Republicans

Subterms

    More stories

    • 200 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Racism is embedded in our society’: how attacks on immigrants in Ohio highlight US disinformation crisis

      by

      In recent weeks, racist conspiracy theories about immigrants have dominated the election cycle. High-ranking Republicans have doubled down on unsubstantiated rumors about Black and brown migrants, tapping into anxieties that immigrants are responsible for increased crime in US cities.During last week’s presidential debate, Donald Trump echoed a baseless claim that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, were eating pets. “In Springfield, they’re eating the dogs. The people that came in. They’re eating the cats. They’re eating – they’re eating the pets of the people that live there,” the Republican nominee said.And in response to a question about high costs of living, Trump alluded to viral rumors that members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua were taking over a Colorado apartment complex. “You look at Aurora in Colorado. They are taking over the towns. They’re taking over buildings. They’re going in violently.”Both claims are completely untrue.Experts argue that the spread of such disinformation amplifies existing xenophobic beliefs within the American psyche as a means of political gain. “It’s so dangerous when people with a platform are repeating these very fabricated rumors,” said Gladis Ibarra, co-executive director of the Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition. “These are very much part of a large coordinated strategy to continue to demonize our immigrant neighbors. It’s undermining the values of our nation and historically what people have said this nation stands for.”Misinformation (inaccurate information that is spread unknowingly) and disinformation (false information that is meant to mislead) are widely shared via social media platforms, despite a push for fact checking and accuracy since the 2016 presidential election. The phenomenon of inaccurate news still occurs at alarming rates as people’s online algorithms are largely driven by their political biases, according to Jeffrey Layne Blevins, a journalism professor at the University of Cincinnati.“[The algorithm] is merely designed to keep users engaged,” Blevins said, referring to metrics such as how long a person looks at content or shares it in their feed. “And what tends to engage most people? Things that outrage them or piss them off.”Blevins added that rightwing figures share disinformation in hopes of “outraging people on the political right”, especially during an election cycle. Such content is accepted as truth by those online who already share rightwing beliefs themselves. “It creates an echo chamber of sorts,” he said. “When public figures who share your political beliefs post content like this – people are more likely to accept it at face value.”Republicans at all levels of government have linked immigrants to instances of violent crime, including drug smuggling and assault. During his campaign for the 2016 presidential election, Trump claimed Mexicans crossing the US southern border were “rapists”, “bringing drugs, bringing crime”. He began the construction of a wall along the border – among other anti-immigrant policies – to deter “large sacks of drugs [from being thrown] over”. During this election cycle, Trump has said that undocumented people are “animals” who are “poisoning the blood of our country”, despite immigrants being significantly less likely to commit crimes than US-born citizens.The demonization of immigrants is a repeated move by lawmakers to secure votes, said Germán Cadenas, an associate professor at Rutgers University who specializes in the psychology of immigration. “Immigration is really not as divisive as some politicians are trying to make it out to be,” he said, as 64% of Americans believe immigration is beneficial for the country. “It’s a tactic that has been used historically to mobilize voters who feel threatened.”For centuries, Cadenas said, politicians built policy around the stereotype that immigrants are a “threat” to US identity and safety. Anti-immigration laws such as the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the 1924 Immigration Act were among the first to curtail US immigration based on nationality. The Chinese Exclusion Act came largely after high-ranking union members warned of a “Chinese invasion” that would steal white, American jobs. Similarly, US senators advised their fellow legislators to “shut the door” on immigrants as a migrating population would “encroach upon the reserve and virgin resources” of the US, before the passage of the 1924 Immigration Act.Fast forward to the early 2000s, as states such as Arizona passed laws allowing local law enforcement to target anyone they believed was in the country without documentation. Arizona Republicans called arriving undocumented people an “invasion that must be stopped” and a “national security threat”, a political tactic to encourage support of the controversial bill.Politicians also attempt to etch out a voting bloc by passing anti-immigrant policies. “Historically, these stereotypes, these falsehoods, have [then] been used to mobilize voters to elect policymakers who are going to make anti-immigrant laws and policies.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionEven as most Americans have a positive view of immigration, Cadenas said: “Racism and xenophobia are deeply embedded in our society and our psychology.” A study by Cadenas and Elizabeth Kiehne found that white US adults are most susceptible to the core stereotype of Latino immigrants being a threat.“The anti-immigrant rhetoric is less about convincing than about amplifying and strengthening beliefs that are already held,” Cadenas said. “It takes large efforts to unlearn these problematic beliefs and biases.”Disinformation about immigrants has consequences, Cadenas and Ibarra said. “Across the nation, a number of states have an ‘anti-immigrant policy climate’,” Cadenas said, meaning those states pass laws that make the lives of immigrants harder.“A small minority of folks who are threatened by immigration are electing policymakers who are crafting policies that are negative towards immigrants,” he added “These policies trickle down to housing. They trickle down to the way that authorities deal with immigration at the local level. These policies trickle down to healthcare and the kinds of access to health and mental health that immigrants have.”In Aurora, Venezuelan residents of the aforementioned apartment complex have said they feel unsafe after the rumors of a gang takeover and they fear being stereotyped as criminals.Springfield has received more than 33 bomb threats since Trump’s statements at the debate. Its city hall was evacuated, along with some local schools. Springfield hospitals are also on alert, and Haitian immigrants say they have received several threats. “People that are hardworking, contributing to our communities, are not the danger, Ibarra said. “The danger is all of these violent ideologies that are being fueled by the people that repeat these lies, by the people that go on social media and on TV and continue to repeat them.” More

    • 238 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      AOC calls the US Green party ‘not serious’ – can it be more than a ‘spoiler’ in the election?

      by

      American politics often has wild deviations from the norms of other major democracies and one of the most striking differences is set to be on display in this year’s election – the performance of its domestic Green party.There are elected Greens at the national level in the UK, Canada, Mexico, France, Germany and Australia, sometimes helping form governments, and yet the US Green party has only ever had a handful of state-level representatives (it currently has none) and has never had a federal election winner.Of about 500,000 elected positions in the US, from school boards and township supervisors to the presidency, the Green party holds just 149. There’s little indication there will be an influx of left-leaning Greens in November’s elections, which will include local and state polls, as well as the headline presidential race in which Jill Stein is the party’s nominee for a third time.“It’s been a story of complete failure,” said Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia who argued the most consequential Green party impact has been as “spoilers” helping Republicans in close elections, such as Ralph Nader’s campaign in 2000 and Stein’s in 2016. There’s a small chance such a scenario could play out again in this year’s tight contest between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. One poll this month had Stein leading Harris among Muslim-American voters in three key swing states of Michigan, Arizona and Wisconsin, Middle East Eye reported.“Normally the Greens aren’t important but they were in 2016, they cost Hillary Clinton a couple of blue wall states, and they were in 2000,” Sabato said. “Why vote for them when Democrats are also concerned about climate change? All you’re doing is helping Republicans. Without them we might not have had the Iraq invasion, we might not have had Donald Trump.”Others are more sympathetic, pointing to the winner-takes-all nature of US politics and the well-funded machinery of the two-party system that makes it hard for third parties, including the Green party and the Libertarian party, to break through. Notably, however, the UK’s Green party did win four seats in first-past-the-post Westminster elections in July.“It is difficult for small parties to make way in the United States because of the undemocratic electoral system,” said Christine Milne, former leader of the Australian Greens, which was in coalition with the ruling center-left Labor party between 2010 and 2013.“Proportional representation systems provide opportunities for small parties to be elected which has been key to the growth of the Greens around the world.”Under Stein, the US Green party has complained of a duopoly but aimed most of its attacks at Democrats, accusing the party of supporting a genocide in Gaza and holding rallies with signs reading “Abandon Harris”.“The simple fact is there is very little policy daylight between these two candidates,” Stein said following last week’s debate between Trump and Harris. Stein added that Harris “chooses the softer approach to fascism of capitulating to endless war and corporate rule in exchange for half a billion in campaign contributions.“What we saw on Tuesday [last week] were two candidates striving to outbid the other’s promises to push us towards a new world war and accelerate the climate emergency.”Such a stance has dismayed some who sought to build the Green party as an alternative to the two major parties. “To me this election is the choice between fascism and keeping democracy alive so it’s almost unfathomable to me that people can think the parties are the same,” said Ted Glick, a progressive activist who was a long-standing Green party member and ran as a Senate candidate for the party in New Jersey.“It’s scary to see so many people support Donald Trump and it’s hard to understand how someone as smart as Jill Stein can think this guy is the same as Kamala Harris.”Glick said he left the Green party in 2017 after becoming convinced the party needed to grow its base between presidential elections by focusing on states that are ‘safe’ for either of the two major parties, rather than battleground states. He said he was “shocked” when Stein said those who sought alliances with other progressives and independents, such as Bernie Sanders, were “sheepdogs for the duopoly”.“Bernie Sanders’s campaign more than anything else points the way to how we get strong, progressive alternatives in the US,” Glick said.“But the Green party became very narrow and rigid, a tiny party of true believers focused on ideological purity above all else. Back in 2004 there were 225 Green party members in elected office, now it’s 143 (the Green party has said it is 149). It’s a pretty dismal record for 20 years of existence.”Rather than ally with the Democratic left wing, Stein has instead been involved in a recent battle with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the progressive Democratic congresswoman from New York. “All you do is show up once every four years to speak to people who are justifiably pissed off, but you’re just showing up once every four years to do that, you’re not serious,” Ocasio-Cortez posted on Instagram last month. “To me, it does not read as authentic. It reads as predatory.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionStein has responded by accusing Ocasio-Cortez of supporting genocide in Gaza and for “taking” a Green party policy in the Green New Deal, a resolution supported by some Democrats, formerly including Harris, for a massive investment in clean energy, jobs and healthcare. “Maybe it’s time to watch these parties die,” Stein, a doctor who has run for president in 2012, 2016 and now 2024, posted on X.This approach, as well as a comparative lack of focus on environmental issues – the US Green party has attacked the Inflation Reduction Act, a huge climate bill with elements of the Green New Deal that was passed by Democrats in 2022, as “relatively small” and a “tradeoff” with fossil fuel interests – and opposition to Nato is unusual among overseas counterparts.“The US Green party is attempting to go after the subset of voters on the left who don’t like the Democrats,” said Carl Roberts, a spokesperson at the Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung, affiliated with a German Green party that has been in the German federal parliament consistently since 1983 and currently supplies the country’s vice-chancellor and foreign minister.“I think this is quite out of step with other Green parties, who always center environmental concerns in their messaging and campaigns as one of their highest priorities,” Roberts said, adding, however, that “systemic” issues with the US political landscape are largely the cause of this difference.A US Green party spokesperson said the party had been “dismayed” by European Green parties’ “silence and complicity” over Israel and Gaza and that these parties have “relied too much on US corporate news media and seem to have swallowed falsehoods like the belief that Republicans are right and Democrats are left”.Democrats and Republicans do differ on climate, he said, but the Biden administration has taken “modest and inadequate measures” to deal with the crisis and it is “reckless and irresponsible to allow an expansion of drilling in the midst of a worsening global climate emergency”.“When Greens get elected to Congress some day, they’ll work with progressives like AOC and others on shared legislative agenda,” the spokesperson said. “The Green party didn’t pick an election-year fight with AOC, the reverse is what happened.”He added the solution to “spoiler” allegations would be ranked-choice voting, which has been mostly opposed by the main two parties.So, will Stein prove a factor in this November’s election? The Green party candidate, running with Butch Ware, is not on the ballot in around a dozen states and is polling at around 1% of the vote, a small but potentially significant total should certain swing states have razor-thin margins.“I doubt they will have an impact but nobody expected Jill Stein to do what she did in 2016, or for Trump to win,” said Sabato. “It was a perfect storm, and the storm is still raging.”Glick hopes his former party isn’t decisive in November. “Hopefully there will be a major drop off in their support when it comes to pulling the lever and preventing Trump getting back into office,” he said. “I hope they see the error of their ways. We need progressive alternative to the Democrats and Republicans, but this isn’t the way you do it.” More

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump-allied Pac fires canvassing vendor in crucial states weeks before election

      by

      America Pac, one of the largest and the most ambitious of the groups supporting Donald Trump’s campaign, is replacing its voter turnout operations in the crucial battleground states of Arizona and Nevada, according to two people familiar with the matter.The political action committee, backed by billionaire Elon Musk, has ended its contract with the September Group and will hire a new company to knock on doors with fewer than 50 days left until the election.America Pac used non-performance as the stated reason to back out of the contract in the past few days, claiming the September Group was not hitting its door-knocking targets, one of people said.The shakeup comes at a crunch moment for the Trump campaign, which has outsourced virtually its entire ground game operation to a number of political action committees in this presidential cycle. America Pac is seen as the most ambitious, with a presence in every swing state.As a result of the shakeup, America Pac has not canvassed any neighborhoods in Arizona and Nevada on behalf of the Trump campaign for the past few days as it resets its operations in the two states.America Pac hopes the roughly 300 canvassers employed by the September Group will be rehired by its successor but whether that occurs remains uncertain.To some degree, it would be in America Pac’s interest to rehire the people given the talent pool for knocking on doors in the blazing Arizona and Nevada heat is dramatically reduced this late in the cycle, having already been hired by congressional and other campaigns.The New York Times reported earlier that America Pac would replace the September Group with a new canvassing vendor. The September Group was paid just under $1.4m for its work since August, according to federal election commission filings.A Trump campaign spokesperson could not immediately be reached for comment.The move inside America Pac comes as Republican officials in swing states have raised concern about the Trump campaign’s own formal presence for the get-out-the-vote operation, the Guardian has reported.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe Republican National Committee once envisioned an extensive field operation for the 2024 election, until the Trump campaign scrapped those plans when it took over the party in March, pursuing a twin voter turnout strategy of relying on Pacs and ardent Trump volunteers.The Trump campaign took the gamble to outsource its ground game, after the Federal Election Commission gave permission for campaigns to coordinate their voter turnout efforts with the Pacs, freeing Trump to spend his war chest on rallies and television advertising.But the Pacs, which are supposed to bridge the gap, have been slow to spool up, according to people with direct access to the data for groups such as America Pac, Turnout for America, Turning Point Action and America First Works.They have only started to hire at a rapid clip in recent weeks, the people said, meaning they are reaching Trump supporters late in the cycle when it often takes repeated “voter contacts” to get them to return a ballot.The situation means that not only is the size of the formal Trump operation particularly small for the 2024 election, but the door-knockers and canvassers recruited by the Pacs might be less effective compared with previous presidential cycles. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      JD Vance defends pet-eating remarks: ‘The media has a responsibility to fact-check’

      by

      JD Vance defended his comments about Haitian immigrants eating pets during a Tuesday rally, saying that “the media has a responsibility to fact-check” stories – not him.The rally in Eau Claire, Wisconsin, came two days after the Ohio senator told CNN host Dana Bash it was OK “to create stories” to draw attention to issues his constituents care about, regarding inflammatory and unfounded claims that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, had eaten residents’ pets.The comments, in which he appeared to say that politicians can brazenly lie, drew immediate rebuke. But during his rally, Vance defended them and claimed that numerous constituents had told him “they’d seen something in Springfield”.“On top of it, if there are certain people who refuse to listen to them, who refuse to take their concerns seriously,” he said, “that’s when it’s my job as United States senator to listen to my constituents.”Vance took questions from reporters but knocked the press repeatedly, a line of attack that brought the crowd to their feet.“When I said – and the media always does this, they’re very dishonest – when I say that I created a story, I’m talking about the media story, by focusing the press’s intention on what’s going on in Springfield,” said Vance.During his speech to a crowd of several hundred people, Vance spoke at length about immigration, invoking a crime committed by an undocumented person in the town of Prairie du Chien that Republicans in the state have already seized on to bolster Republican claims about immigrants committing violent crimes. In fact, research shows immigrants do not commit crimes at a higher rate than people born in the US.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Every community is a border state,” said Vance. “The problems that Kamala Harris has imported through that American southern border have now gone nationwide.”He also blamed the vice-president for the recent apparent assassination attempt at Mar-a-Lago.“The American media, the Democrats, the Kamala Harris campaign, they’ve gotta cut this crap out or they’re gonna get somebody killed,” said Vance, alleging that Democrats, who have highlighted Trump’s authoritarian rhetoric and attempts to overturn the 2020 election, are to blame for the two apparent assassination attempts that Trump has faced so far during his 2024 campaign.Vance described a chaotic, dark, and violent vision of the US under a Harris presidency.“We are closer, in this moment, to a nuclear war, or a third world war, than at any time in our country’s history and we have the chaos and incompetence of Kamala Harris to thank for it,” the Republican vice-presidential nominee said during a campaign event in Eau Claire, Wisconsin.Vance’s message, especially on immigration, was well-received by the crowd.“You don’t know who’s coming across that border. You don’t know the violence or the background of those people,” said Victoria Bischel, who owns a farm and a real estate business and appreciated Vance’s comments. “I believe in immigration. I believe in legal immigration […] I don’t hop over the fence to Saudi Arabia and decide that I want to live there.” More

    • 213 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Harris condemns Senate Republicans for blocking IVF bill; VP calls Ohio attacks a ‘crying shame’ – live

      by

      Kamala Harris said that Senate Republicans refusal to vote in favor of protecting IVF “is not an isolated incident”:
      Every woman in every state must have reproductive freedom. Yet, Republicans in Congress have once again made clear that they will not protect access to the fertility treatments many couples need to fulfill their dream of having a child.Congressional Republicans’ repeated refusal to protect access to IVF is not an isolated incident. Extremist so-called leaders have launched a full-on attack against reproductive freedom across our country. In the more than two years since Roe v Wade was overturned, they have proposed and passed abortion bans that criminalize doctors and make no exception for rape or incest. They have also blocked legislation to protect the right to contraception and proposed four national abortion bans.Their opposition to a woman’s freedom to make decisions about her own body is extreme, dangerous and wrong. Our administration will always fight to protect reproductive freedoms, which must include access to IVF. We stand with the majority of Americans – Republicans and Democrats alike – who support protecting access to fertility treatments. And we continue to call on Congress to finally pass a bill that restores reproductive freedom.
      Arizona’s top elections official said Tuesday that a newly identified error in the state’s voter registration process needs to be swiftly resolved, as early ballots are scheduled to go out to some voters as soon as this week.Election staff in the Maricopa county recorder’s office identified an issue last week, which concerns voters with old drivers licenses who may never have provided documentary proof of citizenship but were coded as having provided it and therefore were able to vote full ballots. The state has a bifurcated system in which voters who do not provide documentary proof of citizenship cannot vote in local or state elections, only federal ones.Because of the state’s very close elections and status as a swing state, the issue affecting nearly 100,000 voters will likely be the subject of intense scrutiny and litigation in the coming weeks. Arizona has more than 4.1 million registered voters.Governor Katie Hobbs directed the motor vehicles division to fix the coding error, which the secretary of state, Adrian Fontes, said was already resolved going forward.It’s not clear if any of these voters have unlawfully cast a ballot or if they have already provided proof of citizenship. People who register to vote check a box on registration forms, under penalty of perjury, declaring they are citizens.“We have no reason to believe that there are any significant numbers of individuals remaining on this list who are not eligible to vote in Arizona,” Fontes said in a press conference Tuesday. “We cannot confirm that at this moment, but we don’t have any reason to believe that.”The error, reported by Votebeat on Tuesday, relates to several quirks of Arizona governance.Since 1996, Arizona residents have been required to show proof of citizenship to get a regular driver’s license. And since 2004, they have been required to show proof of citizenship to vote in state and local elections.State drivers licenses also do not expire until a driver is age 65, meaning for some residents, they will have a valid license for decades before needing renewal. These factors play into the error.The issue has split the Republican recorder in the state’s largest county, Maricopa, and the Democratic secretary of state. Recorder Stephen Richer is arguing that these voters should only be able to cast a federal-only ballot, while Fontes says the state should keep the status quo of allowing them to vote full ballots given how soon the election is. Fontes directed counties to allow these residents to cast full ballots this year.Read more here:Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell has said that Republicans would do well to help avert a looming government shutdown.The path to preventing a shutdown, as ever, remains shrouded. House leader Mike Johnson’s current proposal – which extends funding while also folding in a Republican measure requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote in national elections – lacks even enough Republican votes to pass.Non-citizen voting is already illegal and voter fraud by non-citizens is virtually non-existent, and the inclusion of the measure, which would add barriers to voting for US citizens, is a nonstarter for Democrats in the Senate.Meanwhile, far-right Republicans say Johnson’s proposal doesn’t go far enough in pushing their agenda, and see the threat of shutdown as an opportunity to push Democrats to compromise on immigration and other issues.Since Kamala Harris launched her presidential bid in July, Democrats have showered her campaign with cash. Last month alone, the vice-president raised $361m, tripling Donald Trump’s fundraising haul of $130m for the month. According to Harris’s campaign, she brought in $540m in the six weeks after Joe Biden withdrew from the presidential race.Democratic congressional candidates appear to be benefiting from this financial windfall as well, as Republicans sound the alarm about their fundraising deficit in key races that will determine control of the House and Senate in November.But in one crucial area, Republicans maintain a substantial cash advantage over Democrats: state legislative races. In recent years, Republicans have controlled more state legislative chambers than Democrats, giving them more power over those states’ budgets, election laws and abortion policies.The Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee (DLCC), which supports the party’s state legislative candidates, has raised $35m between the start of 2023 and the end of this June, the committee told the Guardian. In comparison, the Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC) – which invests in an array of state-level campaigns, such as supreme court races, in addition to legislative campaigns – has raised $62m in the same time period.That resource gap is now rearing its head in key battleground states, the DLCC says. In Pennsylvania, a crucial state for the presidential and congressional maps, Republican state legislative candidates have spent $4.5m on paid advertisements, compared with $1.4m for Democratic candidates.“When we think about the context of what’s at stake, we think about more than 65 million people being covered by our target map this year,” said Heather Williams, president of the DLCC. “And that means that the rights of all those people will be determined by who’s in power the day after the election.”Read more here:A national voter poll from Monmouth has found that there are fewer “double haters” – voters that dislike both the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates – since Kamala Harris joined the race.Only 7% of voters polled in this latest round favored neither Donald Trump nor Harris – compared to 16% of disliked both Trump and Joe Biden.“Senate Republicans put politics first and families last again today by blocking the Right to IVF Act for the second time since June,” said Emilia Rowland, national press secretary for the Democratic National Committee.Rowland warned that Donald Trump, who claimed to be a “leader” on IVF during his debate against Kamala Harris last week, would jeopardize access to fertility treatments if he wins in November.“Voters know the difference between words and actions,” she said. “And between now and November, they will turn out against Republicans from the top to bottom of the ballot.”JD Vance is scheduled to speak in an hour at an event in Eau Claire, Wisconsin.The last time I was at this event space was for one of Kamala Harris’s inaugural rallies, which was held on the sprawling grounds adjacent to the hall where Vance will speak today.Cathy Weber, a retired farmer and military serviceperson, said she came to see Vance speak to get a better sense of who he is as a politician. When I asked about Vance’s comments about Haitian immigrants, she said she thought “he misspoke,” and chalked it up to being a younger politician – which she viewed as an asset.“He’s 39,” said Weber. “I said to my son: ‘That’s your generation, that’s our future.’”As the Guardian’s Robert Tait reported earlier this month, JD Vance has a history of opposing IVF – in contradiction to the Republican party and Donald Trump’s current stance that they support it:In 2017, months into Trump’s presidency, Vance wrote the foreword to the Index of Culture and Opportunity, a collection of essays by conservative authors for the Heritage Foundation that included ideas for encouraging women to have children earlier and promoting a resurgence of “traditional” family structure.The essays lauded the increase in state laws restricting abortion rights and included arguments that the practice should become “unthinkable” in the US, a hardline posture the Democrats now say is the agenda of Trump and Vance, who they accuse of harbouring the intent to impose a national ban following a 2022 supreme court ruling overturning Roe v Wade and annulling the federal right to abort a pregnancy.The report also includes an essay lamenting the spread of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and other fertility treatments, with the author attributing them as reasons for women delaying having children and prioritising higher education rather than starting families.IVF has emerged as an issue in November’s presidential race after Trump said last week that he favoured it being covered by government funding or private health insurance companies – a stance seeming at odds with many Republicans, including Vance, who was one of 47 GOP senators to vote against a bill in June intended to expand access to the treatment.Kamala Harris said that Senate Republicans refusal to vote in favor of protecting IVF “is not an isolated incident”:
      Every woman in every state must have reproductive freedom. Yet, Republicans in Congress have once again made clear that they will not protect access to the fertility treatments many couples need to fulfill their dream of having a child.Congressional Republicans’ repeated refusal to protect access to IVF is not an isolated incident. Extremist so-called leaders have launched a full-on attack against reproductive freedom across our country. In the more than two years since Roe v Wade was overturned, they have proposed and passed abortion bans that criminalize doctors and make no exception for rape or incest. They have also blocked legislation to protect the right to contraception and proposed four national abortion bans.Their opposition to a woman’s freedom to make decisions about her own body is extreme, dangerous and wrong. Our administration will always fight to protect reproductive freedoms, which must include access to IVF. We stand with the majority of Americans – Republicans and Democrats alike – who support protecting access to fertility treatments. And we continue to call on Congress to finally pass a bill that restores reproductive freedom.
      Chuck Schumer, the Senate majority leader, pointed to the failure of the IVF bill today as proof that Republicans’ promise to protect access to in vitro fertilization is hollow:Meanwhile, John Thune, a Republican of South Dakota, called the bill “an attempt by Democrats to try and create a political issue where there isn’t one”.Before its convention this year, the Republican party adopted a policy platform that supports states establishing fetal personhood, while also, contradictorily, encouraging support for IVF. But the platform does not explain how IVF could be legally protected if frozen embryos are given the same rights as people.Senate Republicans voted to block a bill that would have ensured access to in vitro fertilization nationwide.Every Republican, except Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, voted against the measure. Though a majority of 51 voted in favor, the bill needed 60 votes to pass.Democrats had brought the measure back to the floor after Republicans previously blocked it from advancing in June.Democrats have been pushing the issue this year after the Alabama’s supreme court ruled that frozen embryos could be considered children under state law, leading several clinics in the state to suspend IVF treatment.Republicans, including Donald Trump, have scrambled to counter what could be a deeply unpopular stance against IVF. More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Senate Republicans block bill to ensure IVF access for second time

      by

      Senate Republicans voted on Tuesday afternoon to block a bill that would have ensured access to in vitro fertilization nationwide.Every Republican, except Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, voted against the measure. Though a majority of 51 voted in favor, the bill needed 60 votes to pass. Democrats had brought the measure back to the floor after Republicans previously blocked it from advancing in June.Democrats have been pushing the issue this year after Alabama’s supreme court ruled that frozen embryos could be considered children under state law, leading several clinics in the state to suspend IVF treatment.Republicans, including Donald Trump, have scrambled to counter what could be a deeply unpopular stance against IVF.“Senate Republicans put politics first and families last again today by blocking the Right to IVF Act for the second time since June,” said Emilia Rowland, national press secretary for the Democratic National Committee.The vote marked Democrats’ latest election-year attempt to force Republicans into a defensive stance on women’s health issues.The bill had little chance of passing, but Democrats are hoping to use the do-over vote to put pressure on Republican congressional candidates and lay out a contrast between Kamala Harris and Trump in the presidential race, especially as the former president has called himself a “leader on IVF”.Rowland warned that Donald Trump would jeopardize access to fertility treatments if he wins in November.“Voters know the difference between words and actions,” she said. “And between now and November, they will turn out against Republicans from the top to bottom of the ballot.”The push started earlier this year after the Alabama supreme court ruled that frozen embryos can be considered children under state law. Several clinics in the state suspended IVF treatments until the Republican-led legislature rushed to enact a law to provide legal protections for the clinics.Democrats quickly capitalized, holding a vote in June on the congressional bill from the Illinois senator Tammy Duckworth and warning that the US supreme court could go after the procedure next after it overturned the right to an abortion in 2022. The legislation would also increase access to the procedure and lower costs.The Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, said on the floor on Tuesday morning that the vote was a “second chance” for Republicans.“Americans are watching, families back home are watching, and couples who want to become parents are watching, too,” Schumer said.Meanwhile, Republicans have scrambled to counter Democrats on the issue, with many making clear that they support IVF treatments. Trump last month announced plans, without additional details, to require health insurance companies or the federal government to pay for the fertility treatment.In his debate with Harris earlier this month, Trump said he was a “leader” on the issue and talked about the “very negative” decision by the Alabama court that was later reversed by the legislature.But the issue has threatened to become a vulnerability for Republicans as some state laws passed by their party grant legal personhood not only to fetuses but to any embryos that are destroyed in the IVF process. Before its convention this summer, the Republican party adopted a policy platform that supports states establishing fetal personhood through the constitution’s 14th amendment, which grants equal protection under the law to all US citizens. The platform also encourages supporting IVF but does not explain how the party plans to do so.Democrats say that if Trump wants to improve access to the procedure, then Republicans should vote for their legislation.Duckworth, a military veteran who has used the fertility treatment to have her two children, has led the Senate effort on the legislation. “How dare you,” she said in comments directed toward her Republican colleagues after the first vote blocking the bill.Republicans have tried to push alternatives on the issue, including legislation that would discourage states from enacting explicit bans on the treatment, but those bills have been blocked by Democrats who say they are not enough.The Associated Press contributed reporting More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats face campaign dilemma after second apparent Trump assassination plot

      by

      In comments to Fox News Digital on Monday, Donald Trump blamed Democrats for the repeated attempts on his life. “Their rhetoric is causing me to be shot at, when I am the one who is going to save the country and they are the ones that are destroying the country – both from the inside and out,” he said.Also on Monday, the former president released a list of quotes that the campaign described as incendiary. At the top of that list was a quote from Kamala Harris saying: “Trump is a threat to our democracy and fundamental freedoms.”The election is seven weeks away. Though Democrats want to place the threat of a repeat of political violence such as the January 6 attacks at the center of their political argument, Trump can adopt the language of victimhood, because he is a victim in this case – the target of a second apparent assassination attempt in less than two months. Democrats face a dilemma about how to effectively campaign against a candidate who has been the target of violence and who continues to claim that the other side’s rhetoric is inciting that violence.Democrats still talk about Trump as a threat to democracy. But they don’t lead with it any more. Instead, Trump is “weird”. Project 2025 is nightmarish and unpopular. Abortion will be illegal. It’s harder for Trump to allege that Democrats are inciting violence when they’re talking about unpopular policies.Leaders can also effectively reinforce social norms against violence, said Lilliana Mason of Johns Hopkins University, who studies political violence in the US electorate. “It can be pretty simple. You can just say ‘political violence has no place in a democratic election,’” she said. “Make it very clear, and often a very simple rejection of violence will make people step back.”Joe Biden delivered just that message Monday, condemning political violence in remarks in Philadelphia at the National HBCU Week Conference.There is “no place for political violence in America – none. Zero,” Biden said. “In America, we resolve our difference peacefully at the ballot box, not at the end of a gun.” Violence “solves nothing. It just tears the country apart. We must do everything we can to prevent it and never give it any oxygen.”Anti-violence political messaging is most effective when it comes from the political perspective of those who have committed violence, Mason said. “The problem with these attempts on Trump is that it’s really perpetrators who are not clearly from one side or the other.”Such is the apparent case with Ryan Wesley Routh, a 58-year-old entrepreneur from Hawaii who had donated to Democrats and supported Ukraine’s war against Russia, but also voted for Trump in 2016 and advocated for Nikki Haley and Vivek Ramaswamy to win the Republican nomination.Louisville mayor Craig Greenberg remembers how people reacted when a gunman shot at him in his campaign headquarters as he was running for office two years ago. There was an outpouring of support from both Democrats and Republicans, he said.“I think extremists on all sides need to turn down the heat of their rhetoric,” Greenberg said. “I think antisemites and racists have no place in political discourse.”Quintez Brown, a social justice activist running for the Louisville metro council, walked into Greenberg’s office on Valentine’s Day and shot at him six times. One bullet passed through Greenberg’s sweater before staffers could barricade the door. Support for Greenberg was bipartisan, though the rhetoric wasn’t always nonpartisan.“I think candidates and elected officials should be held to the highest standards and encourage civil discourse that does not fan the flames of hatred and violence,” Greenberg said. “This often happens, sometimes directly, more often indirectly, with dog whistles and metaphors and tweets.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionStill, some see the need for Democrats to tread carefully as unnecessary, given Trump’s history of inciting violence.The idea that Trump – after the events of January 6 and recent fabrications about the conduct of Haitian refugees that have led to school closures amid threats – could offer criticism on incitement raised the rancor of David Brand, a Democratic activist and operative in Atlanta.“We have strongly condemned in the strongest possible term what he did, what this individual did and called for swift justice,” Brand said. “It is ironic also that he is being prosecuted by a Haitian American immigrant who will be protecting Donald Trump’s civil rights. Donald Trump never gave Paul Pelosi the same respect that we are giving again, and the same respect for the rule of law.”But Trump’s campaign described criticism of this contradiction as itself an incitement.But concerns among Democrats about how to effectively campaign may be short-lived. The most surprising thing about political violence right now is how quickly people move on, Greenberg said.“Whether it’s with the assassination attempts now on President Trump or other acts of political violence or violence in general,” he said. “I mean, just look at Georgia two weeks ago. [A] horrible school shooting. I know I shouldn’t be surprised, but how quickly people seem to forget how much gun violence is impacting our country.” More

    • 125 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Why Republicans are raising double the money in down-ballot races

      by

      Since Kamala Harris launched her presidential bid in July, Democrats have showered her campaign with cash. Last month alone, the vice-president raised $361m, tripling Donald Trump’s fundraising haul of $130m for the month. According to Harris’s campaign, she brought in $540m in the six weeks after Joe Biden withdrew from the presidential race.Democratic congressional candidates appear to be benefiting from this financial windfall as well, as Republicans sound the alarm about their fundraising deficit in key races that will determine control of the House and Senate in November.But in one crucial area, Republicans maintain a substantial cash advantage over Democrats: state legislative races. In recent years, Republicans have controlled more state legislative chambers than Democrats, giving them more power over those states’ budgets, election laws and abortion policies.The Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee (DLCC), which supports the party’s state legislative candidates, has raised $35m between the start of 2023 and the end of this June, the committee told the Guardian. In comparison, the Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC) – which invests in an array of state-level campaigns, such as supreme court races, in addition to legislative campaigns – has raised $62m in the same time period.That resource gap is now rearing its head in key battleground states, the DLCC says. In Pennsylvania, a crucial state for the presidential and congressional maps, Republican state legislative candidates have spent $4.5m on paid advertisements, compared with $1.4m for Democratic candidates.“When we think about the context of what’s at stake, we think about more than 65 million people being covered by our target map this year,” said Heather Williams, president of the DLCC. “And that means that the rights of all those people will be determined by who’s in power the day after the election.”A race to fill the funding gapDemocratic party leaders seem aware of the high-stakes surrounding state legislative races. Earlier this month, the Harris campaign and the Democratic National Committee announced a transfer of $25m in funds to help down-ballot candidates, including $2.5m for the DLCC. Williams said the transfer represented the party’s largest investment to date focused solely on winning state legislative chambers.“The underlying story here is that the Harris campaign, our federal officials [and] the party believe that we need to win up and down the ballot,” Williams said. “We know that our freedoms are on the line, that democracy is on the line in the states, and so investing in state legislatures is really an emerging cornerstone of Democrats’ strategy to protect against Maga [‘Make America great again’] extremism.”But the $2.5m investment, while significant, does not come close to closing with DLCC’s resource deficit against the RSLC. Democratic-aligned outside groups, such as the States Project and the Super Pac Forward Majority, are trying to help close that gap: Forward Majority is now on track to spend $45m this election cycle on promoting Democratic state legislative campaigns, the group announced on Wednesday. The States Project has also announced plans to spend $70m this cycle, after investing heavily in state legislative races two years ago.Forward Majority formed in 2017, after Republicans notched significant victories up and down the ballot in 2016. At the time, Democrats controlled 31 legislative chambers compared with Republicans’ 68. In the years since, Democrats have chipped away at that disadvantage, now controlling 39 chambers.“It was incredible in that decade or so to see people pay more attention to it, to recognize this level of the ballot is critically important,” said Leslie Martes, chief strategy officer at Forward Majority.Despite that progress, Martes warned against complacency, as Republican-aligned groups have shown a willingness to invest heavily in state legislative races as well. During the legislative races in Virginia last year, the conservative Pac Americans for Prosperity spent $2.2m, which represented the largest contribution of any outside group.“We can’t let the Republicans flood the zone with late money,” Martes said. “They have access to it, and we can never underestimate their ability to come in late.”Post-Roe momentumDemocrats had a good year in 2022 when it came to state legislative elections. They flipped the Minnesota senate and both chambers of the Michigan legislature, giving them governing trifectas in both states thanks to the Democratic governors there. Some of that momentum was attributed to Democratic voters’ increased focus on state legislatures after the supreme court overturned Roe v Wade in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionOf the 22 states that currently enforce an abortion ban of some kind, 19 of them are fully controlled by Republicans. (A judge struck down North Dakota’s abortion ban on Thursday, but the law had not yet been enjoined as of Friday afternoon.) Meanwhile, several states controlled by Democrats – including California, Minnesota and New Jersey – have expanded abortion rights since Roe was overturned. That contrast has enlightened many voters on the importance of state elections, Martes argued.“I think most people did not believe that Roe was going to fall,” she said. “And I think it’s been incredibly impactful for people to now know it’s up to the states … I think that’s really helped people focus in on state legislatures.”Williams hopes that greater awareness will translate into electoral success down ballot, as Democrats look to sustain the trifectas they won in 2022 and flip more legislative chambers.The DLCC’s to-do list for November is long. Democrats want to keep their control of the Michigan house and the Pennsylvania house, where they repeatedly defended their slim majority through several special elections since 2022. The party also hopes to break a Republican supermajority in North Carolina, where the state legislature was able to override the Democratic governor’s veto of a 12-week abortion ban. And in Arizona, Republicans have only one-seat majorities in both chambers, giving Democrats an opportunity for their first governing trifecta in the state since 1966.It is no coincidence that much of Democrats’ state legislative map overlaps with their presidential and congressional maps, Martes said.“The key to winning back Congress also runs through a path of picking up state legislative seats and protecting important incumbents,” Martes said.While leaders of both political parties are fond of saying that every vote matters, the truism is particularly relevant when it comes to state legislative races. Because the voting pool is smaller compared with a congressional or presidential race, a couple hundred votes often separate the winner from the loser in state legislative elections.In one stunning case that arose in 2018, a tied Virginia legislative election was decided by pulling a name out of a bowl, and the lucky Republican winner gave his party control of the house of delegates.While the narrow margins of such races may seem daunting, they can also be motivating, Williams argued.“It’s going to take one vote at a time and one legislative win over and over in all of these states,” Williams said. “I think we’re at such a moment where those efforts – seemingly small efforts – will make a huge difference. And we’ll be able to protect the rights of millions of people across the country.” More