Trump administration aides threatens to undermine their efforts to uncover the extent of the former president’s involvement in the 6 January insurrection.The select committee remains in the evidence-gathering phase of the investigation that now encompasses at least five different lines of inquiry from whether Donald Trump abused the presidency to reinstall himself in office or coordinated with far-right rally organizers.These Trump fans were at the Capitol on 6 January. Now they’re running for officeRead moreBut unless House investigators can secure a breakthrough to obtain documents and testimony from Trump’s White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, and others in the next few weeks, the most pressing questions about Trump’s role in 6 January may go unanswered, two sources said.The select committee has designated its “gold” team to examine the extent of Trump’s personal involvement in the events that left five dead and more than 140 injured as his supporters stormed the Capitol in his name, the sources said.One major focus of the investigation is whether Trump had advance knowledge of the insurrection, the sources said – since if they uncover evidence of conspiracy to violently stop the certification of Joe Biden’s election win, that could constitute a crime.But to make that kind of case, which would then guide Congress on how to draft laws to avert a repeat of the Capitol attack, may be impossible without clear insight into Trump’s movements inside the White House both on 6 January and the days before, the sources said.The select committee, the sources said, effectively needs to know what Trump’s top aides know about what the former president thought would allow him to remain in office – and whether that extended to encouraging surrogates to physically stop the certification.To that end, House investigators last month subpoenaed Meadows, his deputy, Dan Scavino, former chief strategist Steve Bannon and defense department aide Kash Patel, while asking the National Archives to turn over Trump White House records.Meadows is of special interest since he remained by Trump’s side as the Capitol attack unfolded and, in the final weeks of the administration, sat in on 6 January strategy meetings with the former president.The former chief strategist Bannon was similarly subpoenaed for documents and testimony as he was in constant contact with Trump in the days before the Capitol attack, and played a major role in drawing up the legal arguments for Pence to return Trump to office.Bannon also appeared to have prior knowledge of the Capitol attack, which former White House aides say would not have escaped Trump’s attention. “All hell is going to break loose tomorrow,” Bannon said on his War Room podcast the day before the insurrection.The select committee, meanwhile, also asked the National Archives for Trump White House materials since they are the custodian for visitor logs and Oval Office memoranda – records that could shed light on the interactions Trump was having with Meadows and Bannon.But under orders from Trump to defy the subpoenas on grounds of executive privilege, the select committee is yet to obtain any materials or testimony from the four aides, while the National Archives is unable to release records until Trump’s lawsuit on the issue is resolved.The collective efforts from Trump and his aides mean that unless House investigators can find a way to circumvent the logjam, the gold team may ultimately find themselves unable to ever uncover whether 6 January was a White House-sponsored insurrection.Bannon, for instance, was last week referred to the justice department for prosecution after he defied his subpoena in its entirety, but a source at the US attorney’s office cautioned a decision on his case could take months of deliberations.The delay stems in part from the fact that the justice department is now examining whether they can successfully secure an indictment in the Bannon case and are indifferent to the select committee’s need to finish a report before the 2022 midterms, the source said.The US attorney’s office, the source added, may not be able to proceed with a potential prosecution against Bannon until the justice department first resolves other constitutional complaints raised by Trump in his lawsuit against the National Archives.Taken together, staff on the gold team are now starting to think the most likely avenue for securing Trump White House materials is not through the former president’s aides but through the National Archives request, since Biden has the final say over executive privilege.Still, given Trump’s pending lawsuit lodged against the National Archives – a move described by a source close to the Trump legal effort as a way to stymie the investigation – the select committee may run out of time before being able to examine the materials.Tim Mulvey, a spokesperson for the select committee, on Friday rejected the internal concerns, saying in a statement: “While we don’t comment on the specifics of our investigation, we are moving ahead expeditiously to uncover the facts, get answers for the American people, and make legislative recommendations to help ensure nothing like January 6th ever happens again.”“The select committee won’t be derailed by those seeking to obstruct our investigation, and we won’t be distracted by anonymous sources posing as experts and insiders,” Mulvey added.The select committee’s struggle to enforce orders against the Trump aides shows the lack of teeth carried by congressional subpoenas, with its power systematically eroded by a Trump administration that has found, since 2016, that defiance carries scant penalties.But the difficulty in obtaining any formal Trump White House materials – either through the former president’s aides or even through the National Archives – also underscores how what could be the most consequential lines of inquiry appear to be dangling by a thread.The select committee has had success eliciting information elsewhere, most notably with individuals connected to the Trump-supporting Women for America First organization that planned the 6 January “Stop the Steal” rally subpoenaed earlier in October.House investigators also heard voluminous testimony from Trump’s former acting attorney general Jeffrey Rosen over seven hours of voluntary testimony, that could help the gold team establish whether the former president unlawfully pressured the justice department.But without knowing what Trump’s top aides know of the former president’s connections to the Capitol attack, the sources said, it could mean that Congress is left unable to write legislation to avert a different effort to stop the certification in 2024.TopicsUS Capitol attackHouse of RepresentativesDonald TrumpTrump administrationUS politicsfeaturesReuse this content More
- in US Politics
Exxon CEO accused of lying about climate science to congressional panel
Climate crimesEnvironmentExxon CEO accused of lying about climate science to congressional panelCongresswoman Carolyn Maloney likens oil company bosses’ responses to those of tobacco industry at historic hearing Supported byAbout this contentChris McGrealThu 28 Oct 2021 17.05 EDTFirst published on Thu 28 Oct 2021 16.33 EDTThe chief executive of ExxonMobil, Darren Woods, was accused of lying to Congress on Thursday after he denied that the company covered up its own research about oil’s contribution to the climate crisis.For the first time, Woods and the heads of three other major petroleum companies were questioned under oath at a congressional hearing into the industry’s long campaign to discredit and deny the evidence that burning fossil fuels drove global heating. When pressed to make specific pledges or to stop lobbying against climate initiatives, all four executives declined.Joe Manchin leads opposition to Biden’s climate bill, backed by support from oil, gas and coalRead moreThe chair of the House oversight committee, Representative Carolyn Maloney, pressed Woods about statements by his predecessor, Exxon CEO Lee Raymond, who in the 1990s said the scientific evidence for climate change was “inconclusive” and that “the case for global warming is far from air tight”. In 2002, Exxon ran advertisements in the New York Times calling climate science “unsettled”.Malone put it to Woods that Exxon’s own scientists had repeatedly warned the company about the threat from burning fossil fuels as far back as the 1970s.“There is a clear conflict between what Exxon CEO told the public and what Exxon scientists were warning privately for years,” she said.Woods denied that Raymond or Exxon misled anyone.“I do not agree that there was an inconsistency,” he said.Maloney said the response reminded her of “another hearing that we had with the tobacco industry”.“They said they did not believe that nicotine was addictive. Well, it came out that they lied. Tobacco nicotine was very addictive. And now I’m hearing from you that the science that was reported publicly, where your executives were denying climate change, we know that your scientists internally were saying that it’s a reality,” she said.“So I was hoping that you would not be like the tobacco industry was and lie about this.”The heads of the American operations of the other oil companies – Shell, Chevron and BP – were also firm in resisting pressure to admit they misrepresented climate science or deceived the public.They each said that they recognised global heating was a reality and a major challenge. But the executives did not accept that their companies had failed to take it seriously or that they were undermining attempts to cut greenhouse gases by funding trade groups pouring millions of dollars into lobbying Congress against tighter environmental laws.“We accept the scientific consensus,” said Michael Wirth, the CEO of Chevron. “Climate change is real. Any suggestion that Chevron is engaged in disinformation and to mislead the public on these complex issues is simply wrong.”But Maloney accused the oil companies of continuing the cover-up, including by hiding documents. She said she would take the unusual step of issuing subpoenas to force the firms to reveal what they knew.“We need to get to the bottom of the oil industry’s disinformation campaign and with these subpoenas we will,” she said.The oil and gas industry, which spent about $100m on political lobbying last year, was strongly backed by a number of Republicans on the committee who sought to distract by denouncing Joe Biden’s energy policies.Republicans called their own witness, Neal Crabtree, who said he lost his job as a welder within three hours of Biden being sworn in as president because the Keystone pipeline was cancelled. Crabtree was used to portray Biden as colluding with China and Russia against America’s oil industry.The highest-ranking Republican on the committee, Representative James Comer, questioned the legitimacy of the investigation. He said the committee would be better off spending its time investigating the White House’s handling of inflation, illegal immigration and the US military withdrawal from Afghanistan.In a hearing meant to focus on climate misinformation, several Republican members openly questioned the urgency of the climate crisis. Representative Clay Higgins called the hearing “a threat from within” because the American way of life was built on oil.Another Republican member said Maloney owed the oil executives an apology for intruding on their right to free speech by pressing them to make a commitment that their firms will “no longer spend any money, either directly or indirectly, to oppose efforts to reduce emissions and address climate change”.None of the executives would make a direct commitment.Maloney showed the hearing a video secretly recorded by Greenpeace earlier this year of an Exxon lobbyist describing the oil giant’s backing for a carbon tax as a public relations ploy intended to stall more serious measures to combat the climate crisis.“How did Exxon respond?” asked Maloney. “Did they come clean about this shocking conduct? No. Mr Woods called Mr McCoy’s comments inaccurate and then they fired him. And they are obviously lying like the tobacco executives were.”While the oil executives largely maintained a united front, Representative Ro Khanna, a leading critic of the petroleum industry on the committee, drew out testimony that showed the European companies, Shell and BP, were working to cut production while the US firms, Exxon and Chevron, intended to increase drilling in the coming years.Wirth said that his company would raise oil production while cutting carbon admissions.The hearing also questioned the leaders of two powerful lobby groups accused of acting as front organisations for big oil, the American Petroleum Institute and the US Chamber of Commerce.Khanna noted that API was heavily funded by oil company money as it resisted the expansion of infrastructure for electric vehicles and opposed a methane fee backed by Biden, including flooding Facebook with advertisements in recent months.Khanna challenged each of the oil executives in turn to resign from API over its position on electric vehicles or to tell it to stop its opposition to a methane fee. All of them declined to do so.TopicsEnvironmentClimate crimesExxonMobilBPRoyal Dutch ShellChevronOil and gas companiesOilnewsReuse this content More
