US Congress

Subterms

    Latest story

    138 Shares24 Views

    US justice department joins lawsuit to block California’s new electoral map

    by

    The justice department on Thursday joined a lawsuit brought by California Republicans to block the state’s new congressional map, escalating a legal battle over a redistricting effort designed to give Democrats a better chance of retaking the House of Representatives next year.The lawsuit, filed in federal court in California, challenges the congressional map championed by Gavin Newsom, the state’s Democratic governor, in response to a Republican gerrymander in Texas, sought by Donald Trump. The justice department’s intervention in the case sets up a high-profile showdown between the Trump administration and Newsom, one of the president’s chief antagonists and a possible 2028 contender.“California’s redistricting scheme is a brazen power grab that tramples on civil rights and mocks the democratic process,” said Pam Bondi, the US attorney general. “Governor Newsom’s attempt to entrench one-party rule and silence millions of Californians will not stand.”Democrats have expressed confidence that the newly approved maps will withstand a legal challenge.“These losers lost at the ballot box and soon they will also lose in court,” Brandon Richards, a Newsom spokesperson, said in a statement.Republicans brought the lawsuit the morning after California voters decisively approved the redistricting measure, known as Proposition 50, which suspended the maps drawn by the state’s independent commission and installed new House districts designed to help Democrats secure up to five GOP-held seats. It was the most significant counterpunch by Democrats in the unprecedented redistricting war that began in Texas and spread across the country as Trump attempts to secure House Republicans’ fragile majority for the final years of his second term.The plaintiffs assert that California’s map improperly used race as a factor to heavily favor Hispanic voters in violation of the US constitution. It asks a judge to block California from taking effect.“Race cannot be used as a proxy to advance political interests, but that is precisely what the California General Assembly did with Prop 50,” Jesus Osete, the second-highest ranking official in the Civil Rights Division, said in a statement, quoting from the lawsuit. “Californians were sold an illegal, racially gerrymandered map, but the US Constitution prohibits its use in 2026 and beyond.”The plaintiffs are being represented by the Dhillon Law Group, which was founded by Harmeet Dhillon, who is now assistant attorney general overseeing the US Department of Justice civil rights division. The firm also represented California Republicans earlier this year in their unsuccessful attempt to prevent the special election from taking place.Dhillon has been recused from this case, the justice department said.Unlike elsewhere, where Republican state legislatures have enacted gerrymanders, California’s plan required voter approval, which it received last week, with nearly 65% of the vote.Democrats need to flip just a handful of Republican-held House seats to take control of the chamber in next year’s midterm election. The party that holds the majority will shape the final years of Trump’s second term in the White House, determining whether a unified Republican Congress will continue to deliver on his agenda or whether he will be met with resistance, investigations and possibly even a third impeachment attempt. More

    More stories

    • 113 Shares32 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats sift through shutdown’s ashes after resistance finally breached

      by

      More than 42 days ago, beleaguered congressional Democrats employed a tactic they were not known for using – refusing to fund the government unless their demands, in this case, an extension of tax credits that lowered costs for Affordable Care Act health plans, were met.Fast forward to Wednesday evening, and the federal government is back open, the Democrats’ resistance breached by the combined forces of Congress’s Republican majorities and a splinter group of Democratic senators who provided just enough votes to get a funding bill past the chamber’s filibuster.The minority party’s lawmakers are now sifting through the ashes of what wound up being the longest government shutdown in history. Though it was the Republicans whose demands fueled other recent funding lapses, this one ended just like those did: with the minority party winning no concessions from the party in power.And yet, many Democrats are calling it a win anyway, arguing it gave them an opportunity to prove to voters that, despite accusations to the contrary, they are still capable of putting up a fight in Donald Trump’s Washington.“I hope that people in America will see those of us who are willing to stand, and hold the line for them,” said Pennsylvania congresswoman Summer Lee.Nor do they plan to let the issue rest any time soon.“These are choices that are being made,” said Wesley Bell, who may after next year be the only Democratic congressman in Missouri, if the state’s Republican-friendly gerrymander is allowed to stand.“[Republicans] have the majorities in the House, Senate and the presidency, and if they wanted to address the skyrocketing health care costs, they have the ability to do it, and they have a willing partner in Democrats,” he said.The spending standoff was a turnaround from months that the party spent seeing its priorities mauled by the ascendant Republican government, enabled by a conservative-dominated supreme court. The country’s main foreign aid agency was closed, droves of federal workers were fired or urged to resign, the premier federal health program for poor and disabled Americans was downsized and tax cuts directed at businesses and the wealthy were extended forever.Democratic-aligned groups succeeded in getting millions of people to take to the streets in protests nationwide against what they saw as Trump’s executive overreach, but the brutal realities of their poor showing in the 2024 election were unavoidable. Democratic lawmakers had few avenues in Congress to block Trump’s policies, and the supreme court repeatedly turned back legal challenges to his orders.Then Congress was asked to extend the government’s funding authorization beyond the end of September, when it was set to expire, and Democrats saw their chance to issue an ultimatum. The current Affordable Care Act tax credits, which were created under Joe Biden, were to expire at the end of the year, and they wanted them extended. They also wanted the cuts to Medicaid reversed, and an undoing of Trump’s use of rescissions to slash congressionally approved funding.It was strategic ground to make a stand, for Democrats had long put healthcare at the center of their pitch to voters. In the end, all they got in the deal that reopened the government was a promise from John Thune, the Senate majority leader, to hold a vote on a bill to reauthorize the credits. There’s no telling if enough Republicans will support it to pass the chamber, if House Republican leaders would allow it to come up for a vote, or if Trump would sign it.The party may have reaped rewards that are less tangible. Polls consistently showed voters putting more blame on the GOP for the shutdown than the Democrats. Last week, the party swept off-year elections in several states, in part by flipping voters who had turned out for Trump last year.The choice of tactics nonetheless disquieted some in the party. As the shutdown went on, Trump moved to halt payments of the government’s largest food aid program, while federal workers missed paychecks.North Carolina congressman Don Davis, one of six Democrats who voted for the funding bill that ended the shutdown in the House of Representatives, said tales of hardship from his constituents convinced him it was time to end the standoff.“I had a person, a constituent, talking to me, literally in tears. That’s not what I want,” he said. Republicans in North Carolina’s senate recently passed a new congressional map that will make his district more difficult to win next year.All signs point to the reauthorization of government funding being merely a lull in the larger war over healthcare in the United States.The funding bill Congress passed keeps the government open only through January, meaning Democrats could issue another set of demands for their votes then. Just before the House voted to restart funding on Wednesday evening, Democratic minority leader Hakeem Jeffries made clear the party was not letting this defeat deter them.“We will stay on this issue until we get this issue resolved for everyday Americans,” he said. More

    • 125 Shares36 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump signs funding bill to end longest US government shutdown

      by

      The longest US government shutdown in history ended on Wednesday after more than 42 days, following the House of Representative’s passage of a bill negotiated by Republicans and a splinter group of Democrat-aligned senators.The compromise sets the stage for government operations to return to normal through January, while leaving unresolved the issue of expiring tax credits for Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare health plans, which most Democrats demanded be extended in any deal to reopen the government.After it was unveiled over the weekend, the Senate approved the compromise on Monday, and the House followed suit two days later by a margin of 222 in favor and 209 against, with two not voting. Donald Trump signed the bill on Wednesday night, saying “we’re sending a clear message that we will never give in to extortion, because that’s what it was … the Democrats tried to extort our country”.Six Democrats broke with their party to vote for the bill: Adam Gray of California, Tom Suozzi of New York, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington, Don Davis of North Carolina, Henry Cuellar of Texas and Jared Golden of Maine. Two Republicans, Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Greg Steube of Florida, voted against it.“The Democrat shutdown is finally over thanks to House and Senate Republicans,” House Republican leadership said in a statement.“There is absolutely no question now that Democrats are responsible for millions of American families going hungry, millions of travelers left stranded in airports, and our troops left wondering if they would receive their next paycheck.”In remarks on the House floor shortly before the vote, the Democratic minority leader Hakeem Jeffries had pledged to continue to press for the subsidies’ extensions.“This fight is not over. We’re just getting started,” he said. “Either Republicans finally decide to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits this year, or the American people will throw Republicans out of their jobs next year and end the speakership of Donald J Trump once and for all. That’s how this fight ends.”The spending standoff was the biggest battle between congressional Democrats and Republicans since Trump returned to the White House earlier this year. It resulted in unprecedented disruptions to government services, with the Trump administration ordering cuts to commercial air travel across the country, and the first-ever halt to the largest federal food aid program.Reeling from their election defeats last year, Democrats had seized on an end-of-September expiration of government funding to make a stand on healthcare, a signature issue of the party over the past decade and a half. The Obamacare tax credits were created during Joe Biden’s presidency, and lowered premiums for enrollers of plans bought under the law.Democrats wanted them extended as part of any deal to continue government funding. The party made other demands as well, including curbs on Trump’s use of rescissions to slash money Congress had previously authorized and an undoing of cuts to Medicaid which Republicans had approved earlier in the year. But as the battle went on, it became clear that an extension of the subsidies was the main objective.Republicans, who control both the House and the Senate, counter-offered with a bill to fund the government through the third week of November, without any spending cuts or major changes to policy. They passed the measure through the lower chamber with only a single Democrat in support, but the minority used the Senate’s filibuster to block its passage there.The shutdown began on 1 October, resulting in around 700,000 federal workers being furloughed. Hundreds of thousands of others, from active duty military to law enforcement to airport security screeners, remained on the job without pay.Russell Vought, the White House office of management and budget director known for his hostility towards the federal workforce, seized on the funding lapse to order further layoffs of government employees. He also cut funding for infrastructure projects in states that voted for Kamala Harris last year.Though Trump ordered military members be paid in a move that many experts called likely illegal, other federal workers missed paychecks. Food banks began reporting increased demand as the shutdown went on, with the need worsening after the White House halted payments under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamps, citing the government funding lapse.Last week, Sean Duffy, the transportation secretary, ordered a cutback in flights at US airports, saying air traffic controllers were facing unprecedented strain after weeks of unpaid work. Widespread flight cancellations were reported in the days that followed.In the Senate, most Democrats remained onboard with the party’s strategy for weeks. Senate majority leader John Thune held 14 votes on the GOP funding measure, but only three members of the minority caucus ever broke ranks to support it.In early November, Democrats swept off-year elections, winning gubernatorial elections in Virginia and New Jersey by significant margins, as well as voter approval for new congressional maps in California that will help the party’s candidates.Democratic leaders said the wins vindicated their strategy in the funding fight, a statement Trump echoed, saying “the shutdown is a big factor” in the GOP’s poor performance. He began pressing Republican senators to scrap the filibuster, which would have negated the 60-vote threshold spending legislation needs to clear in the chamber, where the GOP holds 53 seats.Meanwhile, a small group of moderate members of the Senate Democratic caucus had been negotiating a compromise to end the shutdown. It ended up funding the government through January and undoing the layoffs the Trump administration had ordered after the shutdown began.But it included no additional funding for the Affordable Care Act tax credits – instead, Thune agreed to allow a vote on the issue by mid-December. There’s no telling if it will win the GOP support needed to pass, and Mike Johnson, the Republican House speaker, has not said he will put any legislation up for a vote.Despite howls of outrage from both House and Senate Democrats, the Senate passed it with 60 votes on Monday: eight from lawmakers in the Democratic caucus, and the rest from Republicans.Yet the fight over the ACA subsidies is unlikely to be over. Enrollers in the plans received notices of premium increases in November because of the tax credits’ expiration. One study predicted they would rise by an average of 26%, potentially bringing them to levels unaffordable to many.With government funding expiring again at the end of January, Democrats could use the opportunity to again demand the subsidies be extended.“Dozens of House Republicans have been claiming over the last few weeks that they know that is something that needs to be addressed,” Jeffries said in a Tuesday interview with CNN.“And now we’re going to have to see some action or whether it was just talk from these House Republicans because Democrats are going to continue to stay in the arena as it relates to dealing with the healthcare crisis that Republicans have visited on the American people.” More

    • 213 Shares34 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump calls Epstein emails a Democratic deflection after correspondence alleges president ‘knew about the girls’ – live

      by

      In a post on Truth Social, the president has addressed the batch of emails released by House Democrats on the oversight committee.“The Democrats are trying to bring up the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax again because they’ll do anything at all to deflect on how badly they’ve done on the Shutdown,” Trump wrote. “There should be no deflections to Epstein or anything else, and any Republicans involved should be focused only on opening up our Country, and fixing the massive damage caused by the Democrats!”Arizona Democrat Adelita Grijalva was sworn in by Mike Johnson, the US House speaker, on Wednesday, ending a seven-week standoff that prevented the incoming congresswoman from taking her seat and clearing the path for a vote to release the Jeffrey Epstein files.House Democrats burst into applause on the House floor when Grijalva took the oath of office during a ceremonial swearing-in, shortly before the chamber was poised to take up legislation that would end the longest federal government shutdown in US history. The ceremony comes 49 days after Grijalva won a late September special election to succeed her father, the longtime congressman Raúl Grijalva, who died in March.Grijalva’s arrival does more than narrow the already razor-thin Republican majority. She has vowed to become the 218th and final signature on a discharge petition that would automatically trigger a House floor vote on legislation demanding the justice department release additional files on deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

      A new batch of emails released by House Democrats on the oversight committee seemed to suggest that Donald Trump was aware of Jeffrey Epstein’s conduct. In the three emails released, Epstein apparently told his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell that Trump “spent hours” at his house with one of Epstein’s victims. In two other emails to author Michael Wolff, Epstein wrote that “of course he knew about the girls”, referring to the Trump. According to the exchanges, Epstein also solicited Wolff’s advice about how he should handle Trump discussing their friendship in an interview with CNN. “I think you should let him hang himself,” Wolff writes. “If he says he hasn’t been on the plane or to the house, then that gives you a valuable PR and political currency.”

      Later, the committee’s Republican majority countered by releasing its own tranche of 23,000 documents, accusing Democrats of “cherrypicking” the memos “to generate clickbait”. The GOP members also insisted the redacted victim that the late sex-offender refers to in his emails was actually one of his most prominent accusers – Virginia Giuffre.

      At the White House today, the press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said that the new correspondence released today “proves absolutely nothing other than the fact that President Trump did nothing wrong”. She repeated Republicans’ claims that Giuffre was the unnamed victim. “She maintained that there was nothing inappropriate she ever witnessed, that President Trump was always extremely professional and friendly to her,” Leavitt added.

      For his part, Trump labelled the move by Democrats as “deflection” for their performance during the record-breaking government shutdown. In a post on Truth Social, the president wrote: “There should be no deflections to Epstein or anything else, and any Republicans involved should be focused only on opening up our Country, and fixing the massive damage caused by the Democrats!”

      The Epstein investigation is likely to receive revived interest as the House prepares to return from recess and vote on a bill to reopen the federal government, as Mike Johnson is set to swear in representative-elect Adelita Grijalva after seven weeks of waiting. The soon-to-be Democratic lawmaker is set to be the 218th signature needed on a discharge petition, a procedural tool that would force a vote on the House floor to release the full tranche of Epstein investigation records.

      While the news of the Epstein email drop dominated the day, the House is set to vote on a funding bill to finally reopen the federal government today. Republican leaders, as well as Trump, expect the bill to pass. The extension would extend government funding at current levels through January 2026, along with three year-long provisions that will fund programs at the Department of Veterans Affairs, the USDA and the FDA, and legislative branch operations. It would also reinstate all fired workers that were let go during the shutdown and guarantee back pay for those furloughed.
      At 4pm ET, we can expect the House to reconvene after more than 50 days of recess, and for the Republican speaker, Mike Johnson, to swear in representative-elect Adelita Grijalva.Johnson has staved off the ceremony for the soon-to-be Arizona Democrat for weeks while the government shutdown continued. She’s expected to be the final, and 218th, signature needed to force a vote on the House floor for the full release of the Epstein files.Earlier, CNN reported that top Trump administration officials were planning to meet today to discuss the discharge petition that would force a vote on the House floor to release the complete Epstein files.According to CNN’s source, the planned meeting would include the US attorney general, Pam Bondi; the deputy attorney general, Todd Blanche; Kash Patel, the FBI director; and Lauren Boebert, a Republican Colorado congresswoman and a Trump loyalist who has signed on to the effort for the records to be released.In the White House briefing room, the press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, appeared to confirm the meeting, branding it as the latest example of the administration’s commitment to “transparency”.My colleague Adam Gabbatt has put together a helpful timeline of some of the most significant developments in the Epstein saga that continues to dog the administration. Starting in 2019, when Epstein was charged with federal sex-trafficking crimes, and taking us up to the batch of Epstein’s emails released today that suggest Trump knew about the late financier’s conduct.In a post on Truth Social, the president has addressed the batch of emails released by House Democrats on the oversight committee.“The Democrats are trying to bring up the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax again because they’ll do anything at all to deflect on how badly they’ve done on the Shutdown,” Trump wrote. “There should be no deflections to Epstein or anything else, and any Republicans involved should be focused only on opening up our Country, and fixing the massive damage caused by the Democrats!”Ahead of the House preparing to vote on a Senate-passed bill to reopen the government, Democrats in the lower chamber held a press conference on the steps of the Capitol.“Republicans control the House, the Senate and the presidency,” said the House minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries. “They own the mess that has been created in the United States of America.”Today’s legislation includes none of the healthcare provisions that Democrats made a centerpiece of their fight with the GOP when the government shut down. After some senators in the Democratic caucus broke ranks and voted to pass the bill, much of the party slammed their decision.Today, Jeffries offered more fighting words:
      We work for the American people as we stand on the Capitol steps, ready to continue this battle on the House floor, a battle that we waged week after week after week, and that will continue regardless of the outcome … We’ll continue to fight to stand up for the Affordable Care Act and an extension of the tax credits. We’ll continue to fight for your hospitals. We’ll continue to fight for your nursing homes.
      As the House prepares to vote on a funding bill that would end the longest government shutdown on record, the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) has sent a letter to lawmakers in the lower chamber urging them to pass the legislation.“Passing this bill will reopen the government and allow federal employees to return to the work of serving the American people. It will ensure safety and security for our vital transportation systems,” wrote Daniel Horowitz, legislative director of the largest union representing federal workers.The AFGE argues that Senate-passed resolution includes several provisions beneficial for civil servants affected by the shutdown. This includes ensuring back pay to furloughed workers, reinstating those terminated from their positions by wide-scale reductions in force when the government shuttered, and preventing further layoffs while the continuing resolution keeps agencies open through January.Leavitt said that she hadn’t spoken to the president about whether he believes that Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, the former prince, should sit for an interview with congressional lawmakers on the House oversight committee, after they requested his cooperation in their ongoing investigation into Jeffrey Epstein.Responding to question about the validity of the emails released by House oversight Democrats, Leavitt responded plainly. “These emails prove absolutely nothing other than the fact that President Trump did nothing wrong,” the press secretary said. “Jeffrey Epstein was a member at Mar-a-Lago until President Trump kicked him out because Jeffrey Epstein was a pedophile and he was a creep.”Leavitt repeated Republicans’ statements identifying the redacted name in the batch of emails as Virginia Giuffre. “She maintained that there was nothing inappropriate she ever witnessed, that president Trump was always extremely professional and friendly to her,” Leavitt reiterated, of the outspoken victim of Epstein’s abuse, who died by suicide earlier this year.Leavitt is spending most of her opening remarks blaming Democrats for the longest shutdown on record, as the House prepares to vote on a bill to reopen the government.“The Democrats’ weakness and their unwillingness to buck the fringe members of their party dragged this harmful shutdown on for seven weeks and inflicted massive pain on to the American public,” she said.The White House briefing has begun, and we’ll bring you the latest from Karoline Leavitt as she’ll face questions from reporters.Dominating the news of the day: a small batch of emails released by House Democrats on the oversight committee in which the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein said that Donald Trump “spent hours” at his home in an email to Ghislaine Maxwell – the late sex offender’s accomplice.In one of the email chains in the larger tranche released by the House oversight committee, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor (formerly known as Prince Andrew) appeared to tell Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, “I can’t take any more of this,” in March 2011 after a newspaper said they would be running a story about the trio.In the email chain, Maxwell was initially forwarded the press inquiry from the Mail on Sunday from somebody named Mark Cohen, who told her: “FYI, following up on my email of this morning. Again, I have no intention of responding unless you direct otherwise.”After the email was forwarded from Maxwell to Epstein, and then from Epstein to somebody listed as “The Duke” on 4 March 2011, Andrew appears to respond: “What? I don’t know any of this. How are you responding?”Epstein responds: “Just got it two minutes ago. I’ve asked g [sic] lawyers to send a letter. Not sure … it’s so salcisous [sic] and ridiculous, im [sic] not sure how to respond, the only person she didn’t have sex with was Elvis.”Andrew then appears to reply to Epstein, saying:
      Please make sure that every statement or legal letter states clearly that I am NOT involved and that I knew and know NOTHING about any of these allegations. I can’t take any more of this my end. More

    • 188 Shares26 Views

      in US Politics

      Arizona’s Adelita Grijalva sworn in after seven weeks in move that could force Epstein vote

      by

      Arizona Democrat Adelita Grijalva was sworn in by Mike Johnson, the US House speaker, on Wednesday, ending a seven-week standoff that prevented the incoming congresswoman from taking her seat and clearing the path for a vote to release the Jeffrey Epstein files.House Democrats burst into applause on the House floor when Grijalva took the oath of office during a ceremonial swearing in, shortly before the chamber was poised to take up legislation that would end the longest federal government shutdown in US history. The ceremony comes 49 days after Grijalva won a late September special election to succeed her father, the longtime congressman Raúl Grijalva, who died in March.Grijalva’s arrival does more than narrow the already razor-thin Republican majority. She has vowed to become the 218th and final signature on a discharge petition that would automatically trigger a House floor vote on legislation demanding the justice department release additional files on deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.Already on Wednesday morning, House oversight Democrats released “never-before-seen” Epstein emails that mention Trump, including a 2011 message to Ghislaine Maxwell in which Epstein wrote that Trump “spent hours at my house” with a sex trafficking victim, calling Trump a “dog that hasn’t barked”.A 2019 email to author Michael Wolff states that “of course [Trump] knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop”.But lawmakers say many additional files remain sealed that for now leave unanswered questions about Epstein’s network and associates that a discharge petition could force the House to address.The petition, introduced by Kentucky congressman Thomas Massie and California congressman Ro Khanna in early September, needs just one more signature to force a vote under House rules. Support has come overwhelmingly from Democrats, though Republican representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert and Nancy Mace have also signed on.Democrats accused Johnson of blocking Grijalva’s swearing-in specifically to prevent the Epstein vote. Senator Ruben Gallego of Arizona said that Johnson was “covering up for pedophiles.”If the Epstein files legislation clears the House, it would still need Senate approval. But the vote itself would force lawmakers into an uncomfortable choice between voters demanding transparency about Epstein’s powerful associates and an actively discouraging Donald Trump administration who has pushed to avoid a deeper investigation.Epstein, a financier with connections to numerous high-profile figures, including Trump, died in federal custody in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. His death was ruled a suicide.While previous document releases have detailed some of his associations, lawmakers have argued that a significant tranche of information remains sealed in justice department files.Johnson kept the House out of session following Grijalva’s victory as part of a strategy to pressure Senate Democrats to vote to reopen the government during the shutdown. The Republican speaker claimed he could not administer the oath while the chamber remained inactive, though Grijalva won a week before the shutdown began and no such House rule exists prohibiting the swearing in of newly elected members during recesses.Democrats also widely rejected Johnson’s explanation, noting in a 180-signature letter that he had sworn in two Florida Republicans earlier this year while the House was out. Arizona’s Democratic attorney general, Kris Mayes, filed a lawsuit last month seeking to force Johnson to seat Grijalva.Johnson defended his actions by claiming he followed precedent set by former speaker Nancy Pelosi, who he said delayed similar ceremonies for Republicans. He insists his decision had nothing to do with avoiding an explosive vote on Epstein-related documents, though that ignores an intense pressure campaign from Trump allies attempting to spare the president from attention due to his longtime social ties with Epstein.Speaking to CNN on Tuesday, Grijalva said she plans to directly confront Johnson about the delay, calling the avoidance “undemocratic”, “unconstitutional” and “illegal”.“This kind of obstruction cannot happen again,” she said. More

    • 138 Shares40 Views

      in US Politics

      Top House Democrats vow to oppose shutdown bill over healthcare funding

      by

      As House Republican leaders move to hold a vote on legislation to reopen the US government, top Democrats vowed on Tuesday to oppose the bill for not addressing their demand for more healthcare funding.Democrats have for weeks insisted that any measure to fund the government include an extension of tax credits for Affordable Care Act health plans, which were created under Joe Biden and due to expire at the end of the year, sending premiums for enrollees higher.With Donald Trump’s encouragement, Congress’s Republican leaders refused, sparking a spending standoff that resulted in the longest government shutdown in US history. But the Democrats’ resolve cracked earlier this week, when a splinter group in the Senate joined with the GOP to craft a compromise bill that reauthorizes government funding through January, without extending the tax credits.The Senate passed that legislation on Monday evening, and the House of Representatives is expected to vote on it on Wednesday afternoon. The House rules committee will consider the bill on Tuesday evening, setting the stage for it to come to the House floor on Wednesday.Top House Democrats oppose it, with the minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries, calling it a “partisan Republican spending bill that continues to gut the healthcare of the American people.“It’s our expectation that the House will vote at some point tomorrow and House Democrats will strongly oppose any legislation that does not decisively address the Republican healthcare crisis,” Jeffries told CNN on Tuesday.The House’s largest ideological caucus, the centrist New Democrat Coalition, has announced its opposition to the measure.“While New Dems always seek common ground, our coalition remains united in opposition to legislation that sacrifices the wellbeing of the constituents we’re sworn to serve,” chair Brad Schneider said.“Unfortunately, the Senate-passed bill fails to address our constituents’ top priorities, doing nothing to protect their access to healthcare, lower their costs or curb the administration’s extreme agenda.”The sentiment appears much the same in the Congressional Progressive caucus, where chair Greg Casar called the measure “a betrayal of millions of Americans counting on Democrats to fight for them”.The Democratic opposition threatens to make for a tight vote for the Republican speaker, Mike Johnson, who has kept the House out of session for more than 50 days inan attempt to pressure Senate Democrats into caving to the GOP’s demands.With a 219-member majority assuming full attendance, Johnson can only afford to lose two votes on the bill, and the Kentucky representative Thomas Massie is likely to vote no.But Democrats may have their own defectors. Maine’s Jared Golden, who last week announced he would not seek another term representing a district that voted for Trump last year, was the only Democrat in September to vote for a Republican funding bill that did not extend the tax credit. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, whose Washington state district is similarly friendly to the president, also expressed her support for that bill.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBoth lawmakers’ offices did not immediately respond to a request for comment on how they would vote on the Senate’s compromise.The compromise bill cleared the Senate on Monday evening by 60 votes, the minimum it needed to overcome the chamber’s thresholds for advancement. All Republicans supported the measure’s passage except for Rand Paul of Kentucky, along with eight moderate members of the Democratic caucus, several of whom were recently re-elected, or serving their final terms in office.That group was composed of Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Tim Kaine of Virginia, Dick Durbin of Illinois, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, Jacky Rosen of Nevada and Angus King of Maine, an independent who caucuses with the party.While they did not win an extension of the tax credits, the group claimed credit for getting the Republican Senate majority leader, John Thune, to agree to hold a vote by mid-December on extending the subsidies. However, it remains to be seen if enough Republicans will support its passage, and Johnson has not agreed to put the issue to a vote in the House.Though the Senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer, did not back the bill publicly, Shaheen told Fox News on Monday that the group “kept leadership informed throughout” their talks. Progressive organizations who backed Schumer’s strategy during the shutdown have now turned on him, for allowing the compromise to come together.Indivisible announced plans to support Democratic candidates in primaries who oppose Schumer remaining as the party’s leader, and MoveOn joined in the calls for him to bow out.“It is time for Senator Schumer to step aside as minority leader to make room for those who are willing to fight fire with fire when the basic needs of working people are on the line,” MoveOn Political Action’s executive director, Katie Bethell, said. More

    • 200 Shares45 Views

      in US Politics

      Democratic candidate for Congress criticizes deal to end shutdown – which her mother voted to advance

      by

      A Democratic congressional candidate who posted to social media criticism of the bipartisan deal that looks set to end the government shutdown omitted to mention that her mother was among the party’s rebel senators who voted to approve it.Stefany Shaheen, who is seeking to represent New Hampshire in the US House of Representatives, said in the post to X that she “cannot support this deal when [House] Speaker [Mike] Johnson refuses to even allow a vote to extend health care tax credits”.Jeanne Shaheen, her mother and a US senator of New Hampshire, was one of seven Democrats to break ranks with party leadership on Sunday night and vote to advance a funding bill that will end the 40-day shutdown without securing guarantees for healthcare subsidies. Those seven were joined by an independent who caucuses with Democrats.“Clearly we had different approaches here,” Stefany Shaheen said in an interview Monday, reported by the New York Times, after questions arose over her post. “I can’t speak for her. I think she did what she believes is right.”The deal, which extends government funding until 30 January, contains only the promise of a vote on a healthcare bill in the Senate next month, not an extension of tax credits for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that helps keep premiums low, which had been a key Democratic negotiating position.The elder Shaheen, a senator since 2009, said in a statement that she stood by her decision. “This was the only deal on the table. It was our best chance to reopen the government and immediately begin negotiations to extend the ACA tax credits,” she said.The post by her daughter condemning the deal but leaving out her mother’s involvement drew a swift and predictable backlash on social media, mediaite.com reported.“Your mom just ruined your career,” one user on X posted, while another said: “We don’t vote for the children of traitors”.In her post, Stefany Shaheen, a mother of four children whose campaign biography describes her as a “passionate advocate for groundbreaking medical research and a successful entrepreneur and business leader”, said improving healthcare was “the cause of my life”.In a section of her website about why she is running for Congress during the 2026 midterm elections, Shaheen wrote that she knew “it’s not enough to just get mad” when Donald Trump is “crushing medical research, and Republicans [are] slashing Medicaid, and healthcare for kids, seniors, and veterans – all to give big tax breaks to billionaires and corporations”.According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, about 15 million people will lose healthcare by 2034 because of Medicaid and ACA marketplace cuts pushed through by Republicans; an additional 4.2 million people will lose marketplace cover if premium tax credits are not extended, one possible consequence of the vote by Shaheen’s mother and the other Democratic rebel senators.Jeanne Shaheen and another Democrat who voted yes, Dick Durbin of Illinois, have already announced they will be retiring instead of fighting for re-election next year. None of the other five, Catherine Cortez Masto (Nevada), John Fetterman (Pennsylvania), Margaret Wood Hassan (New Hampshire), Tim Kaine (Virginia), and Jacky Rosen (Nevada), must face voters until November 2028.Angus King (Maine) also voted yes as an independent who caucuses with the Democrats. More

    • 113 Shares32 Views

      in US Politics

      US Senate vote marks step towards ending federal shutdown

      by

      The US Senate on Sunday took a key vote on a bill that would end the record-setting federal government shutdown without extending the healthcare subsidies that Democrats have demanded.Senators began voting on Sunday night to advance House-passed stopgap funding legislation that Senate majority leader John Thune said would be amended to combine another short-term spending measure with a package of three full-year appropriations bills.The package would still have to be passed by the House of Representatives and sent to Donald Trump for his signature, a process that could take several days.Senate Democrats so far have resisted efforts to reopen the government, aiming to pressure Republicans into agreeing to extend subsidies for Affordable Care Act health plans, which expire at the end of the year. Thune said that, per the deal under consideration, the Senate would agree to hold a separate vote later on the subsidies.Richard Blumenthal, a Democratic senator for Connecticut, told reporters that he would vote against the funding measure but suggested there could be enough Democratic support to pass it.“I am unwilling to accept a vague promise of a vote at some indeterminate time, on some undefined measure that extends the healthcare tax credits,” Blumenthal said.“The Senate might get a vote” on the health insurance credits, Ben Ray Luján, a New Mexico Democrat, said. “I’ll emphasize ‘might.’ But is Speaker Johnson gonna do anything? Is the president gonna do anything?”Mike Johnson, the Republican House speaker, has previously said he would not hold a vote on a plan to extend the tax credits that make health insurance affordable for millions of Americans who are not insured through their employers.Two leading progressives in the Senate Democratic caucus were even more dismissive of the emerging compromise. “It’s a mistake,” Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts told Punchbowl News. “It would be a policy and political disaster for Democrats to cave,” Bernie Sanders of Vermont said.Democrats in the House expressed their dismay. Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader, promised to fight the proposed legislation. “We will not support spending legislation advanced by Senate Republicans that fails to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits. We will fight the GOP bill in the House of Representatives,” Jeffries said in a statement.“A deal that doesn’t reduce health care costs is a betrayal of millions of Americans counting on Democrats to fight for them”, Greg Casar, a Texas Democrat who leads the House progressive caucus, wrote on X. “Republicans want health care cuts. Accepting nothing but a pinky promise from Republicans isn’t a compromise – it’s capitulation. Millions of families would pay the price.”“Unacceptable,” Florida congressman Maxwell Frost chimed in. “There are 189,000 people in my district who will be paying 50-300% more for the same, and in many cases worse, healthcare. I won’t do that to the people I represent. I’m a NO on this ‘deal.’”Democrats outside Washington denounced the compromise as well. “Pathetic. This isn’t a deal. It’s a surrender. Don’t bend the knee!” California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, wrote on social media.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSunday marked the 40th day of the shutdown, which has sidelined federal workers and affected food aid, parks and travel, while air traffic control staffing shortages threaten to derail travel during the busy Thanksgiving holiday season late this month. Thom Tillis, a Republican senator from North Carolina, said the mounting effects of the shutdown have pushed the chamber toward an agreement. He said the final piece, a new resolution that would fund government operations into late January, would also reverse at least some of the Trump administration’s mass layoffs of federal workers.“Temperatures cool, the atmospheric pressure increases outside and all of a sudden it looks like things will come together,” Tillis told reporters. Should the government remain closed for much longer, economic growth could turn negative in the fourth quarter, especially if air travel does not return to normal levels by Thanksgiving, White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett warned on the CBS Face the Nation show. Thanksgiving falls on 27 November this year.Americans shopping for 2026 Obamacare health insurance plans are facing a more than doubling of monthly premiums on average, health experts estimate, with the pandemic-era subsidies due to expire at the end of the year. Republicans rejected a proposal on Friday by Democratic Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer to vote to reopen the government in exchange for a one-year extension of tax credits that lower costs for plans under the Affordable Care Act, often referred to as Obamacare.Adam Schiff, a Democratic California senator, said on Sunday he believed Trump’s healthcare proposal was aimed at gutting the ACA and allowing insurance companies to deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions.“So the same insurance companies he’s railing against in those tweets, he is saying: ‘I’m going to give you more power to cancel people’s policies and not cover them if they have a pre-existing condition,’” Schiff said on ABC’s This Week program. More

    • 175 Shares48 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Godfather of the Trump presidency’: the direct through-line from Dick Cheney to Donald Trump

      by

      He spent the twilight of his career denouncing Donald Trump as a threat to the republic he loved. But Dick Cheney arguably laid the foundations of Trump’s authoritarian takeover of the United States.The former vice-president died on Monday aged 84. The White House lowered flags to half-mast in remembrance of him but without the usual announcement or proclamation praising the deceased.Cheney, who served under George W Bush for eight years, was one of the most influential and polarising vice-presidents in US history. Some critics said they would never forgive him for pushing the US to invade Iraq on a false pretext but suggested that his opposition to Trump offered a measure of redemption.Perhaps Cheney’s defining legacy, however, was the expansion of powers for a position that he never held himself: the presidency. Cheney used the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks as a pretext to assert a muscular executive authority that Trump now amplifies and exploits to challenge the system of checks and balances.Some commentators perceive a direct through-line from the Bush-Cheney administration’s policies – such as pre-emptive war, warrantless spying and the creation of novel legal categories like “enemy combatant” – to the Trump administration’s actions against immigrants, narco-traffickers and domestic political opponents.“Dick Cheney is the godfather of the Trump presidency,” said Larry Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota. “Trump is unchained because Dick Cheney had been at war for half a century against the restraints put in place after Vietnam and Watergate. He believed that action was more important than following constitutional rules.”The debate over the balance of power between the White House, Congress and courts did not start with Cheney. In 1973, the historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr published The Imperial Presidency, arguing that the executive branch had begun to resemble a monarch that often acted without the consent of Congress.However, by the time of the Ronald Reagan administration, young conservatives felt the presidency had become hamstrung. This sentiment culminated in a 1989 American Enterprise Institute volume titled The Fettered Presidency, articulating a doctrine to regain what they saw as constitutionally appropriate powers.As a young chief of staff in the Gerald Ford administration, Cheney experienced the fallout of the Watergate scandal. He concluded that a sceptical Congress, reacting to the abuses of Richard Nixon, had gone too far, leaving the presidency dangerously weakened.Jacobs said: “Dick Cheney took it as his mission to tear all that down. He saw the efforts to return accountability in the 70s after Watergate and Vietnam as profoundly and dangerously limiting presidential power. He talked openly about Congress self-aggrandising and warned that the country would face ruin.”Cheney believed that new constraints such as the War Powers Act, a 1973 law that limited the president’s power to commit US forces to conflict without congressional approval, had hobbled the executive, making it nearly impossible for a president to govern effectively, particularly in national security.In a 2005 interview, he said: “I do have the view that over the years there had been an erosion of presidential power and authority, that it’s reflected in a number of developments – the War Powers Act … I am one of those who believe that was an infringement upon the authority of the president.“A lot of the things around Watergate and Vietnam, both, in the 70s served to erode the authority, I think, the president needs to be effective especially in a national security area.”Cheney’s ideas were formalised as the “unitary executive theory”, which asserts that the president should possess total and personal control over the entire executive branch. This effectively eliminates the independence of a vast array of government institutions and places millions of federal employees under the president’s authority to hire and fire at will.As Bush’s No 2, Cheney was dubbed “Darth Vader”. When America was attacked on 9/11 with nearly 3,000 people killed, the trauma created a political climate in which extraordinary measures were deemed necessary. Cheney turned a crisis into an opportunity to broaden executive power in the name of national security.He was the most prominent booster of the Patriot Act, the law enacted nearly unanimously after 9/11 that granted the government sweeping surveillance powers. He championed a National Security Agency warrantless wiretapping programme aimed at intercepting international communications of suspected terrorists in the US, despite concerns over its legality.The Bush administration also authorised the US military to attack enemy combatants acting on behalf of terrorist organisations, prompting questions about the legality of killing or detaining people without prosecution at sites such as Guantánamo Bay and Abu Ghraib.This doctrine is now being used by the Trump administration to justify deadly strikes on alleged drug-running boats in Latin America. It claims the US is engaged in “armed conflict” with drug cartels and has declared them unlawful combatants.Last month the Pentagon chief, Pete Hegseth, wrote on social media: “These narco-terrorists have killed more Americans than al-Qaida, and they will be treated the same. We will track them, we will network them, and then, we will hunt and kill them.”In 2002 a set of legal memorandums known as the “torture memos” were drafted by John Yoo, deputy assistant attorney general, advising that the use of enhanced interrogation techniques might be legally permissible under an expansive interpretation of presidential authority during the “war on terror”.Jeremy Varon, author of Our Grief Is Not a Cry for War: The Movement to Stop the War on Terror, said: “That championed the unitary executive theory and then said as an explicit argument anything ordered by the commander in chief is by definition legal because the president is the sovereign.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“In its own day it was considered a dubious if not a highly contestable legal theory, but the Trump administration is almost pretending that it’s settled law and then using expansive ‘war on terror’ powers to create a war on immigrants, a war on narco traffickers and even potentially a war on dissenting Americans as they protest in the streets.”Varon, a history professor at the New School for Social Research in New York, added: “The great irony is that Trump represents, on the one hand, the repudiation of the neoliberal neocon globalists like Cheney and Bush that entangled America in forever wars. But now America First is being weaponised, making use of ‘war on terror’ powers to capture, brutalise, dehumanise and kill people without any sense of legal constraint.”As an architect of the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, Cheney pushed spy agencies to find evidence to justify military action. He asserted that then Iraqi president Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction and had ties to the al-Qaida terrorist network. Officials used that to sell the war to members of Congress and the media, though that claim was later debunked.The government’s arguments for war fuelled a distrust among many Americans that resonates today with some in the current Republican party. But it did not lead to a significant pushback from Congress aimed at preventing future presidents making a similar mistake.The trend for executive power has been fuelled by an increasingly polarised and paralysed Congress, creating a vacuum that successive administrations, including those of Barack Obama and Joe Biden, have filled with executive action, unwilling to cede powers once gained.The ultimate battle for the unitary executive theory is now being waged within the chambers of the supreme court. Recent rulings from the court’s conservative majority signal a shift away from longstanding precedents that have, for nearly a century, placed limits on presidential authority.Since taking office in January, Trump has unleashed a barrage of unilateral presidential actions. He has waged a campaign to remove thousands of career government workers from their posts and shut down entire federal agencies. His deployment of national guard troops to major US cities and attacks on law firms, media organisations and universities have earned comparison with autocrats around the world.Cheney himself did not approve. He became a severe and outspoken critic of Trump, arguing that the president’s actions went “well beyond their due bounds”, particularly regarding the integrity of the US electoral system. His daughter, Liz Cheney, became one of the most prominent opponents of Trump within the Republican party but eventually lost her seat in the House.Ken Adelman, a former US diplomat who knew Cheney since working with him the 1970s, was not surprised that he took a stand. He said: “Trump stood for everything Dick did not stand for and that was foreign policy, you support your friends and you oppose the totalitarians, strong alliances, strong defence and free trade.“He was very uncomfortable and then finally turned and absolutely opposed Donald Trump with every fibre of his bone, which shows that conservatives can oppose Trump and should oppose Trump because he’s not conservative and he’s not decent and he’s not honourable.”Some commentators contend that while Cheney operated to enhance the power of the institution of the presidency for policy and national security reasons, Trump has leveraged that power for self-aggrandisement, pushing beyond boundaries that Cheney himself recognised.Robert Schmuhl, a professor emeritus of American studies at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana, said: “Clearly in his time as vice-president, he pushed that envelope almost as far as anyone could. But the distinction is that Cheney was trying to enhance the power of the presidency for policy and security reasons, while Donald Trump seems to be pushing for greater power in the presidency that also has a personal dimension for him.”Others agree that, along with the rhymes between Cheney and Trump, there are significant differences. Jake Bernstein, co-author of Vice: Dick Cheney and the Hijacking of the American Presidency, said: “You can draw a line between Cheney and Trump. Trump has taken that to the max; as they say in Spın̈al Tap, he’s turned it to 11. It’s a qualitative difference.“Yes, Cheney believed that power had tilted too much towards Congress and had to go back to the executive and certainly believed that, particularly in issues of war-making, the executive should be completely unfettered. He also understood a lot of this balance between Congress and the executive was based on norms that were elastic and could be stretched in one direction or another.“But he was absolutely at heart an institutionalist and he didn’t want to break those norms. He didn’t want to destroy those institutions. He would have been appalled by the neutering of Congress that’s going on under this current Trump administration. Basically Trump is president and speaker of the House at the moment, and that would have offended Cheney.” More