United States Politics and Government

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Republicans Would Regret Letting Elon Musk Ax Weather Forecasting

      by

      One way Donald Trump may try to differentiate his second term from his first is by slashing the federal work force and budget and consolidating and restructuring a host of government agencies.For people who care about weather and climate, one of the most concerning proposals on the table is to dismantle the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The authors of Project 2025, a blueprint for the administration crafted by conservative organizations, claim erroneously that NOAA is “one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry” and should be “broken down and downsized.” An arm of Mr. Trump’s team, the Department of Government Efficiency, to be led by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, wants to eliminate $500 billion in spending by cutting programs whose funding has expired. That could include NOAA.With the rising costs of and vulnerability to extreme weather in a changing climate for the United States, dismantling or defunding NOAA would be a catastrophic error. Rather, there is a golden opportunity to modernize the agency by expanding its capacity for research and innovation. This would not only help Americans better prepare for and survive extreme weather but also keep NOAA from falling further behind similar agencies in Europe. While the incoming administration may want to take a sledgehammer to the federal government, there is broad, bipartisan support for NOAA in Congress. It is the job of the incoming Republican-controlled Congress to invest in its future.NOAA was established via executive order in 1970 by President Richard Nixon as an agency within the Department of Commerce. Currently its mission is to understand and predict changes in the climate, weather, ocean and coasts. It conducts basic research; provides authoritative services like weather forecasts, climate monitoring and marine resource management; and supports industries like energy, agriculture, fishing, tourism and transportation.The best-known part of NOAA, touching all of our daily lives, is the National Weather Service. This is where daily forecasts and timely warning of severe storms, hurricanes and blizzards come from. Using satellites, balloon launches, ships, aircraft and weather stations, NOAA and its offices around the country provide vital services like clockwork, free of charge — services that cannot be adequately replaced by the private sector in part because they wouldn’t necessarily be profitable.For most of its history, NOAA has largely avoided politicization especially because weather forecasting has been seen as nonpartisan. Members of Congress from both parties are highly engaged in its work. Unfortunately, legislation introduced by Representative Frank Lucas, Republican of Oklahoma — a state with a lot of tornadoes — that would have helped NOAA to update its weather research and forecasting programs passed the House but languished in the Senate and is unlikely to move forward in this session of Congress. However, in 2025 there is another opportunity to improve the agency and its services to taxpayers and businesses.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Picks Chad Chronister, a Florida Sheriff, as D.E.A. Administrator

      by

      The announcement of Sheriff Chad Chronister came after President-elect Donald J. Trump said that he would impose tariffs that would stay in place until Canada, Mexico and China halted the flow of drugs and migrants.President-elect Donald J. Trump on Saturday chose Chad Chronister, a veteran Florida sheriff, to be his administration’s top drug enforcement official, tasking him with delivering on campaign promises to curb the flow of fentanyl and other illegal drugs into the country.Appointed sheriff of Hillsborough County in 2017 by Gov. Rick Scott, the Republican who is now a senator, and re-elected twice, Sheriff Chronister has served on state and regional law enforcement boards, including the Florida Statewide Drug Policy Advisory Council.“For over 32 years, Sheriff Chad Chronister has served the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office and received countless awards for keeping his community SAFE,” Mr. Trump wrote in a social media post announcing his choice.Mr. Trump repeatedly highlighted the opioid crisis during his campaign, framing it as a major national security threat. The president-elect has threatened to impose damaging tariffs on China, Mexico and Canada in an effort to curb migration and the trafficking of drugs, particularly fentanyl, across U.S. borders.As head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, Sheriff Chronister will play a central role in addressing the escalating tensions surrounding fentanyl being brought into the United States.In response to the announcement, Sheriff Chronister posted on social media, “It is the honor of a lifetime to be nominated” for the position by Mr. Trump. He added, “I am deeply humbled by this opportunity to serve our nation.”The D.E.A., an arm of the Justice Department, said in its fiscal year 2025 budget request that 2023 was the highest year for fentanyl seizures since the agency’s inception more than half a century ago. In addition, the agency confiscated more than 77 million fentanyl pills and nearly 12,000 pounds of fentanyl powder. The agency has more than 10,000 employees, with offices in the U.S. and in more than 60 different countries. It has a budget of more than $3 billion.For comparison, Sheriff Chronister’s department in Florida, one of the largest sheriff’s offices in the state, has a 2024 budget of about $600 million and oversees more than 3,500 employees.Sheriff Chronister’s father-in-law, Edward J. DeBartolo Jr., received a pardon from Mr. Trump in 2021. Mr. DeBartolo, a former owner of the N.F.L.’s San Francisco 49ers, pleaded guilty in 1998 to concealing an extortion plot. Though he avoided prison, he was fined $1 million and was suspended for a year by the N.F.L. More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Says He Will Nominate Kash Patel to Run F.B.I.

      by

      President-elect Donald J. Trump turned to a firebrand loyalist to become director of the bureau, which he sees as part of a ‘deep state’ conspiracy against him.President-elect Donald J. Trump said on Saturday that he wants to replace Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. director, with Kash Patel, a hard-line critic of the bureau who has called for shutting down the agency’s Washington headquarters, firing its leadership and bringing the nation’s law enforcement agencies “to heel.”Mr. Trump’s planned nomination of Mr. Patel has echoes of his failed attempt to place another partisan firebrand, Matt Gaetz, atop the Justice Department as attorney general. It could run into hurdles in the Senate, which will be called on to confirm him, and is sure to send shock waves through the F.B.I., which Mr. Trump and his allies have come to view as part of a “deep state” conspiracy against him.Mr. Patel has been closely aligned with Mr. Trump’s belief that much of the nation’s law enforcement and national security establishment needs to be purged of bias and held accountable for what they see as unjustified investigations and prosecutions of Mr. Trump and his allies.Mr. Patel “played a pivotal role in uncovering the Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax, standing as an advocate for truth, accountability and the Constitution,” Mr. Trump said in announcing his choice in a social media post.He called Mr. Patel “a brilliant lawyer, investigator and ‘America First’ fighter who has spent his career exposing corruption, defending Justice, and protecting the American people.”Mr. Patel, a favorite of Mr. Trump’s political base, has worked as a federal prosecutor and a public defender, but has little of the law enforcement and management experience typical of F.B.I. directors.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Democrats Weigh Dumping Jerrold Nadler for Jamie Raskin in House Judiciary Committee

      by

      Some House Democrats want to oust aging committee leaders like Representative Jerrold Nadler in favor of younger lawmakers who they see as better suited to take on the president.House Democrats are considering pushing aside some of their most senior leaders from top posts in the next Congress, driven by a worry that aging members are not up to the task of countering President-elect Donald J. Trump and his loyal Republican allies in Congress.The debate has grown most intense in recent days as dozens of Democrats have been privately pressing Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland to challenge Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York for his position as the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. They are doing so out of concern that Mr. Nadler will be ineffective in pushing back against any efforts by Mr. Trump to abuse his power.Mr. Nadler, 77, the dean of New York’s congressional delegation, has made it clear he has no plans to step aside. And while Mr. Raskin, 61, is mulling a challenge, he has not yet decided whether to pursue one, according to colleagues familiar with his thinking who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the matter.“As a New Yorker, I have stood up to Donald Trump my entire career,” Mr. Nadler wrote in a letter to colleagues announcing his run for re-election to the post, in which he emphasized his history of going after Mr. Trump. “When he became president, I led the Judiciary Committee’s efforts to hold him accountable for his various abuses of power, culminating in two historic impeachments.”Mr. Raskin, a former professor of constitutional law, developed a progressive fan base for his work as the lead impeachment manager against Mr. Trump in 2021 and as the top Democrat on the House committee that investigated the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol that year. He is seen by many colleagues as more aggressive, articulate and shrewd than Mr. Nadler when it comes to taking on the former and future president.Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi has been among those privately encouraging him to challenge Mr. Nadler, according to the people familiar with the internal discussions.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Note to Democrats: It’s Time to Take Up Your Hammers

      by

      I would prefer to live in a world where the recent news that more than 146,000 New York City schoolchildren experienced homelessness during the last school year was regarded as a crisis demanding immediate changes in public policy. But if helping children isn’t enough to move New York’s political leaders to action — and, by all indications, it most certainly is not — they might consider doing it for the sake of the Democratic Party.There is a straight line from homeless schoolchildren to Donald Trump’s election victory.Homelessness is the most extreme manifestation of the nation’s housing crisis. America simply isn’t building enough housing, which has driven up prices, which has made it difficult for millions of households to keep up with monthly rent or mortgage payments. Every year, some of those people suffer at least a brief period of homelessness.Popular anger about the high cost of housing, which is by far the largest expense for most American households, helped to fuel Mr. Trump’s comeback. He recorded his strongest gains compared with the 2020 election in the areas where living costs are highest, according to an analysis by the Economic Innovation Group, a nonpartisan think tank.The results are more than a backlash against the party that happened to be in power. The animating principle of the Democratic Party is that government can improve the lives of the American people. The housing crisis is manifest proof that government is failing to do so. And it surely has not escaped the attention of the electorate that the crisis is most acute in New York City, Los Angeles and other places long governed by Democrats.Republicans promise to cut taxes and they cut taxes. Democrats promise to use tax dollars to solve problems and one in eight public school students in New York experienced homelessness last year. It is the ninth straight year the number of homeless schoolchildren in New York topped 100,000.The good news is that Democrats still have the power to do better. While the party will soon be sidelined in Washington, it is primarily local and state laws that impede home building, including zoning laws that limit development, building codes that raise costs and local control measures that give existing residents the power to prevent growth.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Pete Hegseth’s Mother Accused Her Son of Mistreating Women for Years

      by

      Penelope Hegseth made the accusation in an email to her son in 2018, amid his contentious divorce. She said on Friday that she regretted the email and had apologized to him.The mother of Pete Hegseth, President-elect Donald J. Trump’s pick for secretary of defense, wrote him an email in 2018 saying he had routinely mistreated women for years and displayed a lack of character.“On behalf of all the women (and I know it’s many) you have abused in some way, I say … get some help and take an honest look at yourself,” Penelope Hegseth wrote, stating that she still loved him.She also wrote: “I have no respect for any man that belittles, lies, cheats, sleeps around and uses women for his own power and ego. You are that man (and have been for years) and as your mother, it pains me and embarrasses me to say that, but it is the sad, sad truth.”Mrs. Hegseth, in a phone interview with The New York Times on Friday, said that she had sent her son an immediate follow-up email at the time apologizing for what she had written. She said she had fired off the original email “in anger, with emotion” at a time when he and his wife were going through a very difficult divorce.In the interview, she defended her son and disavowed the sentiments she had expressed in the initial email about his character and treatment of women. “It is not true. It has never been true,” she said. She added: “I know my son. He is a good father, husband.” She said that publishing the contents of the first email was “disgusting.”Questions about Mr. Hegseth’s treatment of women have emerged in the weeks since Mr. Trump chose him, a veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, to lead the Pentagon. The issue is expected to be a subject of scrutiny during Senate confirmation hearings.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Shouldn’t Trump Voters Be Viewed as Traitors?

      by

      The magazine’s Ethicist columnist on whether voters should be held accountable for their chosen candidate’s behavior.From my perspective, the attack on the Capitol spurred on by Donald Trump on Jan. 6, 2021, the efforts to nullify the results of the 2020 election with false electors and unfounded court cases and the persistent effort to discredit those election results without evidence amounted to an attempt to overthrow a pillar of our democracy. More to the point, 18 U.S. Code Chapter 115 includes crimes against the nation described as treason, misprision of treason, rebellion or insurrection, seditious conspiracy and advocating the overthrow of government. I hold anyone voting for Trump at least morally guilty for the consequences of Jan. 6 and everything that follows the recent election. Would you agree that people who vote for Trump in light of these circumstances are themselves guilty of treasonous acts? — Name WithheldFrom the Ethicist:Something like three-quarters of Americans, surveys over the past year report, think democracy in America is threatened. To go by exit-poll data, those voters supported Trump in about the same proportions as those who thought democracy was secure. In a study published last year, researchers at U.C. Berkeley and M.I.T. provided evidence that democratic back-sliding around the world — with citizens voting for authoritarian leaders — is driven in part by voters who believe in democracy but doubt that the other side does. The researchers found that such voters, once shown the actual levels of support for democracy among their opponents, became less likely to vote for candidates who violated democratic norms. The general point is that not understanding the actual views of people of other parties — and assuming the worst of them — can be dangerous for democracy.Trump voters, for the most part, don’t think he committed treason. And your position can’t be that unknowingly voting for someone guilty of treason is itself treasonous. Perhaps you think that they should believe him to have been treasonous. Similar issues were aired when Henry Wallace, otherwise a highly dissimilar figure, ran for president in 1948. He had denounced the Marshall Plan, wanted the Soviet Union to play a role in the governance of Germany’s western industrial heartland and — detractors thought — was a Stalin apologist.Historians can debate whether he was a voice of conscience or a pawn of America’s adversaries. But suppose you were among those who viewed him as a traitor. To have extended the indictment to his supporters would have been to criminalize political disagreement. Besides, if voting for someone who has done bad things makes you guilty of them, most voters are in deep trouble. It’s easy to be inflamed by someone with a habit of making inflammatory statements. But there may be a cost when you deem those who vote for the other side as ‘‘the enemy from within.’’ That’s a term that Trump has freely employed, of course. You’ll want to ask yourself whether protecting democracy is best served by adopting this attitude.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Justice Dept. Girds for a Test of Its Independence

      by

      President-elect Donald Trump’s plans to install loyalists have left officials fearful that he intends to carry out his threats of retribution but hopeful that rule-of-law norms can hold.It was an early case of Donald J. Trump seeking retribution through the Justice Department.In the first year of Mr. Trump’s first presidency, Attorney General Jeff Sessions appointed a top federal prosecutor to review whether the F.B.I. had failed to fully pursue investigations involving Hillary Clinton, including an inquiry into the Clinton Foundation’s ties to a Russian uranium mining operation.The appointment of the prosecutor, John W. Huber, the U.S. attorney in Utah, was championed by many on the right eager to turn the spotlight away from Mr. Trump’s ties to Moscow. But when Mr. Huber’s work ended years later with no charges or public report, Mr. Trump publicly called him a “garbage disposal unit for important documents.”As Mr. Trump begins filling out his administration and putting his stamp on Washington again, few issues loom larger than the resilience of the Justice Department’s tradition of independence and its commitment to the rule of law.Mr. Trump’s grievance-laden campaign rhetoric has left many current and former agency officials fearful that he will seek to turn it into a department of revenge aimed at foes inside and outside government.They said they worried that Mr. Trump’s past experiences with the Justice Department mean he is less likely this time to settle for an investigation like Mr. Huber’s — one that leads to little punishment or pain for anyone.In an interview, Mr. Huber characterized his work during Mr. Trump’s first term as a sign of the Justice Department’s ability to withstand any political pressure.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More