House of Representatives

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Republican lawmaker who voted against impeaching Mayorkas to retire

      by

      A Republican congressman who broke with his party colleagues and refused to vote to impeach Democratic homeland security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas is retiring from his elected office, he announced Saturday.The announcement from Wisconsin representative Mike Gallagher that he won’t run for a fifth term means his time spearheading the US House’s pushback against the Chinese government will come to an end in early 2025.Gallagher’s refusal to impeach Mayorkas drew anger from his fellow Republicans, who have been looking to oust Joe Biden’s homeland security secretary as a way to punish the president over his administration’s handling of the US-Mexico border crisis.A House impeachment vote Tuesday fell just one vote short. Gallagher was one of three Republicans who opposed impeachment.His fellow Republicans surrounded him on the House floor in an attempt to change his mind, but he refused to switch his vote.Record numbers of people have been arriving at the southern border as they flee countries around the globe. Many claim asylum and end up in US cities that are ill-prepared to provide for them while they await court proceedings. The issue is a potent line of attack for Donald Trump as he works toward retaking the presidency from Biden in November’s elections.Gallagher wrote in a Wall Street Journal opinion column published after the vote that impeachment wouldn’t stop migrants from crossing the border and would set a precedent that could be used against future Republican administrations. But the impeachment vote’s failure was a major setback for Republicans.Party officials in Wisconsin in recent days mulled whether Gallagher should face a primary challenger.Gallagher did not mention the impeachment vote in a statement announcing his retirement, saying only that he doesn’t want to grow old in Washington.“Electoral politics was never supposed to be a career and, trust me, Congress is no place to grow old,” Gallagher said. “And so, with a heavy heart, I have decided not to run for re-election.”He told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the backlash over the impeachment vote did not play a role in his decision.“I feel, honestly, like people get it, and they can accept the fact that they don’t have to agree with you 100%,” he told the newspaper, adding later in the interview: “The news cycle is so short that I just don’t think that stuff lasts.”Gallagher, a former Marine who grew up in Green Bay, has represented north-eastern Wisconsin in Congress since 2017. He spent last year leading a new House committee dedicated to countering China.During the committee’s first hearing, he framed the competition between the US and China as “an existential struggle over what life will look like in the 21st century”.Tensions between the US and China have been high for years. Both sides enacted tariffs on imports during Trump’s presidency. Beijing’s opaque response to Covid-19, aggression toward Taiwan and the discovery of a possible spy balloon floating across the US only intensified lawmakers’ intent to do more to block China’s government.Gallagher was one of the highest-profile Republicans considering a run for the US Senate this year against incumbent Wisconsin Democrat Tammy Baldwin. But he abandoned the idea in June, saying he wanted to focus on China during his fourth term in Congress.
      The Associated Press contributed reporting More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Hospitalized lawmakers showing up for last-minute votes? Not as rare as you’d think

      by

      The US House of Representatives was on edge on Tuesday night: would the homeland security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, be impeached? The Republicans’ mission looked likely to succeed, just barely, when a lone Democrat in a wheelchair and a hospital outfit emerged and put a stop to it.That man was Al Green – not that Al Green, but a representative from Texas who’d taken an Uber from the hospital to make his views known. In a line perfectly tailored to a scene the New York Times compared to a political thriller, Green told the paper: “I came because it was personal.” He had undergone emergency abdominal surgery days before and was back in his hospital bed when he spoke to the reporter, Kayla Guo.It’s not the first time the US Capitol has played host to such a dramatic vote. Lawmakers have always had to balance their physical health with the demands of the job – and on occasions from the passage of the Civil Rights Act to the near-death of Obamacare, the results have been momentous.Green was the latest politician to make such a memorable entrance. “I had to cast this vote because this is a good, decent man whose reputation should not be besmirched,” he said of Mayorkas, who Republicans, in a partisan effort, accused of purposely failing to enforce immigration laws. Signs suggest they may attempt the process again – but for now, Green’s last-minute rush to the chamber prevented the first impeachment of a cabinet member since 1876.A comparable moment in recent memory came in 2017. After he was diagnosed with brain cancer, John McCain returned to the Senate to weigh in on the future of the Affordable Care Act, AKA Obamacare, travelling across the country from his home in Arizona. And that wasn’t the most surprising part: with Republicans only slightly outnumbering Democrats in the Senate, 52-48, there was little wiggle room in their effort to undo the health law.McCain’s return could have helped his party undermine legislation that members had been whining about for almost a decade – and which McCain himself opposed. But his views on the “skinny” repeal were more complicated. On 25 July, he voted to begin debate on the bill but expressed his reservations about it, calling it a “shell of a bill” and condemning the process that created it.A few nights later, with a scar over his left eyebrow, he told reporters to “wait for the show”. When it came time to vote, he gave a thumbs down, casting a decisive vote that salvaged the healthcare reform he had campaigned against; gasps could be heard in the chamber. “I was thanked for my vote by Democratic friends more profusely than I should have been for helping save Obamacare,” he later wrote. “That had not been my goal.” Still, the healthcare act lived on.Another historic piece of US legislation, the Civil Rights Act, benefited from the heroics of a single lawmaker in poor health. In 1964, the law had passed the House and was facing a Senate vote – but 18 senators were determined to filibuster it. Senator Richard Russell, a Georgia Democrat, said he and his allies would “resist to the bitter end” efforts “to bring about social equality” in the south. The chamber needed 67 votes to end the filibuster, and Senator Clair Engle, a California Democrat, was in the hospital with a brain tumor.View image in fullscreenOn the day of the vote, as Colin Son recounted in the journal Neurosurgical Focus, an ambulance carried Engle to the chamber. In a wheelchair, he struggled to speak; instead, he pointed to his eye, mouthing the word “aye”. Some colleagues were said to be in tears. The vote counted, and the measure passed, allowing the bill to move forward. Engle returned to the chamber for the last time nine days later, on 19 June, when the Senate passed the Civil Rights Act.Other instances of rushed trips to the Capitol have had somewhat lower stakes. In 1985, for instance, Pete Wilson of California arrived in the Senate in a wheelchair and a bathrobe at 1.32am after getting his appendix out. According to a Times report, he asked colleagues: “What was the question?” and then voted to pass Ronald Reagan’s 1986 budget, prompting cheers. And across the ocean, Westminster has seen its share of politicians overcoming illness to cast votes: in 2018, for instance, the Labour MP Naz Shah discharged herself from a hospital and traveled four hours to London for a vote on a Brexit amendment. “I was standing next to Laura Pidcock [the Labour MP for North West Durham], who is eight months pregnant and in agony,” she told the Guardian at the time.Shah called the voting process archaic; similar arguments have been made about the US system. Last year, several House Democrats introduced a bill to allow voting by proxy, which was permitted early in the pandemic but shut down when Republicans took control of the House. “Of course we’re going to try to get here no matter what, but we have medical emergencies, just like our constituents do,” Representative Deborah Ross told CQ Roll Call.Then again, some perfectly healthy US lawmakers have done the opposite. On multiple occasions, senators have had to be essentially hauled on to the chamber floor.In 1988, the Senate’s sergeant-at-arms was ordered to arrest no-shows – it was the only way to halt a filibuster. According to the chamber’s official history, he “led a ‘posse of six Capitol police officers’ in a post-midnight search” of their offices. Senator Robert Packwood, an Oregon Republican, had jammed a chair against his door, but officers finally managed to get him to the chamber.“By prearrangement, Senator Packwood collapsed into the arms of the officers who then transported him feet-first into the Chamber,” the history says. “On his feet again, he announced: ‘I did not come fully voluntarily.’” More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Who Will Replace George Santos? Takeaways From the Pilip-Suozzi Debate

      by

      Five days before a special House election in New York, Tom Suozzi and Mazi Pilip traded blows in the race’s lone debate.The candidates vying to replace George Santos in a special House election squared off on Thursday in an exceedingly bitter debate, tangling over the roots of New York City’s migrant crisis, abortion rights and, at one point, the definition of “assault weapon.”The face-off on Long Island was the only chance for voters to see the candidates debate, and each sought to smear the other at close range. Mazi Pilip, the Republican nominee, claimed that her opponent, Tom Suozzi, “opened the border.” He called her wholly unprepared for Congress.The Feb. 13 election is considered a tossup. A victory by Mr. Suozzi would narrow Republicans’ paper-thin House majority at a time when they are already struggling to govern. If he loses, it could signal trouble for Democrats ahead of November’s elections.Here are five takeaways from the debate, hosted by News 12.The migrant crisis is dominating the race.New York is almost 2,000 miles from the U.S.-Mexico border, but it is clear the race has become a referendum on the influx of migrants trying to get across it. The only question is who will take the blame in the eyes of frustrated voters.Ms. Pilip, a Nassau County legislator who immigrated from Israel, offered spare details about her own prescriptions to secure the border (she supports a wall and more border agents). But she repeatedly accused Mr. Suozzi, a moderate former three-term congressman, of siding with President Biden and far-left members of the House “squad” to encourage illegal immigration.“Tom Suozzi opened the border. Tom Suozzi funded the sanctuary city. Tom Suozzi kicked I.C.E. from Nassau County,” she said. Addressing Mr. Suozzi, she added, “This is absolutely you; you have to own it.”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

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Leading Republican Steve Scalise back at work after blood cancer treatment

      by

      The Republican House majority leader, Steve Scalise, will return to work in Washington after receiving autologous stem cell treatment for multiple myeloma, a blood cancer.Scalise announced he was diagnosed with the disease in August. His cancer treatment represents the second serious health scare for the representative since he took office to represent Louisiana in 2008. In 2017, Scalise was one of four people shot during practice for a congressional baseball game.“Leader Scalise has successfully completed his autologous stem cell treatment and has been medically cleared to resume travel,” a statement from Scalise’s office said on Thursday.“He is in complete remission and will be returning to Washington next week for votes. He is thankful for his positive prognosis, and for the support of his medical team, family, colleagues and fellow Louisianans.”Autologous stem cell treatment uses stem cells from a person’s own body to restore the body’s ability to create normal blood cells, and is often used in treatment for blood cancers such as myeloma, according to the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society.Despite controversy tied to a past speech at a white supremacist conference (a speech he later called a “mistake”) and ties to racist leaders such as fellow Louisianan David Duke, a former Ku Klux Klan leader, Scalise has risen through the Republican ranks.After being shot, Scalise said the experience strengthened his support for gun rights and the second amendment. In part, he said, because he was “saved by people who had guns”. The gunman who shot Scalise during baseball practice was shot and killed by police. More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      American Firms Invested $1 Billion in Chinese Chips, Lawmakers Find

      by

      A Congressional investigation determined that U.S. funding helped fuel the growth of a sector now viewed by Washington as a security threat.A congressional investigation has determined that five American venture capital firms invested more than $1 billion in China’s semiconductor industry since 2001, fueling the growth of a sector that the United States government now regards as a national security threat.Funds supplied by the five firms — GGV Capital, GSR Ventures, Qualcomm Ventures, Sequoia Capital and Walden International — went to more than 150 Chinese companies, according to the report, which was released Thursday by both Republicans and Democrats on the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party.The investments included roughly $180 million that went to Chinese firms that the committee said directly or indirectly support Beijing’s military. That includes companies that the U.S. government has said provide chips for China’s military research, equipment and weapons, such as Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation, or SMIC, China’s largest chipmaker.The report by the House committee focuses on investments made before the Biden administration imposed sweeping restrictions aimed at cutting off China’s access to American financing. It does not allege any illegality.Last August, the Biden administration banned U.S. venture capital and private equity firms from investing in Chinese quantum computing, artificial intelligence and advanced semiconductors. It has also imposed worldwide limits on sales of advanced chips and chip-making machines to China, arguing that these technologies could help advance the capabilities of the Chinese military and spy agencies.Since it was established a year ago, the committee has called for raising tariffs on China, targeted Ford Motor and others for doing business with Chinese companies, and spotlighted forced labor concerns involving Chinese shopping sites.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

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Republicans’ standalone Israel aid bill fails in House vote

      by

      The US House of Representatives rejected a Republican-led bill on Tuesday that would provide $17.6bn to Israel, as Democrats said they wanted a vote instead on a broader measure that would also provide assistance to Ukraine, international humanitarian funding and new money for border security.The vote was 250 to 180, falling short of the two-thirds majority needed for passage.Opponents called the Israel legislation a political ploy by Republicans to distract from their opposition to a $118bn Senate bill combining an overhaul of US immigration policy and new funding for border security with billions of dollars in emergency aid for Ukraine, Israel and partners in the Indo-Pacific region.The standalone Israel bill would have provided $17.6bn in military aid for the country, which is strongly supported by the vast majority of lawmakers in both parties as it responds to the deadly 7 October attacks by Hamas.The Republican House speaker, Mike Johnson, had said the Senate bill was “dead on arrival” in the chamber even before it was introduced. And Senate Republican leaders said on Tuesday they did not think the measure would receive enough votes to pass.“This accomplishes nothing and delays aid getting out to our allies and providing humanitarian relief,” said Representative Rosa DeLauro, the top Democrat on the House appropriations committee, urging opposition to the Israel-only bill. “Our allies are facing existential threats and our friends and foes around the globe are watching, waiting to see how America will respond.”But 167 Democrats voted no after Biden had threatened to wield his veto, angered that the legislation appeared aimed at undermining the larger package, hammered out after months of negotiations with a bipartisan group of senators.The standalone bill was also opposed by 13 Republicans as it did not contain budgetary offsets that conservatives have been pushing for with every proposal for new spending.The Israel-only bill’s supporters insisted it was not a purely political stunt, saying it was important to move quickly to support Israel.One of Johnson’s first actions when he took office in the fall was to shepherd a bill through the House that would have provided $14.3bn to Israel.But it included steep cuts to the Internal Revenue Service, which Biden opposed.The ultra-conservative House Freedom caucus blasted Johnson for “surrendering” to pressure for an even larger package not offset by cuts.Biden’s Office of Management and Budget had said the Republican “ploy” would undermine efforts to secure the US border and support Ukraine against Russian aggression, while denying humanitarian assistance to Palestinian civilians caught in the crossfire of the Israel-Gaza conflict.But Johnson countered at a news conference on Tuesday that it was “outrageous and shameful” Biden would suggest vetoing support for Israel “in their hour of greatest need”.House Democratic leaders called the bill a “nakedly obvious and cynical attempt” to undermine the larger package, which ties the Israel cash to $60bn aid for Ukraine and $20bn for US border security but is deadlocked in Congress.“Unfortunately, the standalone legislation introduced by House Republicans over the weekend, at the 11th hour without notice or consultation, is not being offered in good faith,” the House Democratic minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries, said in a letter to colleagues. More

    • 113 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      House to vote on impeaching Biden’s homeland security secretary

      by

      House Republicans cleared the way on Tuesday for a vote to impeach the homeland security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, as Democrats denounced the move as a purely partisan exercise meant to boost the electoral prospects of Donald Trump.The historic vote, scheduled for early evening, would mark the first time since 1876 that the House has impeached a cabinet official, but with hours to go before a scheduled evening vote its prospects were unclear. But Democrats have retorted that Republicans were abusing the impeachment process to attack one of Joe Biden’s cabinet members during a crucial election year, in which immigration may play a key role.With Republicans in control of the House by a whisker-thin margin, and Democrats uniformly opposed, they can afford only a few defections. Two Republicans have already announced their opposition and a handful more appeared undecided as the House proceeded to debate the charges against Mayorkas.Congressman Ken Buck, a Republican of Colorado who declared himself solidly opposed to the impeachment effort, said the accusations leveled against Mayorkas amounted to a “policy difference”, not an impeachable offense.“If we start going down this path of impeachment with a cabinet official, we are opening a door as Republicans that we don’t want to open,” Buck said on MSNBC shortly before the afternoon vote.Republicans are seeking to impeach Mayorkas on charges that he willfully refused to enforce immigration law and breached the public trust, overriding the objections of legal experts, including some prominent conservatives, who say they have failed to produce compelling evidence that the cabinet secretary had committed high crimes and misdemeanors.“I respect everybody’s view on it,” House speaker Mike Johnson told reporters on Tuesday. “I understand the heavy weight that impeachment is.”He described impeachment as an “extreme measure”, but said that “extreme times call for extreme measures.”During the floor debate on Tuesday, Republicans leveled broad accusations that Mayorkas had mismanaged oversight of the US-Mexico border, where arrests for illegal crossings have reached record highs.“The constituents I represent do not understand why Texas has had to endure basically an invasion during the tenure of the secretary of Homeland Security,” Congressman Michael Burgess, Republican of Texas, said in floor remarks ahead of the procedural vote. “What are we left to do?”A Harvard-Harris survey conducted this month showed that immigration is now an important concern for voters, with 35% of respondents citing the issue as their top priority. But Democrats say that the Republican impeachment effort is a political stunt rather than meaningful reform.“Do we have a problem at the border? Absolutely,” said Democratic congressman Jim McGovern of Massachusetts. But, he said: “It’s clear that this is not about Secretary Mayorkas or a high crime and misdemeanor. It is about a policy disagreement with President Biden.”Trump has made the “crisis” at the border a focus of his presidential campaign and celebrated Republicans for impeaching Mayorkas on very shaky grounds.Meanwhile, Republicans barreled toward a vote as a border deal recently brokered by the Biden administration and a bipartisan group of senators appeared to be on the brink of collapse. After months of painstaking negotiations, Senate Republicans appear ready to oppose the agreement, all but ensuring it will fall short of the 60 votes needed to pass legislation in the chamber.In the event it does pass the Senate, Johnson has described it as an inadequate response to the situation at the border and has declared the deal will be “dead on arrival” in the lower chamber.House Republicans’ opposition to the bipartisan proposal and their support of Mayorkas’s impeachment sparked accusations of hypocrisy among Democrats, who argued their colleagues were uninterested in substantive changes to immigration policy even as they expressed outrage over the situation at the border.The impeachment of Mayorkas has attracted notable criticism from conservatives, including in an op-ed by the Wall Street Journal editorial board that was frequently cited by Democrats on Tuesday.“As much as we share the frustration with the Biden border mess, impeaching Mr Mayorkas won’t change enforcement policy and is a bad precedent that will open the gates to more cabinet impeachments by both parties,” the board wrote in an editorial published on Tuesday. “Grandstanding is easier than governing, and Republicans have to decide whether to accomplish anything other than impeaching Democrats.” More

    • 200 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Show a little courage’: Biden attacks Republicans for ‘caving’ to Trump on US-Mexico border security bill

      by

      Joe Biden urged Congress to pass the bipartisan border bill in a pointed speech on Tuesday, accusing Republicans of “caving” in to Donald Trump’s demands to block the legislation from advancing.“All indications are this bill won’t even move forward to the Senate floor. Why? A simple reason: Donald Trump. Because Donald Trump thinks it’s bad for him politically,” Biden said at the White House. “He’d rather weaponize this issue than actually solve it.”With an eye toward the presidential race, Trump has attacked the bipartisan deal on Truth Social as “nothing more than a highly sophisticated trap for Republicans to assume the blame on what the Radical Left Democrats have done to our Border, just in time for our most important EVER Election”.As of Tuesday afternoon, it appeared that more than 20 Republican senators were prepared to oppose the border bill, raising serious doubts about its passage.In his speech, Biden pledged he would make sure that Republicans received the blame if the bill does not pass, indicating he would spotlight the issue on the campaign trail.“The American people are going to know why it failed. I’ll be taking this issue to the country,” Biden said. “Every day between now and November, the American people are going to know that the only reason the border is not secure is Donald Trump and his Maga [‘Make America Great Again’] Republican friends. It’s time for Republicans in the Congress to show a little courage, to show a little spine, to make it clear to the American people that you work for them – not for anyone else.”Biden’s remarks came one day before the Senate is expected to hold a procedural vote on advancing the border bill, which will require 60 “yes” votes to receive approval. But even the bill’s greatest proponents have expressed doubts that it can advance.“I would anticipate Wednesday, the cloture vote does not pass,” Senator James Lankford, a Republican of Oklahoma who helped broker the deal, told reporters after a conference meeting on Monday. “People are saying, ‘Hey, I need a lot more time to be able to go through this.’”A number of senators have already indicated they will not support the bill. Hard-right Republicans argue that it does not go far enough to address the situation at the US-Mexican border, where arrests for illegal crossings have hit record highs.“The border deal is even worse than we thought,” Senator Mike Lee, a Republican of Utah, said on Sunday. “No one who cares about our border security should support it. It is a betrayal of the American people.”But progressive Democrats insist the bill, which has been described as the most severe set of changes to border policy in decades, is far too restrictive. Senator Alex Padilla, a Democrat of California and chair of the Senate judiciary subcommittee on immigration, citizenship and border safety, said on Monday that the bill amounted to “dismantling our asylum system while ultimately failing to alleviate the challenges at our border”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe $118bn bill would grant the president a new power to shut down the border when daily crossings pass a certain limit while also expediting the asylum review process, which could lead to a quicker deportation for many migrants. The bill would also provide $60bn in military assistance for Ukraine, $14bn in security assistance for Israel, and $10bn in humanitarian assistance for civilians affected by war in Ukraine, Gaza and the West Bank.Supporters of the bill have framed the legislation as vital for those US allies abroad, warning colleagues that inaction could trigger disastrous consequences around the world.“If we fail the Ukrainian people, then Vladimir Putin will likely succeed in his invasion of Ukraine. Putin will be emboldened, and western democracy will face the greatest threat it has seen in decades,” the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, a Democrat of New York, said on Monday.But that argument has failed to sway the bill’s Republican critics, many of whom already oppose sending more money to Ukraine. Meanwhile, the House speaker, Republican Mike Johnson of Louisiana, is moving forward on Tuesday with a planned vote on a standalone bill to provide aid to Israel, but Biden has already threatened to veto that proposal.“It’s time to stop playing games with the world waiting and watching. And by the way, the world is waiting. The world is watching,” Biden said on Tuesday. “They are waiting to watch what we’re going to do. We cannot we can’t continue to let petty partisan politics get in the way of responsibility. More