Republican Party

Subterms

    More stories

    • 188 Shares108 Views

      in Elections

      House Votes to Rename Gulf of Mexico as Gulf of America, Taking a Symbolic Step

      by

      The legislation was all but certain to die in the Senate, but the move put the Republican-led House on the record supporting President Trump’s nomenclature.A divided House on Thursday approved legislation to permanently rename the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America, moving over the taunting objections of Democrats to codify President Trump’s executive order renaming the body of water in line with his “America First” worldview.The 211-to-206 mostly party-line vote to pass the bill amounted to a symbolic show of Republican deference to Mr. Trump, given that Democrats are unlikely to allow the legislation to move forward in the Senate. But it put the G.O.P.-led House on the record backing the president in his effort to rewrite the rules of geography and to dare critics to defy him.Just one Republican, Representative Don Bacon of Nebraska, voted no.The White House has barred journalists from The Associated Press from covering events in the Oval Office and flying aboard Air Force One, as punishment for the news organization’s continued use of the name Gulf of Mexico.“The American people deserve pride in their country, and pride in the waters that we own and we protect with our military and our Coast Guard,” said Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, the Georgia Republican who sponsored the bill, calling it “one of the most important things we can do this Congress.”Democrats dismissed the legislation as a pandering and performative waste of time when Republicans were struggling to reach agreement on legislation to fulfill the president’s domestic policy agenda — the “big, beautiful bill” that could include unpopular cuts to Medicaid.Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the minority leader, called it a “silly, small-minded and sycophantic piece of legislation.” He said the only silver lining of the exercise was that it underscored how Republicans were laboring to enact that domestic policy measure, which he warned would impose the largest Medicaid cut in history.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

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      JD Vance’s Half Brother Advances in Race for Cincinnati Mayor

      by

      Cory Bowman will next face Aftab Pureval, the Democratic incumbent, who outperformed him in Tuesday’s nonpartisan primary.A half brother of Vice President JD Vance who is running for mayor of Cincinnati advanced on Tuesday to compete in the general election.The candidate, Cory Bowman, a Republican coffee shop owner, won a small share of the votes in Tuesday’s nonpartisan primary, according to The Associated Press. He came in second to the current mayor, Aftab Pureval, a Democrat.They will now face each other again in November. The results pushed a third candidate, Brian Frank, also a Republican, out of the race.Cincinnati mayoral elections are technically nonpartisan, but it has been decades since the city elected a Republican to the office. Vice President Kamala Harris won 77 percent of the city’s voters last fall, even as President Trump and Mr. Vance, Ohio’s junior senator, took the state.David Niven, a professor of politics at the University of Cincinnati, said Mr. Bowman’s family connections were unlikely to change that dynamic. “You can’t get that far as a Trump-Vance Republican in the city of Cincinnati.” But anywhere else in the state of Ohio, Dr. Niven said, “He’d be in better shape as a candidate.”Mr. Pureval won both the primary and the general mayoral elections four years ago by wide margins. Until a few months ago, he had seemed poised to run unopposed for a second term. Both Republicans said that possibility spurred them to enter the race, which has focused on local matters like affordable housing, potholes and public safety.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 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Charles Koch Says Many in the Country Are ‘Abandoning’ Its Principles

      by

      In a rare appearance on Thursday to receive an award from the Cato Institute, Mr. Koch made oblique references to President Trump and his tariffs, without mentioning his name.Charles Koch, the billionaire industrialist and conservative megadonor, made a rare public appearance Thursday evening and called for libertarians to embrace their principles, in comments that seemed obliquely directed at a Republican Party taken over by President Trump.Mr. Koch was at one time among the most powerful forces in Republican politics. In the 2016 election cycle alone, he and his allies spent $750 million to promote the party’s candidates and causes. But his political power has waned significantly since Mr. Trump’s election that year, and he is now seldom seen in Washington. And neither do Republicans worry much about his plans in a party that is much more in Mr. Trump’s image than in Mr. Koch’s.But Mr. Koch, who will turn 90 this November, showed up in Washington to accept an award from the Cato Institute. Almost 50 years ago, Mr. Koch helped found Cato, one of the nation’s prominent libertarian think tanks. By 2012, Mr. Koch and his brother David had given about $30 million to the institute, but the relationship soured and the Kochs ended up suing the nonprofit before settling that June.Accepting a prize named after Milton Friedman, the free-market economist, on Thursday, Mr. Koch made his first public remarks since Mr. Trump was inaugurated in January and enacted a number of policies that are anathema to Mr. Friedman’s and Mr. Koch’s politics, most notably the sweeping tariffs.Mr. Koch dispensed with the cheery rhetoric of most conservatives these days. Speaking about the subsidies and protectionism of the past, he said that “you can see why we’re in the mess we’re in today.” The billionaire often speaks about his core “principles” in business and philanthropy.“With so much change, chaos and conflict, too many people and organizations are abandoning these principles,” Mr. Koch later said, not uttering Mr. Trump’s name. He added, “But we know from history, this just makes the problems worse. And people have forgotten that when principles are lost, so are freedoms.”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

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Senate Rejects Bipartisan Measure to Undo Trump’s Tariffs

      by

      Only three Republicans joined Democrats in voting to end the national emergency President Trump declared to impose tariffs on most U.S. trading partners, leaving the measure short of the support needed to pass.The Senate on Wednesday rejected an effort to undo President Trump’s sweeping tariffs on most U.S. trading partners, even as a small group of Republicans joined Democrats in delivering a rebuke to a trade policy that many lawmakers fear is causing economic harm.The vote deadlocked at 49 to 49, meaning it failed despite three Republicans joining Democrats in favor of a measure that sought to terminate the national emergency declaration Mr. Trump used this month to impose 10 percent reciprocal tariffs.Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky and a cosponsor of the resolution, crossed party lines to support it, as well as Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. But the defections were not enough to make up for the absences of two supporters: Senators Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, and Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, who backed a similar measure this month.“It’s still a debate worth having,” Mr. Paul said of the failed resolution. He noted that many of his Republican colleagues are privately expressing consternation over Mr. Trump’s trade war but have carefully calibrated their public responses to defer to the president.A subsequent procedural vote on the measure prompted Vice President JD Vance to go to Capitol Hill on Wednesday evening to cast the deciding vote to table it, formally ending the effort to challenge Mr. Trump’s use of the emergency power for wide-ranging tariffs.Even if the resolution had passed the Senate, it had no path to enactment. The White House has threatened a veto, and House Republican leaders moved pre-emptively to prevent any such measure from being forced to the floor until the fall at the earliest. The maneuver was aimed at shielding their members from politically tricky votes on the matter.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 Elections

      Elise Stefanik, Cabinet Hopes Dashed, Considers Her Next Move

      by

      Styrofoam packing peanuts littered an empty office in the Rayburn House Office Building across from the Capitol on Monday morning as two moving men unpacked a plush couch, an upholstered armchair, lamps and a lucite side table.Representative Elise Stefanik of New York was back.This had not been the plan.Ms. Stefanik, the self-proclaimed “ultra MAGA” warrior whom President Trump nominated to serve as ambassador to the United Nations, had expected to sail through her Senate confirmation vote, which was to be scheduled in early April.So she boxed up her office. She sent off her longtime chief of staff, Patrick Hester, to start a new job at the State Department, where he ended up working for seven days. She completed a “farewell tour” of her district, checked out schools for her son in New York City and was looking forward to moving into the $15 million Manhattan penthouse that comes with what is considered a fairly cushy job.Instead, Ms. Stefanik was back here on Capitol Hill amid the peanuts, contemplating her next steps and pinning most of the blame for what happened on Speaker Mike Johnson.To detractors, the president’s decision to pull Ms. Stefanik’s nomination was something akin to karmic comeuppance for a Republican lawmaker who was elected as a moderate but tacked unapologetically to the MAGA right, coming to personify the opportunistic shape-shifting that has gripped her party in the age of Mr. Trump.Ms. Stefanik’s plight seemed to crystallize in one succinct cautionary tale the limits of loyalty in the MAGA universe. Even one of the president’s most stalwart defenders, an effective ally since his first impeachment trial, ultimately did not get what she had long been promised.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 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Rough Night for Republican at Town Hall in N.Y. Swing District

      by

      Representative Mike Lawler faced shouts, groans and mockery at a high school auditorium in Rockland County.No one was expecting a love fest when Representative Mike Lawler, Republican of New York, faced constituents in his suburban swing district on Sunday night. Still, even he seemed surprised by the night’s first clash — over the Pledge of Allegiance.“Please tell me you’re not objecting to the Pledge of Allegiance,” Mr. Lawler asked incredulously after some members of the audience inside a high school auditorium audibly groaned when he suggested reciting it.They acquiesced, and several hundred attendees labored to their feet to say the pledge, but not without indicating why they believed its words had come to ring hollow.“Authoritarian!” one man yelled, an apparent reference to President Trump.“Support the Constitution!” bellowed another.So it went for nearly two hours as Mr. Lawler, one of the House’s most vulnerable Republicans and a potential candidate for governor of New York, faced a torrent of criticism from liberal constituents over almost everything, from Republicans’ multitrillion-dollar tax cut plan to how brightly the room was lit.It was a scene that has repeated itself across the country over the past two weeks for the small group of Republicans who have defied party leaders’ advice and convened feedback sessions with the people they represent, many of them anxious, angry and primed to vent over a president who they believe is acting with unchecked power.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

    • 188 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Harvard May Not Be the Hero We Want, but It Is the Hero We Need

      by

      Like many of its conservative alumni, I have a complicated relationship with Harvard.I grew up in a small town in Kentucky, where I went to public school. I attended college at a small Christian university in Nashville. I never had a thought that I could attend Harvard Law School. But friends urged me to try.When I got in, it was so shocking that it felt miraculous. I knew it would change my life — and it did. It gave me some of my closest friends, it gave me career opportunities I couldn’t previously fathom, and it kindled in me a love for constitutional law.At the same time, the school had profound problems. The student culture was remarkably intolerant and contentious. This was the height of early 1990s political correctness, and I was sometimes shouted down by angry classmates.In 1993, GQ published a long report from the law school called “Beirut on the Charles,” and it described a place that “pitted faculty members against faculty members, faculty members against students” and where students were “waging holy war on one another.”The more things changed, the more they stayed the same. In the 30 years since my graduation, the school has continued to change lives, and it has maintained one of the least tolerant cultures in American higher education.For the second year in a row, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Expression (where I served as president a number of years ago) has ranked Harvard last in the country in its annual free speech rankings. The environment, FIRE determined, was “abysmal.”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 Elections

      Elon Musk Backs Away From Washington, but DOGE Remains

      by

      As Elon Musk sought to reassure Wall Street analysts on Tuesday that he would soon scale back his work with the federal government, the strain of his situation was audible in his voice.The world’s richest man said that he would continue arguing that the Trump administration should lower tariffs it has imposed on countries across the world. But he acknowledged in a subdued voice that whether President Trump “will listen to my advice is up to him.”He was not quite chastened, but it was a different Mr. Musk than a couple months ago, when the billionaire, at the peak of his power, brandished a chain saw onstage at a pro-Trump conference to dramatize his role as a government slasher.Back then, Mr. Musk was inarguably a force in Washington, driving radical change across the government. To the president, he was a genius; to Democrats, he was Mr. Trump’s “unelected co-president”; to several cabinet secretaries, he was a menace; and to G.O.P. lawmakers, he was the source of anguished calls from constituents whose services and jobs were threatened by cuts from his Department of Government Efficiency.As Mr. Musk moves to spend less time in Washington, it is unclear whether his audacious plan to overhaul the federal bureaucracy will have lasting power. The endeavor has already left an immense imprint on the government, and Mr. Musk has told associates that he believes he has put in place the structure to make DOGE a success. But he has still not come close to cutting the $1 trillion he vowed to find in waste, fraud and abuse.Elon Musk and President Trump looked at new Tesla car models at the White House in March.Doug Mills/The New York TimesWe 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