US Congress
Subterms
More stories
175 Shares129 Views
in US PoliticsBiden increases US refugee cap to 62,500 amid backlash over initial plan – live
150 Shares199 Views
in US Politics‘Our moment is now’: can Washington DC statehood finally become a reality?
Thousands of miles from the US capital, a group of progressive protesters recently marched to the office of their senator, Republican Lisa Murkowski, to demand that she support statehood for Washington DC.The protest was notable because of its setting of Anchorage, Alaska, and similar demonstrations have recently been popping up all across America. Progressives from Arizona to New York have taken pictures with 51-star flags to show their support for making DC the first new state to join the union since Hawaii in 1959.Previously dismissed by its critics as a regional issue, DC statehood has gained national prominence in recent years, and that increased attention has now translated into legislative action. Late last month, the House passed a DC statehood bill with a record number of co-sponsors, and Joe Biden has offered a full-throated endorsement of the proposal.This momentum has given activists hope that now – with Democrats controlling the White House and both chambers of Congress – DC statehood may finally become a reality. However, numerous challenges remain in the evenly divided Senate, and Republicans are determined to keep just 50 stars on the American flag.For statehood advocates, this moment feels like an opportunity to correct a 200-year-old injustice. The District’s population of 700,000 is more than that of Wyoming and Vermont, and DC residents pay more in federal taxes than their counterparts in 22 states, yet they do not have congressional representation. Perhaps even more infuriating for statehood supporters is the fact that DC laws are subject to congressional review, meaning lawmakers from around the country have an effective veto on local proposals.The issue of race if also front and center, given that DC’s citizens are predominantly people of color and their full rights as Americans are being curtailed mostly by Republicans in the Senate, who skew heavily white.DC residents themselves largely support statehood. In 2016, the District held a referendum on the issue, and 86% of voters backed statehood.“This fight is the most pressing voting rights fight and the most pressing civil rights fight of our lifetime,” said Jamal Holtz, a leader of 51 for 51, which advocates for statehood. “We should not be okay with American citizens not having voter representation.”The lack of representation for DC residents has been the subject of international condemnation. The United Nations human rights committee has repeatedly said DC’s current political status is a human rights violation that flies in the face of America’s international treaty obligations.Arturo Carrillo, the director of the International Human Rights Clinic at George Washington University law school, said the injustice of the situation is somewhat ironic. In the capital of one of the oldest democracies in the world, citizens are not represented at the federal level.“The paradox is so profound that you almost don’t believe it,” Carrillo said. “It can’t really be like that, can it? But it is. It is exactly as bad as it looks. And all you’ve got to do is drive around Washington DC, and look at our license plates. You’ll see they say, ‘End taxation without representation.’”But for Republicans, the true injustice would be if DC, a city of just 68 sq miles, were granted statehood and the two US senators that come with it. Republican leaders have criticized the statehood push as a Democratic “power grab” that contradicts the founders’ wishes for the capital district to be completely under federal control.“If DC were to become a state, Democrats would gain two reliably liberal seats in the US Senate,” said Emma Vaughn, a spokesperson for the Republican National Committee. “They cite various reasons for why they want DC statehood, but the truth is that these extra Senate seats would be a rubber stamp for their radical, far-left agenda.”Statehood advocates acknowledge DC would probably elect two Democratic senators if it becomes a state. In 2020, just 5% of DC voters backed Donald Trump, while 92% supported Biden. But activists say DC residents should not be deprived of basic democratic rights because of their political leanings.Republicans are afraid of admitting DC as the first plurality Black state in the nation“It is a much larger power grab to deny representation to people because you don’t think that they would vote for you. That’s the power grab,” said Meagan Hatcher-Mays, the director of democracy policy for the progressive group Indivisible.Holtz also described Republican arguments against statehood as “racist dog whistles”, given that the majority of DC residents are people of color.“Republicans are afraid of admitting DC as the first plurality Black state in the nation,” Holtz said. “Regardless of occupation and political party, all Americans deserve representation.”Holtz’s organization is urging Senate Democrats to end the filibuster to get statehood passed, hence the group’s name of 51 for 51, meaning 51 votes for the 51st state. (With the filibuster mechanism in place, Democrats need 60 votes to advance the statehood bill, which is considered an impossible task given Republicans’ fervent opposition.)But even if Democrats do end the filibuster, it may not be enough to get the statehood bill to Biden’s desk. Senator Joe Manchin said on Friday that he does not support the legislation, and four other Senate Democrats have not taken a stance on the bill.Without the filibuster, the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, would still need all five of them on board to pass the proposal. Those five holdouts are probably why Schumer has not committed to a timeline for voting on a bill, instead simply saying the Senate is “working to make [statehood] a reality”.Hatcher-Mays urged Democratic senators to move quickly on statehood, noting that the party’s hold on the White House and both chambers of Congress is unlikely to last long.“History does tell us that trifectas are pretty rare, and they’re pretty fleeting,” Hatcher-Mays said. “We really need Democrats in the Senate to understand that this is what we gave you this majority for, so it’s really urgent to take this up and get this passed as soon as possible.”For Holtz and many other District residents, the wait for statehood has already been long enough.“Our moment is now,” Holtz said. “We cannot continue to count our days where there are people disenfranchised in our nation’s capital.” More
150 Shares169 Views
in US PoliticsRepublicans into Texas runoff after robocall claims leader killed husband with Covid
Susan Wright, the widow of the Republican congressman whose death prompted a special election in Texas on Saturday, made the runoff after reporting to law enforcement a bizarre robocall in which she was accused of murdering her husband by contracting Covid-19.The election in the sixth congressional district on Saturday drew 23 candidates and was seen as a key test of both a Republican party under Donald Trump’s sway and of Democratic hopes of making inroads in Texas.Endorsed by the former president, Wright led with 19% of the vote. The lone anti-Trump conservative in the field, former marine Michael Wood, was way off the pace.A Republican, Jake Ellzey, edged out a Democrat, Jana Lynne Sanchez, for second place and a spot in the runoff.Ellzey, a state representative and navy veteran, drew 13.8% of the vote. Just 354 ballots and less than half a percentage point separated him from Sanchez, a journalist and communications professional who ran for the seat in 2018, with 13.4%.In a statement, the chairman of the Texas Democratic party, Gilbert Hinojosa, put a brave face on the outcome.“The new Democratic south is rising,” he insisted, “and we will continue to rally our movement to take back our state – including as we look toward the 2022 governor’s race. We’re ready to build Democratic power, ready to defeat Texas Republicans, and ready to elect leaders who defend our rights and put Texans first.”Nonetheless, the sixth district, close to Dallas and Fort Worth, will again send a Republican to Washington despite trending Democratic for years. Trump won it in 2020 but only by three points after winning by 12 in 2016, that lead down five points on Mitt Romney four years before.In Utah on Saturday, Romney, the only Republican senator to vote to convict in both Trump’s impeachment trials, was booed and called a “traitor” when he spoke at a state convention.NBC News reported the split of the vote in Texas at roughly 60%-40% in Republicans’ favour. Mark Jones, a political science professor at Rice University, told Reuters: “Democrats didn’t get their people out there, and then to the extent to which they did … they split up a lot of the Democratic votes.”The contest was to fill a seat vacated when congressman Ron Wright died in February, after contracting Covid-19. Trump endorsed his wife this week.The day before the election, Politico reported that Susan Wright sought help from local and federal law enforcement after voters received a robocall which said she “murdered her husband” and was “running for Congress to cover it up”.The robocall claimed Wright “obtained a $1m life insurance policy on the life of her husband … six months before his death” and “tearfully confided in a nurse that she had purposely contracted the coronavirus”.The call, in a female voice, did not say who paid for it.“This is illegal, immoral, and wrong,” Wright said. “There’s not a sewer too deep that some politicians won’t plumb.”Matt Langston, an aide, said: “Susan’s opponents are desperate and resorting to disgusting gutter politics.”Other Republican candidates condemned the call.Before polling day, Wood, the anti-Trump conservative, told CNN he ran because he was worried about Trump’s influence and “somebody needed to stand up and say this isn’t what the Republican party should be”.He also said he was “afraid for the future of the country”, given the prevalence of belief in Trump’s lie that the election was stolen – 70% of Republicans in a CNN poll this week said they believed Joe Biden did not win enough legitimate votes to win the White House – and conspiracy theories such as QAnon. More
163 Shares159 Views
in US PoliticsTim Scott ‘hopeful’ deal can be reached with Democrats on US policing reform
Tim Scott, the Republican senator leading negotiations with Democrats over police reform, who insisted during his rebuttal to Joe Biden’s address to Congress the US was not a racist country, said on Sunday he was “hopeful” a deal can be reached. Scott, from South Carolina and the only Black Republican in the Senate, said he saw progress in talks which stalled last summer as protests raged following the killings of George Floyd and other Black Americans.“One of the reasons why I’m hopeful is because my friends on the left aren’t looking for the issue, they’re looking for a solution, and the things that I offered last year are more popular this year,” the senator told CBS’s Face the Nation.“The goal isn’t for Republicans or Democrats to win, but for communities to feel safer and our officers to feel respected. If we can accomplish those two major goals, the rest will be history.”The talks are intended to break an impasse over the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, which passed the House in March but is frozen by the 50-50 split in the Senate.Negotiations have taken on increasing urgency following the high-profile killings of Daunte Wright in Minneapolis and Andrew Brown in North Carolina, Black men shot in their vehicles by officers, killings which sparked outrage.“The country supports this reform and Congress should act,” Biden said on Wednesday during his address on Capitol Hill.I personally understand the pain of being stopped 18 times driving while BlackA panel including Scott, the New Jersey Democrat Cory Booker and Karen Bass, the author of the House bill and a Democrat from California, met on Thursday to discuss key elements including individual liability for officers who abuse their power or otherwise overstep the line.Republicans strongly oppose many of the proposals but Booker said it had been “a promising week”.Scott, a rising star in Republican ranks, said he was well-placed to help steer the discussion.“One of the reasons why I asked to lead this police reform conversation on my side of the House is because I personally understand the pain of being stopped 18 times driving while Black,” he said.“And I have also seen the beauty of when officers go door to door with me on Christmas morning, delivering presents to kids in the most underserved communities. So I think I bring an equilibrium to the conversation.”Scott said he was confident major sticking points in the Senate version of the proposed legislation could be overcome and the bill aligned to that which passed the House.“Think about the [parts] of the two bills that are in common … data collection,” he said. “I think through negotiations and conversations we are closer on no-knock warrants and chokeholds, and then there’s something called Section 1033 that has to do with getting government equipment from the military for local police.“I think we’re making progress there too, so we have literally been able to bring these two bills very close together.”The House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, placed no timeline on when a revised version of the bill would get a vote.“We will bring it to the floor when we are ready, and we will be ready when we have a good, strong bipartisan bill,” she said on Thursday. “That is up to the Senate and then we will have it in the House, because it will be a different bill.”On the issue of whether lawsuits could be filed against police departments rather than individual officers, Chuck Schumer, the Democratic Senate majority leader, said: “We’re moving towards a reasonable solution.”Scott said the issue was “another reason why I’m more optimistic this time”.He said: “We want to make sure the bad apples are punished and we’ve seen that, through the convictions of Michael Slager when he shot Walter Scott in the back to the George Floyd convictions.“Those are promising signs, but the real question is how do we change the culture of policing? I think we do that by making the employer responsible for the actions of the employee.”Others senators in the negotiations include Dick Durbin of Illinois and Lindsay Graham of South Carolina, senior figures in their parties.Scott also broke with Republicans who support Donald Trump’s big lie that the presidential election was rigged, saying the party could only move on once it realised “the election is over, Joe Biden is the president of the United States”.On CNN’s State of the Union, Susan Collins, a moderate Republican senator from Maine, appeared to acknowledge Scott’s rising profile.“We are not a party that is led by just one person,” she said. “There are many prominent upcoming younger men and women in our party who hold great promise for leading us.” More
138 Shares199 Views
in US PoliticsAntitrust: Hawley and Klobuchar on the big tech battles to come
Antitrust is hot. In February, the Minnesota senator Amy Klobuchar introduced the Competition and Antitrust Law Enforcement Reform Act of 2021. Weeks later, the Missouri senator Josh Hawley proposed the Trust-Busting for the Twenty-First Century Act. Both bills are pending before the Senate judiciary committee.Hawley and Klobuchar have both published books. Hawley offers The Tyranny of Big Tech, and Klobuchar Antitrust. There is plenty of overlap but the substantive and stylistic differences are glaring.Hawley takes pride in owning the libs. Klobuchar criticizes the Trump administration’s lack of antitrust enforcement. His book is barbed. Hers methodical.On 6 January, Hawley gave a clench-fisted salute to pro-Trump militants and voted against certifying the 2020 presidential election. On the page, he doubles down.Two weeks after the Capitol attack, Klobuchar told the presidential inauguration: “This is the day our democracy picks itself up, brushes off the dust and does what America always does.” She remains angry with Hawley and “Flyin’” Ted Cruz for the insurrection and its aftermath.Playing to type, Hawley has also provided the sole vote against a bill to crack down on anti-Asian hate crime and opposed renaming military bases named for Confederate generals. Roy Blunt, Missouri’s senior senator and the No 4 member of GOP Senate leadership, parted ways with Hawley on both. In the civil war, Missouri was a border state. A century and a half later, it looks like Hawley has picked the losing side.In his book, he upbraids corporate America, “woke capitalism”, Amazon, Google and Facebook. He demands that Google “be forced to give up YouTube and its control of the digital advertising market”.He would also have Facebook “lose” Instagram and WhatsApp, and accuses Amazon of destroying Parler, the conservative alternative to Twitter funded by Rebekah Mercer, a Hawley donor along with her father, Robert Mercer and other Trump acolytes.Hawley’s embrace of antipathy toward big business – even that in which he invests – is not exactly new.In 2008 he published a biography of Theodore Roosevelt, subtitled Preacher of Righteousness and approving of the 26th president’s relentless support for the little guy.Almost a decade later, as Missouri attorney general, Hawley launched an antitrust investigation of Google. Shortly after that, as a Senate candidate, he told Bloomberg News: “We need to have a conversation in Missouri, and as a country, about the concentration of economic power.”But Hawley is buffeted by contradictions. He has for example feted Robert Bork as a conservative martyr, even as Bork’s legal writings have served as intellectual jet fuel for those developments in the marketplace Hawley professes to abhor.The Tyranny of Big Tech makes no mention of the professor who wrote an influential anti-antitrust book, The Antitrust Paradox, in 1978, nine years before he was blocked from the supreme court.Klobuchar, by contrast, gives Bork plenty of face time.“For Bork,” she writes, “the accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few is not a relevant consideration for antitrust law.”Bork had issues with civil rights too. In 1963, when Jim Crow was still in full force, he branded what would become the Civil Rights Act of 1964 “legislation by which the morals of the majority are self-righteously imposed upon a minority”.In The Tyranny of Big Tech, Hawley also blasts corporate abuse of personal data and data mining – all while he looks to Peter Thiel of Palantir for donor dollars.Left unstated is that Palantir was embroiled in the Cambridge Analytica data scandal. Cambridge Analytica was owned by the Mercer family and Thiel was an early funder and board member of Facebook. The circle is complete.Hawley’s book can be viewed as plutocrat-populism in print. Tucker Carlson’s praise is blurbed on the jacket. Inside, Hawley defends Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News from purported predations by Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook. Both Murdoch and Zuckerberg are billionaires many times over.Hawley is on stronger ground when he revisits the nexus between the Obama administration, Hillary Clinton’s campaign and Google. Eric Schmidt, then head of the company, was Obama’s chief corporate ally. On election night 2016, Schmidt, wore a Clinton staff badge, having spent months advising her campaign.In her book, Klobuchar furnishes an overview of the evolution of US anti-monopoly law and a call for rebalancing the relationship between capital and labor. She condemns corporate consolidation and wealth concentration, and views lax antitrust enforcement as antithetical to democracy.In a footnote, she commends Hawley for addressing the “turf wars” between the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission, and their negative impact on antitrust enforcement. Unlike Hawley, however, Klobuchar vehemently disapproves of the supreme court’s Citizens United decision and characterizes it as opening “the floodgates to dark money in our politics”.In 2016, Dave Bossie, president of Citizens United, wrote an op-ed titled: “Josh Hawley for [Missouri] Attorney General”. In his maiden Senate race, Hawley’s campaign received $10,000 from the Citizens United Political Victory Fund.Unfortunately, Klobuchar goes the extra mile and calls for a constitutional amendment to overturn that decision. Her would-be cure is worse than the disease – an attack on free speech itself.The proposed amendment would expressly confer upon “Congress and the states” broad power to curtail campaign fundraising and spending. It also provides that “nothing in this article shall be construed to grant Congress or the states the power to abridge the freedom of the press”.Not so curiously, it is silent about “abridging the freedom of speech”, an existing constitutional protection. Media barons rejoice – all others start sweating.In 2020, Klobuchar came up way short in her quest for the Democratic presidential nomination. Now, she chairs the Senate’s antitrust subcommittee, where Hawley is a member.Both senators were law review editors: she at the University of Chicago, he at Yale. If Hawley has written a sort of campaign manifesto for the Republican presidential primary in 2024, Klobuchar’s book reads at times like an application for supreme court justice. It contains hundreds of pages of footnotes and pays repeated tribute to the late justice Louis Brandeis.Klobuchar also heaps praise on Stephen Breyer, a member of the court appointed by Bill Clinton and a former Harvard Law professor who in 1982 authored Regulation and Its Reform, a counter to Bork and the “Chicago School”.Klobuchar extends an array of “thank yous”. There is one for Jake Sullivan, her former counsel, now Joe Biden’s national security adviser; another for Matt Stoller, a former staffer to Bernie Sanders on the Senate budget committee and a sometime Guardian contributor; and another for Paul Krugman of the New York Times. All three come with definite viewpoints and are strategically placed.Increased antitrust enforcement by the DoJ, the FTC and the states appears to be more likely than wholesale legislative change. A government antitrust case against Google proceeds. Furthermore, Biden has already appointed two critics of big tech to key slots at the White House and the FTC. Who will lead DoJ’s antitrust division is an open question. Finding a suitable non-conflicted pick appears difficult.Klobuchar and Hawley will be heard from. Their books matter. More
188 Shares189 Views
in US PoliticsBiden set to impose restrictions on US travel from India amid Covid crisis – live
138 Shares159 Views
in US PoliticsBiden’s ‘transformative’ 100 days in office: Politics Weekly Extra – podcast
Despite Joe Biden only being president for a little more than three months, some are calling his tenure ‘transformative’. Jonathan Freedland and Robert Reich dissect the US leader’s first 100 days in office
How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know
On Wednesday Joe Biden gave his first address to a joint session of Congress, on the eve of his first 100 days in office. He promised a new era, a chance for America to heal – not only from the pandemic but from four years of Donald Trump. He announced plans to change the way the American economy works, and promised to spend trillions of dollars to help the nation recover. Anybody looking for proof of his commitment need only look at his first 100 days in office. Many are calling this three-month period “transformative”. So what will Biden do next? Jonathan and Robert share their thoughts. Send us your questions and feedback to podcasts@theguardian.com Help support the Guardian by going to gu.com/supportpodcasts More