Republicans

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      US government faces another shutdown: what you need to know

      by

      Congress faces its third shutdown deadline of the month this week, as much of the federal government is expected to run out of funding by Friday at midnight.Both chambers of Congress must approve six appropriations bills before Saturday to get the legislation to Joe Biden’s desk and avert a partial shutdown. Although the current fiscal year started more than five months ago, House Republicans have struggled to pass appropriations bills due to demands from hard-right members to include controversial provisions in the legislation.As a result, Congress has been forced to pass four stopgap bills since the fiscal year began in October, and members hope they can finally conclude the appropriations process this week.But disputes over the Department of Homeland Security’s budget repeatedly hampered negotiations, raising serious doubts about whether members would be able to pass a spending package in time to prevent a funding lapse.The White House announced on Tuesday that negotiators had reached a deal on homeland security funding, but it remains unclear whether Congress will have enough time to pass the proposal before Saturday.Here’s everything you need to know about the shutdown threat:What bills must Congress pass?Congress has to approve six full-year appropriations bills, which represent funding for about 70% of the federal government. Among other agencies, the departments of state, defense, homeland security, education and labor will all run out of funding at 12.01am on Saturday unless another spending package is approved.Didn’t Congress already pass a funding bill?Earlier this month, Congress approved a spending package that encapsulated six of the 12 full-year appropriations bills necessary for funding the federal government. The agencies covered by that package now have funding through the rest of this fiscal year, which ends on 30 September.But under the terms of a stopgap bill passed late last month, the remaining six appropriations bills must be signed by 22 March to prevent a partial government shutdown.What is holding up the talks?Democrats and Republicans appear to have reached agreement on five of the six appropriations bills, but they repeatedly clashed over funding for the Department of Homeland Security due to arguments over money for border security measures.The House speaker, Republican Mike Johnson, said on Tuesday that a deal had been struck on DHS funding, but the exact details of the proposal remain unclear. As of Tuesday afternoon, lawmakers were still waiting to see legislative text of the deal.“House and Senate committees have begun drafting bill text to be prepared for release and consideration by the full House and Senate as soon as possible,” Johnson said on X, formerly known as Twitter.The announcement comes weeks after congressional Republicans blocked a bipartisan border and national security deal that included more funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.Does a shutdown appear likely at this point?The exact timing of votes in the House and the Senate will determine whether a partial shutdown occurs on Saturday. House Republican leaders prefer to give members 72 hours to read legislation before a vote, and with full bill text now expected no earlier than Tuesday, it appears that a final House vote would probably take place on Friday.That would leave the Senate with little time to approve the package before the shutdown deadline at midnight. Senators would have to unanimously agree on fast-tracking the legislation, and that task could prove difficult given past objections from some hard-right Republicans in the chamber, including Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky.“Passing the second group of appropriations bills, of course, is not going to be easy,” the Senate majority leader, Democrat Chuck Schumer, said last week. “Democrats will continue working with Republicans to finish the job. That can only be done in a bipartisan way.”If no agreement is reached on expediting the final Senate vote, it could trigger a partial shutdown on Saturday morning. But if the Senate can ultimately approve the package over the weekend, the shutdown would be short-lived and would have little impact on federal agencies.If Congress can pass a funding package, when will this issue arise again?Assuming Congress approves a spending package this week, the entire federal government will be funded through the end of the fiscal year, and lawmakers will not face another shutdown deadline until the end of September.But it is worth noting how unusual it is to have Congress still haggling over government funding at this point in the calendar, when nearly half of the fiscal year has already elapsed. Underscoring how late Congress is on passing the appropriations bills, members of Biden’s cabinet will be on Capitol Hill this week to testify about the president’s proposed budget for the next fiscal year – even as this year’s spending levels remain up in the air. More

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden and House Republicans reach funding deal as shutdown looms

      by

      The Biden administration and House Republican leadership have struck a deal on a government funding package, but it remains unclear if US Congress will have enough time to pass the proposal before Saturday, when many federal agencies are expected to run out of money.Joe Biden said on Tuesday that an agreement had been reached, and he urged lawmakers to move as swiftly as possible to get the bill to his desk and avert a partial government shutdown this weekend.“We have come to an agreement with congressional leaders on a path forward for the remaining full-year funding bills,” Biden said in a statement. “The House and Senate are now working to finalize a package that can quickly be brought to the floor, and I will sign it immediately.”The House speaker, Republican Mike Johnson, confirmed that negotiators had reached a deal on funding the Department of Homeland Security through the rest of the fiscal year, which had become the final sticking point in the talks.The negotiators had already closed out five of the six remaining appropriations bills, but disputes over border security funding prevented them from announcing a deal over the weekend. The exact details of the DHS deal were not immediately clear, as lawmakers waited to review the text of the legislation on Tuesday.“House and Senate committees have begun drafting bill text to be prepared for release and consideration by the full House and Senate as soon as possible,” Johnson said on X, formerly known as Twitter.Congressional leaders are now in a race against the clock to pass the funding bill before 12.01am on Saturday, when roughly 70% of the federal government will shut down unless another spending package is approved. Earlier this month, Biden signed a bill to fund the remaining 30% of the federal government through the rest of the fiscal year, which ends on 30 September. But the departments of state, defense, labor, education and others still face a funding cliff on Saturday.The timeline will be tight, as House Republican leaders prefer to give members at least 72 hours to review legislation before holding a vote. That would set the final House vote for Friday at the earliest, leaving the Senate with just hours to pass the bill before the shutdown deadline.In order to accomplish that, all senators will need to unanimously agree on expediting the bill’s passage, and that could prove difficult given past objections from some hard-right members of the upper chamber, such as Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky. If no such time agreement is reached, then a short shutdown may ensue, but it would probably have little impact on federal agencies as long as the Senate can still pass the bill over the weekend.Once Biden signs the spending bill, the entire federal government will be funded through the rest of the fiscal year. The resolution would end a months-long standoff that has forced Congress to pass four stopgap spending bills since the fiscal year began in October, but members will not get much of a reprieve from their appropriations duties. Congressional hearings are already being held this week to discuss next year’s budget. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      US election 2024 primaries: intrigue in down-ballot races as Trump-Biden rematch set

      by

      With a rematch set between Joe Biden and Donald Trump after both candidates crossed the delegate threshold needed to clinch their parties’ presidential nominations, suspense around the next wave of Tuesday primaries shifts to a handful of key down-ballot races.Five states – Arizona, Florida, Illinois, Kansas and Ohio – will hold their presidential nominating contests on Tuesday. Trump and Biden are expected to sail to victory, growing their delegate counts in a march toward this summer’s conventions, where they will officially secure their parties’ nomination.Trump’s last Republican challenger, his former UN ambassador Nikki Haley, ended her presidential campaign after being routed on Super Tuesday, while the Democratic congressman Dean Phillips dropped his long-shot challenge to Biden after failing to win a single delegate, including in his home state of Minnesota.In Florida, the state Democratic party decided support for Biden was strong enough and cancelled its presidential primary. Republicans in the one-time swing state can vote for Trump, though his vanquished rivals, including the governor, Ron DeSantis, will still appear on the ballot. The result may reveal clues about the enduring strength of the anti-Trump vote within the Republican party.Further down the ballot there could be some surprises in store on Tuesday.OhioOhio Republicans will choose their nominee in one of the most highly anticipated Senate races of the cycle. The heated three-way battle to take on the Democratic incumbent, Senator Sherrod Brown, features Republicans Frank LaRose, Matt Dolan and the Trump-backed Bernie Moreno. The final days have become increasingly bitter.Trump held a rally for Moreno in Ohio this weekend, a day after the candidate, who has taken virulently anti-LGBTQ+ positions, was the subject of reporting by the Associated Press that his work email had been used to create an account on an adult website seeking “men for 1-on-1 sex” in 2008. Moreno’s team has condemned the report, and his lawyer told the AP that the account was created by a former intern as “part of a juvenile prank”.During his speech, Trump defended Moreno, used dehumanizing language to describe immigrants and warned darkly that if he loses “you’re going to have another election”.Ohio, once a perennial swing state, is now soundly Republican and backed Trump in 2016 and 2020.Meanwhile, voters in eastern Ohio will choose their party’s nominee to represent them in a June special election to serve the remaining term of the seat vacated by Congressman Bill Johnson, a Republican who retired earlier this year to become a college president.The leading Republican candidates will be on the ballot twice: once for the special election and again to represent their party in the November general election contest for this Republican-leaning seat.In another closely watched primary, Republicans are vying for the nomination to challenge the longtime Democratic congresswoman Marcy Kaptur. State representative Derek Merrin has secured the backing of the party and his former Republican rival, the scandal-plagued JR Majewski, who bowed out of the race after disparaging athletes at the Special Olympics.IllinoisIn Illinois, the incumbent congressman Danny Davis is in the fight of his political life as he seeks to fend off a progressive challenge. But the 82-year-old, 14-term congressman, backed by the state’s governor, JB Pritzker and the Chicago mayor, Brandon Johnson, is also contending with calls for a generational change in leadership that echoes the concerns Democrats have with Biden.CaliforniaMeanwhile, California will hold a special election to replace the Republican Kevin McCarthy, who resigned from Congress last year after his historic removal as speaker of the House.McCarthy’s departure left Republicans with one less vote in the House, where their grip on the majority is already razor thin. The race for the seat, a rare conservative stronghold in the otherwise liberal state, will feature Republicans Vince Fong, a state assemblymember and McCarthy’s chosen successor, and the Tulare county sheriff, Mike Boudreaux.While Fong, who won Trump’s endorsement, is favored to win the election to serve the rest of McCarthy’s unexpired term, it is possible he could be forced to a May runoff if no candidate secures a majority of the vote. The Republicans will face each other in the November general election for a new congressional term.Elsewhere in the west, Biden will visit Arizona on election day, touching down in Phoenix after a stop in Nevada and before departing for events in Texas. Biden narrowly won Arizona in 2020 but polls show him trailing Trump amid deep dissatisfaction with his handling of the economy and border security.As part of the Democratic effort to protest Biden’s handling of the Israel-Hamas war, organizers with the “Vote Ceasefire AZ” campaign are urging supporters to cast a ballot for the president’s nominal challenger, the self-help guru Marianne Williamson who recently “unsuspended” her presidential campaign. Williamson, who is one of several candidates to appear on Arizona’s Democratic primary ballot, has called for a ceasefire in Gaza and has advocated a “peace” department as part of her platform.For observers closely tracking the strength of the “uncommitted” campaign, the result may be hard to parse. Uunlike in Michigan and Minnesota, there are few options on Tuesday for Democrats upset with the president’s handling of the Israel-Hamas war to register their discontent at the ballot box.Florida, for example, isn’t holding a Democratic primary. And Williamson won’t appear on the ballot in Ohio, where ceasefire activists there are urging supporters to “Leave It Blank”. More

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Arizona county fears ‘homelessness on steroids’ as migrant shelter funds end

      by

      An Arizona migrant shelter that has housed thousands of asylum seekers plans to halt most operations in two weeks when funding from Washington runs out, a problem for towns along the border where officials fear a surge in homelessness and extra costs.Arizona’s Pima county, which borders Mexico, has said that at the end of the month its contracts must stop with Tucson’s Casa Alitas shelter and services that transport migrants north from the border cities of Nogales, Douglas and Lukeville.The Pima county administrator, Jan Lesher, said the county could not afford the roughly $1m a week that previously would have been covered by federal funds.The amount “is not something that can be easily absorbed into a Pima county budget”, she said.Funding predicaments similar to Pima county’s are playing out in other border regions and faraway cities like New York City, Chicago and Denver that have received migrants.As in Tucson, other local governments anticipate that without federal dollars, communities will face many more migrants living on their streets, greater demands on police, hospitals and sanitation services.Pima county, which since 2019 has received over 400,000 migrants who have been processed by USborder authorities, estimated 400 to 1,000 migrants with nowhere to stay could start arriving daily in Tucson beginning in April.Congress faces a Friday deadline to fund the US Department of Homeland Security, which pays for migrant services, along with other federal agencies. Current money could be temporarily extended as a stopgap measure to keep DHS and other federal agencies running.View image in fullscreenBut additional funding for the shelter and transportation services has been caught in broader political battles about illegal migration and government spending, and Congress is at an impasse, largely due to election-year politics.Immigration is among the top three concerns for voting-age Americans, and Arizona is an election battleground state that could help decide control of the White House and US Senate.President Joe Biden, a Democrat running against the Republican former president Donald Trump for re-election on 5 November, has tried to appeal simultaneously to the Democratic base in favor of protecting asylum seekers while also courting other voters who want to reduce the number of illegal crossings from Mexico.Biden has grappled with record numbers of such migrants since he took office in 2021.In recent months, Biden has toughened his stance, blaming Republicans for opposing additional border security funding and legislation that would grant him new enforcement authority.Republicans counter that Biden should reinstate restrictive Trump policies and end new legal entry programs before Congress devotes more money to border security.‘Homelessness on steroids’Casa Alitas started in 2014 as a church effort to help Central American migrants whom authorities dropped at Tucson’s bus station. By 2023 it had served over 180,000 asylum seekers, mostly families, who are legally entitled to stay in the US as they pursue their immigration cases.While some migrants come from Mexico, Guatemala and other Latin American countries, Casa Alitas has recently housed people from west Africa, India and elsewhere.At one of five Casa Alitas shelter sites last week, migrants rested on cots and received meals, clean clothes, toiletries and assistance planning onward travel.Sara Vásquez González, 45, came with her husband and three of her six children from Chiapas, Mexico, where cartel violence has driven Mexican families to flee to the US.As they ate breakfast sandwiches, Vasquez said criminals had shot at their house, forcing them to seek refuge in the US.View image in fullscreen“We lost our house, our corn, our harvest,” she said.Casa Alitas has already told two-thirds of its 60-person workforce that they will be dismissed due to lack of funding, according to Diego Lopez, the executive director.The shelter plans to reduce its capacity from 1,400 people a day to 140, a level that may not even be enough to house all incoming families with infants and toddlers, he said.In December, Pima county received 46,000 migrants – more than ever before, according to county figures. Numbers have been just below 30,000 a month in January and February.In a February memo to Pima officials, Lesher said migrants being released by border patrol without shelter services could result in “homelessness on steroids”.Tucson officials are considering setting up a migrant site with bathrooms but no sleeping accommodations. By giving migrants “some place where they can go”, the city hopes to avoid people living on the streets and resulting calls on police and emergency services, said a county spokesperson, Mark Evans.The Democratic Arizona governor, Katie Hobbs, last week sent a letter to top US lawmakers on funding committees saying her state needed at least $752m in shelter funds. In the meantime, Hobbs said in a press conference that her office was working to find ways to deal with the situation.‘Stopping the flow’In Congress, lawmakers representing the area are divided on the issue of shelter funding.Representative Raúl Grijalva, a Democrat who represents part of Pima county and more than 350 miles (563km) of the Mexico border, called for more federal funds and said Republicans were “continuing to exploit the humanitarian crisis for their political gain.”Representative Juan Ciscomani, a Republican whose district includes another part of Pima county, said in an interview that Biden should reinstate more restrictive Trump-era policies and increase deportations before Congress provides more money for migrant shelter and transportation.“We need to focus on what would actually solve the problem, which is stopping the flow at the border,” Ciscomani said. More

    • 175 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Trump calls for Liz Cheney to be jailed for investigating him over Capitol attack

      by

      Donald Trump has renewed calls for Liz Cheney – his most prominent Republican critic – to be jailed for her role in investigating his actions during the January 6 Capitol attack launched by his supporters in 2021, a move that is bound to raise further fears that the former president could persecute his political opponents if given another White House term.In posts on Sunday on his Truth Social platform, Trump said other members of the congressional committee that investigated the Capitol attack – and concluded he had plotted to overturn his 2020 electoral defeat to Joe Biden – should be imprisoned.Those statements followed Trump’s previous comments that he would act like a “dictator” on the first day of a second presidency if given one by voters.Cheney, who served as vice-chair of the January 6 committee and was one of two Republicans on the panel, lost her seat in the House of Representatives to a Trump-backed challenger, Harriet Hageman, in 2022. She responded later on Sunday, saying her fellow Republican Trump was “afraid of the truth”.Trump has been charged with four felonies in relation to his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election, including conspiracy to defraud the United States. The US supreme court is considering Trump’s claim that he has absolute immunity from prosecution in the case because he served as president from 2017 to 2021.Trump is also facing charges of 2020 election interference in Georgia, retention of government secrets after he left the Oval Office and hush-money payments that were illicitly covered up.On Sunday, Trump wrote that Cheney should “go to jail along with the rest” of the select January 6 House committee, which he sought to insult in his post on Truth Social by calling it the “unselect committee”.Trump founded Truth after he was temporarily banned from Twitter – now known as X – in the wake of the January 6 insurrection.In a separate Truth Social post, Trump linked to an article written by Kash Patel, a White House staffer in Trump’s administration. In the article, published on the rightwing website the Federalist, Patel claimed that Cheney and the committee “suppressed evidence” which “completely exonerates Trump” from charges that he had a hand in the January 6 insurrection.Patel, who was chief of staff in the defense department under Trump, said in December that if the former president was re-elected, his administration would “come after the people in the media” who had reported on Trump’s attempts to remain in power.Trump wrote: “She [Cheney] should be prosecuted for what she has done to our country! She illegally destroyed the evidence. Unreal!!!”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe suggestions that Cheney and others should be targeted for their role in the January 6 investigation came after House Republicans released a report that they claim contradicts the testimony that Trump tried to grab the wheel of his presidential limousine on January 6 in his excitement to join his supporters attacking the Capitol.Cheney was one of 10 Republicans who voted to impeach Trump over the attack, which has been linked to nine deaths and sought to prevent the congressional certification of Biden’s victory in the 2020 presidential election.After a series of retirements and Trump-backed primary challenges, only two of those Republicans remain in office.Cheney’s father, former US vice-president Dick Cheney, released a video in 2022 urging Republicans to reject Trump.“He is a coward. A real man wouldn’t lie to his supporters. He lost his election, and he lost big,” Dick Cheney, who served as George W Bush’s vice-president, said in the video. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      An outmaneuvered Lauren Boebert will face more obstacles in 2024 elections

      by

      As well as further reducing US House speaker Mike Johnson’s already threadbare majority in his legislative chamber, last week’s abrupt departure of Colorado congressman Ken Buck has the potential to significantly damage another prominent Republican figure: Lauren Boebert.The far-right firebrand seized on Buck’s declaration last year that he would not seek re-election by opting to switch from a district the congresswoman barely won in 2022 to run in Buck’s soon to be vacant seat.The calculation was that it would offer safe harbor and a near-certain return to Congress later this year, while allowing her to complete her term in office in her current seat.Buck’s 15 March decision to bring forward his exit from November to this Friday, however, stripped the floor from beneath her. It triggered a special election in his district that will take place on 25 June and left Boebert with two equally unappealing choices. She could resign her post to run in the special election, giving Democrats the chance to flip her current seat. Or she could stay where she is and gamble on trying to unseat an incumbent in the 5 November general election.She chose the latter. “I’m not leaving my constituents,” she said in a statement that failed to acknowledge she had already decided to walk away from them in November. “I will not imperil the already very slim House Republican majority by resigning my current seat.”The statement also expressed anger at Buck, who outmaneuvered her and left her facing a seemingly narrow path to being a member of the next Congress. She accused Buck of “forcing an unnecessary special election on the same day” as Colorado’s presidential preference primary, predicting that it would “confuse voters, result in a lame duck congressman on day one, and leave the fourth district [being vacated by Buck] with no representation for more than three months”.“The fourth district deserves better,” Boebert’s statement stated.Unsaid was that neither the “lame duck” congressmember nor the primary choice of Republican voters in that district, most probably, would be her.For his part, Buck, who said last year he was standing down in part because of his disappointment at his party’s backing of Donald Trump’s lie that Trump won the 2020 election, denied his decision to bring forward his exit was intended to harm Boebert.“It’s ridiculous,” he told the Colorado Sun, stressing his decision to leave the House – where Republicans for the moment had a 219-213 edge over Democrats – was solely over his disillusionment at a lack of action in Congress.Buck said: “I’m not giving anybody an advantage or disadvantage. I have done my very best to stay out of this primary election.”But he did slam Boebert for attempting to fundraise from the situation, as she did in a tweet attacking the “uniparty”, a derogatory term used by conservative extremists to attack Republicans who work or vote with Democrats to pass bipartisan legislation.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBoebert’s next steps are unclear, although her pathway to the fourth district seat, if she still wants to pursue it, is now strewn with obstacles. She can run in the crowded fourth district primary also on 25 June without resigning her current seat – but to be successful she would have to persuade voters to elect one Republican as a “caretaker” in the special election before then rejecting that same candidate in the primary in her favor.The likelihood is that the winner of the June special election, assuming it is a Republican, will also become the primary winner and run again in November with the advantage of being an incumbent.A far less likely alternative is Boebert giving up on district four and attempting to defend Colorado’s third district seat, which she retained in 2022 by only about 500 votes from more than 327,000 cast. Many, however, believe she has burned bridges there.The congresswoman’s second term has been mired in controversy, including an unsavory groping incident involving a male companion at a Denver theater in September, and the arrest of her 18-year-old son in February on felony charges over multiple instances of credit card and identity theft.Either way, Boebert faces a monumental challenge to extend her political career in a House in which her behavior has been questionable, including unseemly heckling of Joe Biden during his 2022 State of the Union speech.In December, self-styled “no-nonsense conservative” Richard Holtorf, a candidate in the district four primary, said in a tweet that “seat shopping isn’t something that the voters look kindly on”. It is unlikely that Buck’s decision will have gained her any more supporters. More

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Why the rift between anti-abortion activists and Republican lawmakers is growing

      by

      There is a growing rift in the decades-old marriage between anti-abortion activists and Republican lawmakers.The problem came into view last month, after a bombshell decision from the Alabama supreme court temporarily halted in vitro fertilization (IVF). The ruling, which described frozen embryos as “extrauterine children”, unraveled when the Republican-controlled legislature passed short-term protections for IVF providers.Under a new law signed last week by Republican governor Kay Ivey, IVF providers are temporarily protected from civil litigation and criminal prosecution in the event of “damage or death of an embryo” during treatment.“In our state, we work to foster a culture of life,” the governor said in a statement about the court ruling. “This certainly includes some couples hoping and praying to be parents who utilize IVF.”The move offered a helpful, if limited lifeline, to IVF patients in the state. The new law does not refute the Alabama supreme court’s controversial position that an embryo, stored for the purpose of IVF, is a person. Nor does it permanently shield IVF providers from legal penalties.Despite its limited scope, the Republican-backed law took a step to align the GOP with US public consensus, which overwhelmingly supports IVF. It also invoked the wrath of rightwing Christian activists.“Tragically, the Governor of Alabama has given the IVF industry a license to kill,” said Lila Rose, president of Live Action, a non-profit that opposes abortion. “Stripping embryonic human beings of legal protections is also unconstitutional.”Some anti-abortion groups are even running ads against Alabama Republicans using the same provocative imagery – “blood, babies and scalpels” – that is typically leveraged against Democrats, according to Politico.View image in fullscreenThe backlash from anti-abortion groups, many of which are hostile to IVF, represents a persistent problem for Republicans in the post-Roe era. The party, once united under the simple goal of repealing Roe v Wade, cannot figure out how to advance the anti-abortion movement’s most hardline policy goals without alienating large swaths of US voters.In their rush to announce a restrained, politically-safe stance in support of IVF, Alabama Republicans inadvertently angered their own Christian conservative base.“You have a lot of Christian Right and pro-life groups that think that Alabama’s supreme court decision was good, and – if anything didn’t go far enough,” said Mary Ziegler, a law professor at the University of California, Davis. “For state lawmakers in solidly red districts, where there’s no chance that a Democrat could win, the Christian right could launch a primary challenge against Alabama Republicans who supported the IVF bill.”It’s not the first time that the rightwing Christian movement has demanded that Republican lawmakers split from public opinion on reproductive healthcare.In 2022, after the US supreme court repealed the constitutional right to abortion guaranteed by Roe v Wade, anti-abortion activists rejoiced: the Right to Life lobby had finally won. Uninhibited by Roe, state Republican leaders were free to set their own laws on abortion access – and yet wholly unprepared to answer the thorny legal questions that followed: should abortion bans offer an exception for cases where the life of the mother is jeopardized? What about cases where a rape or incest victim is impregnated by their abuser?Like IVF, abortion ban exceptions are supported by the majority of US voters.The GOP’s conservative Christian base, however, argued that exceptions should not exist, or at least be extremely narrow in scope. Rightwing activists believe that a fetus is a “preborn person” entitled to the same rights and protections as any other American citizen.The concept of fetal personhood, once a fringe ideology that could be mostly ignored by mainstream Republican lawmakers, now underscores much of the modern anti-abortion movement’s work.Abortion bans in states like Georgia and Alabama, for example, contain language that define a fetus as a person. In 2022, Georgia’s department of revenue announced that “any unborn child with a detectable human heartbeat” can be counted as a dependent on tax forms.The Alabama supreme court ruling itself hinges on the belief that a fetus is a legally-protected person.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionEven before Roe’s demise, fetal personhood seeped into the criminal justice system, enabling the prosecution and criminalization of pregnancy complications. In 2020, Oklahoma police arrested a 19-year-old woman who had a miscarriage in her second trimester of pregnancy. Alleging that she had used meth, police charged her with first-degree manslaughter of the fetus (a medical examiner identified five other potential factors that may have led to the miscarriage).As fetal personhood continues to transform American politics and law, anti-abortion lobbyists have been more willing to turn on Republican allies for failing to champion the ideology.View image in fullscreen“Politicians cannot call themselves pro-life, affirm the truth that human life begins at the moment of fertilization, and then enact laws that allow the callous killing of these preborn children simply because they were created through IVF,” said Rose in her statement condemning the Alabama governor’s support of IVF.Prompted by Alabama’s IVF wars, leading far-right think tanks are also pressuring congressional Republicans to back fetal personhood on the national stage. In a memorandum released late last month, the Heritage Foundation urged conservatives to view the Alabama supreme court decision on embryos as a means of protecting children.“This ruling merely ensures that parents using the service can rest assured that their children will receive the same legal protections as everyone else’s,” the memo said.It is unclear if the GOP will ultimately back fetal personhood, or decide that the ideology is too extreme.In 2023, 124 Republicans co-sponsored the federal Life at Conception Act, which would give embryos the rights of people “at the moment of fertilization, cloning, or other moment when the individual comes into being”.A recent attempt by Senate Democrats to advance a bill protecting the procedure failed after a single Republican blocked it.Meanwhile, House Republicans have repeatedly sidestepped questions about federal protections for IVF, leaving Alabama lawmakers to answer fundamental questions about fetal personhood on their own.“It’s not my belief that Congress needs to play a role here,” said the Republican House speaker, Mike Johnson, at a West Virginia press conference on Thursday. “I think this is being handled by the states.” More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘A campaign for vengeance’: critics warn of a radical second Trump term

      by

      The US election primary season is effectively over. Conventional wisdom holds that the two major candidates will now pivot towards the centre ground in search of moderate voters. But Donald Trump has never been one for conventional wisdom.Detention camps, mass deportations, capital punishment for drug smugglers, tariffs on imported goods, a purge of the justice department and potential withdrawal from Nato – the Trump policy agenda is radical by any standard including his own, pushing the boundaries set during his first presidential run eight years ago.“In 2016 he was still, in his own mind at least, positioning himself to be beloved by everybody,” said Kurt Bardella, a Democratic strategist. “That’s why ‘Drain the swamp’ was a more populist, appealing message to all sides of the aisle because everyone on some level felt like Washington’s broken, Washington’s left us behind.“Now you flash-forward to 2024 and we’re getting a much darker version of Donald Trump, one who seems to be driven by imaginary grievances from the 2020 election. There’s nothing unifying about that message in any way; it’s incredibly self-centred. This is a campaign for vengeance. In a lot of ways he is Ahab and Moby Dick is the United States of America.”Eight years ago Trump, seeking to become the first US president with no prior political or military experience, was running with a clean slate. If anything, there was a suspicion that his background as a thrice-married New York celebrity implied some ideological fluidity and latent liberal instincts.But he announced his candidacy in June 2015 by promising to build a wall on the southern border, using xenophobic language to portray Mexicans as “criminals” and “rapists” and promising to “make America great again”.During the campaign he described international trade deals as “a disaster” and called for increased tariffs on imports. He promised sweeping tax cuts and vowed to repeal Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act and environmental regulations, describing climate change as “a total hoax”.Trump pledged to nominate supreme court justices opposed to abortion and, in one TV interview, suggested that women who have abortions should be punished. With backing from the National Rifle Association, he opposed gun safety reforms.Overseas, the Republican candidate deployed the slogan “America first”, questioning the Nato alliance while calling for improved relations with Russia. He vowed to destroy the Islamic State and called for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on”.Trump did implement his first attempt at a Muslim ban almost immediately after taking the Oval Office in January 2017, prompting protests, airport chaos and a long legal battle in the courts. The supreme court ruled in June 2018 that the third iteration of the law could go into full effect, meaning considerable restrictions on Muslim travellers entering the country.Trump failed to overturn the Affordable Care Act, but his presidency was hugely consequential in other ways. His $1.5tn tax cut added to the national debt and, research has shown, helped billionaires more than the working class. The US pulled out of the Paris climate agreement. Trump reshaped the federal judiciary and appointed three supreme court justices who would be instrumental in ending the constitutional right to abortion.He botched the response to a coronavirus pandemic that has now left more than a million Americans dead, initially underplaying the threat and later suggesting that patients might inject bleach as a cure. In the summer of 2020, Trump is said to have wanted the US military to shoot peaceful protesters in Washington during the Black Lives Matter demonstrations.In the aftermath of his 2020 election defeat, and dozens of criminal charges against him, Trump’s extremism has broadened and deepened as he heads into an electoral rematch with Joe Biden. He won the Republican primaries with ease, prompting commentators to warn of “collective amnesia” and “the banality of chaos” as many voters seemingly become numb to his demagoguery.However, an AP VoteCast poll found six in 10 moderate Republicans in New Hampshire and South Carolina were concerned that Trump was too extreme to win a general election.View image in fullscreenFor example, he now argues that presidents should have total immunity and openly threatens the guardrails of American democracy. “I only want to be a dictator for one day,” he told supporters in Manchester, New Hampshire, earlier this year.He has said he would try to strip tens of thousands of career employees of their civil service protections as he seeks to “totally obliterate the deep state”. Given his rage at the FBI and federal prosecutors pursuing criminal cases against him, Trump may target people linked to those prosecutions for retribution.His signature issue, border security, is once again taking centre stage with record levels of migrants caught crossing into the US. In response, he has pledged to launch the biggest deportation effort in American history. This would involve far-reaching roundups and detention camps to hold people while they await removal, the New York Times reported. He has also refused to rule out reinstating a Muslim travel ban and a hugely controversial family separation policy.Trump further wants to build more of the border wall – his first administration built 450 miles (724km) of barriers across the 1,954-mile (3,144km) border, but much of that replaced existing structures. He also wants to end automatic citizenship for children born in the US to immigrants living in the country illegally, an idea he flirted with as president.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionFormer Republican congressman Joe Walsh said: “He’s even uglier in his language now. He’s even more cruel in his approach. He’s gotten much more extreme, which you would think means, oh my God, how stupid politically, because he needs people in the middle. But it is big issue and Democrats have never understood how important immigration and the border are and so Trump feels as if he can demagogue it in even more of an extreme fashion.”Trump has called for the death penalty for drug smugglers and those who traffic women and children. In a broader anti-crime push, he says he will require local law enforcement agencies to use divisive policing measures including stop-and-frisk. Last year, he told a rally in Anaheim, California: “Very simply, if you rob a store, you can fully expect to be shot as you are leaving that store.”Under the mantra “Drill, baby, drill”, Trump says that he would increase oil drilling on public lands and offer tax breaks to oil, gas and coal producers. He would again exit the Paris climate accords, end wind subsidies and eliminate environmental regulations.Trump has suggested that he is open to making cuts to the social security and Medicare welfare programmes. But one area in which he has hinted at moderation is abortion, publicly acknowledging that the national ban favoured by some Republicans would be electoral kryptonite, although it was reported last month that he privately expressed support for a 16-week limit with exceptions.Wendy Schiller, a political science professor at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island, said: “His campaign has been smart to float the 16-week ban because I think most Americans fall somewhere between 16 and 20 weeks as something they can live with. If he basically says the federal government will not try to do a six-week ban, we’re not going to come after a foetal heartbeat bill – so if you live in a swing state like Michigan that has codified abortion, I’m not coming after you – that is strategically a smart position. But it would be considered a modification to the centre on abortion by Trump.”On foreign policy, Trump claims that even before he is inaugurated, he will have settled the war between Russia and Ukraine. Last week, after visiting the former president at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, Hungary’s autocratic prime minister, Viktor Orbán, said Trump promised him that he will end Russia’s war with Ukraine by not giving “a single penny” in aid.The Republican nominee also says he will continue to “fundamentally re-evaluate” Nato’s purpose and mission. At one recent rally, he said he would “encourage” Vladimir Putin’s Russia to attack Nato allies who do not pay their bills. And he says he will institute a system of tariffs of perhaps 10% on most foreign goods.Sometimes it can all seem like campaign bluster unlikely to survive the scrutiny of advisers, Congress or the courts. But whereas Trump’s 2016 win took everyone by surprise, perhaps including him, resulting in a first term marred by infighting and hastily written executive orders, this time there are allies who consider a second term is possible, or even probable, and are ready to hit the ground running.Trump’s campaign and groups such as the Heritage Foundation and America First Policy Institute thinktanks are assembling Project 2025 policy books with detailed plans. Groups of conservative lawyers are sizing up what orders Trump might issue on a second presidency’s first day. With lessons learned, his administration could be even more ruthless and efficient.Lanhee Chen, a fellow in American public policy studies at the Hoover Institution thinktank in Stanford, California, said: “Some of the general framing and themes around what it is he wants to do are relatively consistent. What is different this time around is that there’s more of an architecture and infrastructure supporting a lot of these policy proposals.“If you look at the ecosystem of organisations that’s involved in helping him think through what a second term agenda would look like, it’s much more robust in 2024 than it was in 2016. So I don’t necessarily subscribe to the view that the substance is all that different or somehow more extreme. It’s just there’s a lot more people who are thinking about it. Some of them are authorised; some of them are probably not authorised.”Critics of Trump warn that, while Trump himself has few core beliefs, he would effectively become a vehicle for extremists to push a far-right agenda wildly out of step with the majority of Americans. Reed Galen, a co-founder of the anti-Trump Lincoln Project, said: “He is an empty vessel for these other people around him who do have very specific policy ideas, most of them rooted in straight authoritarianism or some noxious mix of authoritarianism and Christian dominionism.“He doesn’t care. For all of it, it’s a means to an end. If I win do these people help me or do they hurt me? Do they give me more control? Do they give me less control? Do they give me more access to making sure I’m never going to go to jail, that I can persecute and prosecute my political enemies, that I can make life harder for the media?”Galen added: “In many ways, he is the leader of the torchlight parade but he’s being taken arm in arm and pushed from behind by a bunch of very noxious individuals with what I would call fundamentally anti-democratic and un-American ideology.” More