US domestic policy

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      The Presidency of Donald Trump review: the first draft of history

      by

      The Presidency of Donald Trump review: the first draft of history Julian Zelizer of Princeton has assembled a cast of historians to consider every aspect of four years that shook AmericaAfter thousands of articles and scores of books about Donald Trump’s mostly catastrophic presidency, it’s difficult for anyone to break dramatic new ground. But this new volume, with contributions from 18 American academics, is broader and deeper than all its predecessors, with essays covering everything from Militant Whiteness to the legacy of Trump’s Middle East policies, under the title Arms, Autocrats and Annexations.The result is a great deal of information that is familiar to those who have already plowed through dozens of volumes, enlivened by a few new facts and a number of original insights.One of the best essays, about the Republican party Trump inherited, is written by the book’s editor, Julian Zelizer. The Princeton historian reminds us that the “smashmouth partisanship” perfected by Trump actually began when Newt Gingrich snared the House speakership nearly 30 years ago. In 1992, Pat Buchanan’s speech to the Republic convention featured all of the gay-bashing Florida’s governor, Ron DeSantis, (and may other Republicans) have revived with so much gusto in 2022.Trump swooped in to profit from White House photographer’s book deal – reportRead moreWith major contributions from Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and the rest of the rightwing media machine, most of the GOP moved so far right it didn’t become Trump’s party because he “seized control” but rather because “he fit so perfectly” with it. Most Republicans were “all in” for Trump, from Mitt Romney, the ex-never Trumper who voted with his former nemesis more than 80% of the time, to “moderate” Chris Christie, who gave Trump an “A” four months after his four years of scorched-earth governance were over.Nicole Hemmer, from Columbia, offers an excellent primer on the irresistible rise of rightwing media, reminding us that in the last year of the first George Bush presidency, Limbaugh was spending the night at the White House. By 2009, the shock jock “topped polls asking who led the Republican party”.By the time Trump started his run for the presidency, in 2015, he had “grown far more powerful than the political media ecosystem that had boosted his rightwing bona fides”. This became clear after his dust-up with Megyn Kelly. Moderating a primary debate, the Fox anchor challenged his long history of sexist statements. Trump declared afterwards: “You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever.”The Fox News chief, Roger Ailes, “stayed silent”, Hemmer writes. Another executive, Bill Shine, “told on-air anchors not to come to Kelly’s defense”.By the spring of 2016, Fox was becoming less important than Breitbart, an extreme-right website which researchers at Harvard and MIT declared the new anchor of a “rightwing media network”. It was Steve Bannon of Breitbart who “armed Trump with something like a cohesive political platform … built on anti-immigrant, anti-Black, anti-Muslim, and anti-liberal politics – the same agenda Breitbart.com was promoting”.“Sure enough”, Trump’s Twitter feed “during the campaign linked to Breitbart more than any other news site”.Eventually, just about everyone on the right became a Trump disciple. Glenn Beck compared him to Hitler in 2016. By 2018, Beck was wearing a red Make America Great Again hat, though he blamed the media’s “Trump Derangement Syndrome” for “forcing him to become a Trump supporter”. As a former rightwing radio host, Charlie Sykes, explained: “There’s really not a business model for conservative media to be anti-Trump.”A Brown historian, Bathsheba Demuth, demonstrates that Trump was also a perfect fit for a party that endorsed a propaganda initiative of the American Petroleum Institute that portrayed environmental protection as “a dangerous slide toward communist authoritarianism”. Among loyal constituents were evangelicals, who either saw human dominion over nature as “a doctrinal requirement” or just thought the whole debate was irrelevant because of “Christ’s imminent resurrection”.The most surprising fact in this chapter is that the fossil fuel industry was so sure Trump was a loser in 2016, it gave the bulk of its contributions to Hillary Clinton.Margaret O’Mara, of the University of Washington, describes big tech’s key role in our national meltdown. She reminds us of a key, mostly forgotten moment 10 years ago, when “Google and Facebook successfully petitioned the Federal Election Commission for exemptions from disclaimer requirements” that required political ads to say who paid for them and who was responsible for their messages.The companies argued the requirements would “undermine other, much larger parts of their businesses”. Disastrously, the FEC went along with that pathetic argument. After that, no one ever knew exactly where online attack ads were coming from.O’Mara also recalls that Facebook provided the 2016 Trump campaign with “dedicated staff and resources” to help it purchase more ads on the platform. O’Mara mistakenly reports that the Clinton campaign received the same kind of largesse. Actually, in what may have been the campaign’s single worst decision, it refused Facebook’s offer to install staffers in Clinton’s Brooklyn headquarters.Dignity in a Digital Age review: a congressman takes big tech to taskRead moreAnother chapter, by Daniel C Kurtzer of Princeton, analyses what Trump supporters consider their president’s greatest foreign policy achievement: the initiation of diplomatic relations between Israel and Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Sudan and Morocco.A conservative journal summarized the accomplishment this way: “Washington is strengthening repression in Bahrain, underwriting aggression by UAE, sacrificing the Sahrawi people [of Western Sahara, to Morocco], undermining reform in Sudan and even abandoning justice for Americans harmed by Sudan. The administration calls this an ‘American first’ policy.”The last chapter focuses on the two failed attempts to convict Trump in impeachment trials. Those outcomes may be Trump’s worst legacy of all. Gregory Downs, from the University of California, Davis, writes that the failures to convict “in the face of incontrovertible proof” may convince all Trump’s successors “that they have almost complete impunity as long as they retain the support of their base, no matter what the constitution says”.
      The Presidency of Donald Trump is published in the US by Princeton University Press
      TopicsBooksDonald TrumpTrump administrationUS politicsUS elections 2020RepublicansUS domestic policyreviewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden targets America’s wealthiest with proposed minimum tax on billionaires

      by

      Biden targets America’s wealthiest with proposed minimum tax on billionairesTax on households over $100m aims to ensure wealthiest Americans no longer pay lower rate than teachers and firefighters Joe Biden proposed a new tax on America’s richest households when he unveiled his latest budget on Monday.The Biden administration wants to impose a 20% minimum tax on households worth more than $100m. The proposal would raise more than $360bn over the next decade and “would make sure that the wealthiest Americans no longer pay a tax rate lower than teachers and firefighters”, according to a factsheet released by the White House.‘I make no apologies’: Biden stands by ‘Putin cannot remain in power’ remarkRead moreThe plan – called the “billionaire minimum income tax” – is the administration’s most aggressive move to date to tax the very wealthiest Americans.The tax is part of Biden’s $5.8tn budget proposal for 2023, which also sets aside billions for the police and military as well as investments in affordable housing, plans to tackle the US’s supply chain issues and gun violence.“Budgets are statements of values, and the budget I am releasing today sends a clear message that we value fiscal responsibility, safety and security at home and around the world, and the investments needed to continue our equitable growth and build a better America,” Biden said in a statement.Billionaire wealth grew significantly during the coronavirus pandemic, helped by soaring share prices and a tax regime that charges investors less on their gains than those taxed on their income.“In 2021 alone, America’s more than 700 billionaires saw their wealth increase by $1tn, yet in a typical year, billionaires like these would pay just 8% of their total realized and unrealized income in taxes. A firefighter or teacher can pay double that tax rate,” the White House factsheet notes.Under the plan households worth more than $100m would have to give detailed accounts to the Internal Revenue Service of how their assets had fared over the year. Those who pay less than 20% on those gains would then be subject to an additional tax that would take their rate up to 20%.The Biden administration calculates that the tax would affect only the top 0.01% of American households, those worth over $100m, and that more than half the revenue would come from households worth more than $1bn.The budget also looks set to tackle another issue that some economists have argued contributes to widening income inequality: share buybacks.In recent years cash-rich companies including Apple, Alphabet, Meta and Microsoft, have used their funds to buy back huge quantities of their own shares, boosting their share price. Last year companies in the S&P 500 bought back a record $882bn of their own shares and Goldman Sachs estimates that figure will rise to $1tn this year.Critics say that the purchases divert money from hiring new staff, raising wages and research and development.Research by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) shows that there is “clear evidence that a substantial number of corporate executives today use buybacks as a chance to cash out”.The Biden proposal would stop executives from selling their shares for three years after a buyback is announced.Biden attempted to impose a 1% tax on share buybacks last year but the proposal failed in Congress. Both Biden’s billionaire tax and the share buyback proposal will also face tough opposition in Congress.TopicsUS taxationBiden administrationUS politicsUS economyJoe BidenUS domestic policynewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Republican senator says tax rises in own plan are ‘Democratic talking points’

      by

      Republican senator says tax rises in own plan are ‘Democratic talking points’Rick Scott of Florida grilled on Fox News Sunday about suggested income tax rise and letting social security and Medicare fall A Republican senator and reputed presidential hopeful found himself in a tough spot when he claimed tax rises contained in his own “11 point plan to rescue America” were “Democratic talking points” instead.‘Rick Scott had us on lockdown’: how Florida said no to $70m for HIV crisisRead more“No, no, it’s in the plan!” his interviewer exclaimed, on Fox News Sunday. “It’s in the plan!”Rick Scott, from Florida, is a former healthcare chief executive whose company admitted 14 felonies related to fraudulent practices. As the South Florida Sun-Sentinel put it, “most happened under Scott’s leadership”.As the Guardian reported, when Scott was governor of Florida “his administration presided over the effective blocking of $70m in federal funds available for fighting the state’s HIV crisis”.Scott beat an incumbent Democrat for a Senate seat in 2018 and is now chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) as the party eyes a Senate takeover in the midterm elections.Last month, Scott released an “11 Point Plan to Rescue America”. It proposes that more Americans pay federal income tax and says Congress could “sunset” social security and Medicare within five years, meaning allow them to lapse.The plan immediately came under fire.The non-partisan Institution on Taxation and Economic Policy (Itep) said Scott’s plan “would increase taxes by more than $1,000 on average for the poorest 40% of Americans”.Itep also noted the effect Scott’s plan would have on Republican heartlands, saying the states most affected, “where more than 40% of residents would face tax increases, are … Mississippi, West Virginia, Arkansas, Louisiana, Alabama, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Georgia, New Mexico, South Carolina and … Florida”.Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate, disowned the plan, saying: “We will not have as part of our agenda a bill that raises taxes on half the American people and sunsets social security and Medicare within five years.”Dana Milbank, a Washington Post columnist, said Scott had given Democrats a much-needed election-year gift.“All Democrats need do,” he wrote, regarding a plan which would also cut trade with China and slash tax-gathering resources, “is repeat Scott’s own words.”The Fox News Sunday host John Roberts asked Scott: “Why would you propose something like that in an election year?”Scott said Roberts was repeating “Democrat talking points”.“No, no, it’s in the plan!” Roberts said. “It’s in the plan!”Scott said: “But here’s the thing about reality for a second.”Roberts said: “But, Senator, hang on. It’s not a Democratic talking point! It’s in the plan!”Scott defended his plan, saying, “We ought to every year talk about exactly how we are going to fix Medicare and social security” but “no one that I know of wants to sunset” either.“Here’s what’s unfair,” he added, of his tax plan. “We have people that … could go to work and have figured out how to have government pay their way. That’s not right. They ought to have some skin in the game. I don’t care if it’s a dollar. We ought to all be in this together.”Scott is reportedly Donald Trump’s choice to replace McConnell as Senate leader – an effort that shows no sign of succeeding.Scott was asked if, with a Wall Street Journal column entitled “Why I’m Defying Beltway Cowardice”, he was calling McConnell a coward. He dodged the question, saying he wanted “to get something done”.Complaining about “the woke left” and Democratic policy on immigration and energy, he said: “We’ve got to change this. You don’t change it without having a plan.”TopicsUS midterm elections 2022RepublicansUS taxationUS domestic policyUS SenateUS CongressUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 263 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Big oil could bring US gas prices down but won’t – so hit it with a windfall tax | Robert Reich

      by

      Big oil could bring US gas prices down but won’t – so hit it with a windfall taxRobert ReichIn the US, in times of crisis, the poor pay the price and the rich cash in. Democrats know it doesn’t have to be this way This morning I filled my car with gas, costing almost six dollars a gallon. My car is a Mini Cooper I bought years ago, partly because it wasn’t a gas-guzzler. Now it’s guzzling dollars.Putin and Trump have convinced me: I was wrong about the 21st century | Robert ReichRead moreWhen I consider what’s happening in Ukraine, I say what the hell. It’s a small sacrifice.Yet guess who’s making no sacrifice at all – in fact, who’s reaping a giant windfall from this crisis?Big oil has hit a gusher. Even before Vladimir Putin’s war, oil prices had begun to rise due to the recovery in global demand and tight inventories.Last year, when Americans were already struggling to pay their heating bills and fill up their gas tanks, the biggest oil companies (Shell, Chevron, BP, and Exxon) posted profits totaling $75bn. This year, courtesy of Putin, big oil is on the way to a far bigger bonanza.How are the oil companies using this windfall? I can assure you they’re not investing in renewables. They’re not even increasing oil production.As Chevron’s top executive, Mike Wirth, said in September, “We could afford to invest more” but “the equity market is not sending a signal that says they think we ought to be doing that.”Translated: Wall Street says the way to maximize profits is to limit supply and push up prices instead.So they’re buying back their own stock in order to give their stock prices even more of a boost. Last year they spent $38bn on stock buybacks – their biggest buyback spending spree since 2008. This year, thanks largely to Putin, the oil giants are planning to buy back at least $22bn more.Make no mistake. This is a direct redistribution from consumers who are paying through the nose at the gas pump to big oil’s investors and top executives (whose compensation packages are larded with shares of stock and stock options).Though it’s seldom discussed in the media, lower-income earners and their families bear the brunt of the burden of higher gas prices. Not only are lower-income people less likely to be able to work from home, they’re also more likely to commute for longer distances between work and home in order to afford less expensive housing.Big oil companies could absorb the higher costs of crude oil. The reason they’re not is because they’re so big they don’t have to. They don’t worry about losing market share to competitors. So they’re passing on the higher costs to consumers in the form of higher prices, and pocketing record profits.It’s the same old story in this country: when crisis strikes, the poor and working class are on the frontlines while the biggest corporations and their investors and top brass rake it in.What to do? Hit big oil with a windfall profits tax.The European Union recently advised its members to seek a windfall profits tax on oil companies taking advantage of this very grave emergency to raise their prices.Democrats just introduced similar legislation here in the US. The bill would tax the largest oil companies, which are recording their biggest profits in years, and use the money to provide quarterly checks to Americans facing sticker shock as inflation continues to soar.It would require oil companies producing or importing at least 300,000 barrels of oil per day to pay a per-barrel tax equal to half the difference between the current price of a barrel and the average price from the years 2015 to 2019.This is hardly confiscatory. Those were years when energy companies were already recording large profits. Quarterly rebates to consumers would phase out for individuals earning more than $75,000 or couples earning $150,000.Republicans will balk at any tax increase on big oil, of course. They and the coal-industry senator Joe Manchin even tanked the nomination of Sarah Bloom Raskin to the Fed because she had the temerity to speak out about the systemic risks that climate change poses to our economy.But a windfall profits tax on big oil is exactly what Democrats must do to help average working people through this fuel crisis. It’s good policy, it’s good politics and it’s the right thing to do.
      Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley and the author of Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few and The Common Good. His new book, The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, is out now. He is a Guardian US columnist. His newsletter is at robertreich.substack.com
      TopicsOil and gas companiesOpinionOilCommoditiesEnergy industryUkraineRussiaUS domestic policycommentReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Progressive Democrats set out list of executive orders to push Biden agenda

      by

      Progressive Democrats set out list of executive orders to push Biden agendaCongressional Progressive Caucus urges president to bypass legislative logjam and give Democrats record to campaign on The leftwing Congressional Progressive Caucus unveiled its highly anticipated list of suggested executive orders on Thursday, outlining a strategy for Joe Biden to advance Democrats’ policy priorities in the US while much of his legislative agenda has stalled on Capitol Hill.The move reflects pressure from the left of the Democratic party to try to keep Biden pushing an ambitious program of action, despite setbacks and as November’s midterm elections are widely expected to favor a resurgent Republican party.Manchin ‘very reluctant’ on electric cars in ominous sign for Biden’s climate fightRead moreThe list covers a wide range of progressive wishlist items, including lowering healthcare costs, canceling federal student loan debt and reducing America’s dependence on fossil fuels. The agenda also calls for raising wages by increasing the threshold to be eligible for overtime pay and reducing police violence by establishing national standards for law enforcement officers.“Taken together, these actions will have an immediate and meaningful impact on people’s lives: lowering costs and raising wages for working people to provide urgently needed economic relief, advancing racial and gender equity by investing in communities that have historically been neglected, and delivering on our promises,” said Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal, chair of the CPC. The list was crafted in consultation with the 98 members of the CPC, as well as a number of progressive grassroots groups. Dozens of progressive organizations have endorsed the agenda, calling on Biden to act quickly to sign the suggested executive orders.“As we face a historic crossroad in the fight to protect democracy and defeat white supremacy, it’s beyond time for Biden to use the full powers of the presidency to deliver for the people who elected him and address the interlocking crises of our times,” said Lauren Maunus, advocacy director for the climate group Sunrise Movement. “If he doesn’t, Biden risks not only alienating his own base, but failing to stop the worst of the climate crisis while he had the chance.”Jayapal said the CPC and the White House have had many conversations over the past several months as the caucus worked to develop its list, with the hope of avoiding potential legal challenges to the orders. Jayapal told reporters she planned to discuss the newly released agenda with Biden as early as this week.“The reason it took us so long to put this together, from when we first started talking about it at the end of December, is because we did want to make sure that these are things that the White House can do,” Jayapal said on a press call on Thursday. If Biden takes the CPC’s advice and signs more executive orders in the coming months, they believe it could help Democrats’ prospects in the midterm elections this November.As of now, Republicans are heavily favored to retake control of the House and possibly the Senate as well. With the Build Back Better Act stalled in the Senate, executive action may be Democrats’ best hope of enacting meaningful change between now and November, making it easier for members to campaign for re-election.“If we cancel student debt, that would be a huge thing all across this country,” the progressive Congresswoman Cori Bush said on Thursday. “We keep saying that Democrats deliver, but people don’t know we’re delivering if they can’t feel that difference, and people need to feel the difference.”Jayapal emphasized progressives were not giving up on implementing portions of the Build Back Better Act, the $1.7tn spending package that includes significant investments in healthcare, childcare and climate-related initiatives. But she argued the executive orders proposed by the CPC could provide immediate aid to families struggling to financially recover from the coronavirus pandemic, while also boosting Democrats’ midterm prospects.“We’ve got to make sure that we’re addressing the increase in housing costs, in childcare, in gas prices, and all the things that we’re seeing right now – and addressing that for people who are on the margins,” Jayapal said. “Let’s deliver some relief quickly for people. And yes, anything we do between now and November helps us.”TopicsDemocratsBiden administrationUS CongressUS politicsUS domestic policynewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Test to Treat: pharmacists say Biden’s major new Covid initiative won’t work

      by

      Test to Treat: pharmacists say Biden’s major new Covid initiative won’t workProgram to facilitate access to antivirals will have a limited impact because pharmacists are restricted from prescribing the pills A major new Biden administration initiative to facilitate access to Covid-19 antivirals will have a limited impact and fail to mitigate certain health inequities, major pharmacist groups argue, because pharmacists are restricted from prescribing the pills.Announced in Joe Biden’s State of the Union address, the “Test to Treat” program is meant to address the maddening difficulty Americans have had in accessing Covid-19 treatments. The administration will channel newly increasing stocks of antiviral pills to major retail pharmacies that have in-house clinics, providing one-stop testing and antivirals access.The program, which the administration aims to provide for free (in the face of fierce Republican opposition to new Covid-19 spending), is also slated to roll out in Veterans Affairs clinics, community health centers and long-term care facilities.Major participants include some 250 Walgreens stores, 225 Kroger Little Clinics and 1,200 CVS MinuteClinics. CVS clinics in particular are staffed by nurse practitioners and physician assistants, authorized by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to prescribe the two currently available Covid antivirals, Pfizer’s Paxlovid and Merck and Ridgeback Biotherapeutics’ molnupiravir.In a 9 March letter to Biden calling for pharmacists to be granted authority to prescribe these pills, 14 organizations representing pharmacies and pharmacists insisted Test to Treat’s impact will be compromised by the fact that such in-house clinics are relatively limited in number and largely in urban areas.“Unfortunately, rural and underserved communities are less likely to benefit from your test to treat approach because of this limitation,” the letter states.According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 90% of Americans live within five miles of one of approximately 60,000 pharmacies.“The FDA is still blocking us from leveraging the most accessible healthcare provider out there to make sure that these patients can get these drugs easily,” said Michael Ganio, a Columbus, Ohio pharmacist, senior director of pharmacy practice and quality at the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, which is a signatory of the letter to Biden.“As far as expanding access,” said Ganio, Test to Treat is “not doing a lot”.The need for Covid-19 antivirals is likely to be greater in rural areas, at least on a per-capita basis. A recent CDC study found that through January, 58.5% of people aged five and older in rural counties had received at least one coronavirus vaccination shot, compared with 75.4% in urban counties.Paxlovid and molnupiravir are authorized for individuals at high risk of severe Covid-19, in particular unvaccinated people with certain medical conditions. Paxlovid was 88% effective at preventing hospitalization and death in its clinical trial. Molnupiravir proved just 30% effective. The FDA only authorizes its use when other treatments are unavailable or aren’t advised for an individual.Sufficient supply of Paxlovid will be key to Test to Treat. Since late December, the federal government has delivered a woefully inadequate 700,000 Paxlovid courses to states, the biweekly allotment increasing from 100,000 in January to 175,000 in March.The administration has claimed it will distribute 1m courses in March and 2.5m in April. A Pfizer representative would only state that the company plans to deliver a cumulative 10m courses by the end of June. The administration has agreed to purchase 20m courses, slated to be delivered by the end of September.In September 2021, the US Department of Health and Human Services amended a federal public health emergency law, the Prep Act, to grant licensed pharmacists the authority “to order and administer select Covid-19 therapeutics” – which at the time meant monoclonal antibodies and vaccines.But when the FDA authorized Paxlovid and molnupiravir in December, it explicitly restricted pharmacists from prescribing them.Authors of the letter to Biden say they submitted data to the FDA at the end of January, hoping to persuade it to grant pharmacists prescribing authority.These groups have also lobbied the federal government to ensure Medicare Part B would reimburse pharmacists for such prescribing – a move that would probably lead health insurers to follow.Prescribing Paxlovid safely can be challenging, because it may interact harmfully with other medications. Additionally, the FDA advises against providing the treatment to those with severe kidney or liver impairment. Experts have also raised concerns about molnupiravir’s potential toxicities. It cannot be prescribed to minors and is not advised for pregnant women.Chanapa Tantibanchachai, an FDA press officer, said the agency’s decision to forbid pharmacists from prescribing Paxlovid and molnupiravir “was based on several factors, including the drugs’ side-effect profiles, the need to assess potential for drug interactions, the need to assess potential kidney function problems (including the severity of potential problems), and the need to evaluate patients for pre-existing conditions” linked to severe Covid-19.Tantibanchachai said the FDA could revise the policy “as new data and information become available”.On 4 March, the American Medical Association said the “pharmacy based clinic component of the Test to Treat plan flaunts patient safety and risks significant negative health outcomes”. The AMA argued that by prescribing Covid antivirals at such clinics, providers may endanger patients for whom they lack a comprehensive medical history.The pharmacy groups insisted in their letter to Biden they have the expertise to prescribe these medications.In an email to the Guardian, Al Carter, executive director of the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy, stated: “Pharmacists have more complete access to the patients’ medication in comparison to physicians, especially since most patients have more than one prescriber, who don’t necessarily talk with each other.“Pharmacists spend their whole education focused on medications and their impacts on the body; whereas physicians take the minimal number of classes on pharmacology.”Katherine Yang, a clinical pharmacist at the University of California, San Francisco, said: “There are a lot of studies that show that when you increase services in community pharmacies, you improve care. In a lot of neighborhoods and rural areas, people may not have access to primary care, and pharmacists are the most accessible public health provider the patients can see.”TopicsCoronavirusBiden administrationUS domestic policyUS politicsPfizerPharmaceuticals industrynewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Beto O’Rourke calls Texas governor Greg Abbott an ‘authoritarian’ and ‘thug’

      by

      Beto O’Rourke calls Texas governor Greg Abbott an ‘authoritarian’ and ‘thug’The Democratic gubernatorial candidate compared his Republican opponent to the Russian president Vladimir Putin

      Can Texas go purple? It may depend on Hispanic voters
      Beto O’Rourke, the Democratic candidate for Texas governor, has likened his Republican opponent to the Russian president Vladimir Putin, calling Greg Abbott an “authoritarian” and a “thug”.Judge blocks Texas from investigating parents of transgender childrenRead moreAs governor, Abbott has presided over draconian laws on issues including abortion, LGBTQ+ rights and voting rights. In February 2021, on his watch, a failure of the state energy grid during cold weather contributed to hundreds of deaths.O’Rourke is a former congressman and candidate for both US Senate and the Democratic presidential nomination. On Saturday, he spoke at the SXSW festival in Austin, the state capital.Speaking to Evan Smith, a co-founder of the Texas Tribune newspaper, O’Rourke said, “I just had a chance to meet with the ambassador from the [European Union]. We talked about the fact that you’re seeing the continued rise of authoritarians and thugs across the world. And we have our own, right here, in the state of Texas.”Smith asked: “Greg Abbott is a thug in your mind?”O’Rourke said: “He’s a thug, he’s an authoritarian. Let me make the case.“Not only could this guy, through his own incompetence, not keep the lights on in the energy capital of the planet last February, but when people like Kelcy Warren and other energy company CEOs made … $11bn in profit over five days – selling gas for 200 times the going rate – not only did [Abbott] not claw back those illegal profits, not only was there no justice for more than 700 people who were killed – who literally froze to death in their homes, outside, in their cars, people who are paying now tens of billions of dollars cumulatively to pay for the property damage that the flooding that ensued caused in their homes – but he’s taking millions of dollars in payoffs from these same people.“I mean, he’s got his own oligarch here in the state of Texas.”Russian oligarchs, billionaire businessmen who control fortunes often based on natural resources and work closely with Putin, have been subject to severe sanctions in the west since their president ordered the invasion of Ukraine last month.As the Texas Tribune reported, the state of Texas says 246 people died in the power grid failure in 2021 but other analysis has placed the figure as high as 702.The paper also pointed out that Warren, a co-founder of Energy Transfer, an oil pipeline company, recently sued O’Rourke for defamation. Warren did not immediately comment on Saturday. O’Rourke has called the lawsuit “frivolous”.According to testimony from a Texas power grid manager, energy prices were kept high in the aftermath of the failure as a way to incentivise private companies to avoid more blackouts.In a statement, Abbott’s campaign said: “It’s unfortunate Beto O’Rourke continues to run a campaign based on fear-mongering and tearing down Texas.”O’Rourke also linked Abbott to Putin when discussing a new elections law which critics say seeks to reduce participation among those likely to vote Democratic.“You think this stuff only exists in Russia or in other parts of the world?” said O’Rourke. “It’s happening right here. You think they rig elections in other parts of the planet? It is the toughest state in the nation in which to vote, right here.”‘Shivering under a pile of six blankets, I finally lost it’: my week in frozen Texas hellRead moreTexas has not elected a Democrat to statewide office since 1994 but progressives see hope in demographic change. O’Rourke showed strongly in his US Senate race in 2018, losing narrowly to the Republican Ted Cruz. But his run for the presidency went nowhere.The Hollywood actor Matthew McConaughey’s decision not to run for governor cleared O’Rourke’s path but Realclearpolitics.com on Saturday put Abbott up by 8.8% in its polling average. Fivethirtyeight.com showed Abbott up by between 5% and 11%.On Saturday, O’Rourke said he would seek to work with Republicans on gun control reform, strong remarks on the subject having proved unpopular with Texans in 2020. He also discussed immigration and Joe Biden – who he said was “not a drag on anyone”.Mark Miner, Abbott’s communications director, said: “It appears if you want Beto to tell the truth, you need to put him in front of out-of-state liberal elitists, not the people of Texas.”TopicsBeto O’RourkeGreg AbbottTexasUS politicsDemocratsRepublicansUS domestic policynewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Don’t Say Gay’: Disney clashes with DeSantis over Florida bill

      by

      ‘Don’t Say Gay’: Disney clashes with DeSantis over Florida billEntertainment giant suspends political donations as CEO apologises for silence and governor hits back with ‘communist’ barb The Republican governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis, claimed the Walt Disney Company was too cozy with communist China, as the chief executive of the tourism and entertainment criticized a state bill that bars teachers from instructing early grades on LGBTQ+ issues.Disney accused of removing gay content from Pixar films Read moreDeSantis, who has not yet signed the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” bill, also reportedly criticized Disney as “woke”, after the company’s leader opposed the legislation.Controversy surrounding the bill could cut off a significant fundraising pipeline for Florida Republicans: Disney said it would suspend political donations in the state.The move came after the Disney chief executive, Bob Chapek, experienced extensive blowback for not using the company’s influence to thwart the controversial bill.“I do not want anyone to mistake a lack of a statement for a lack of support,” Chapek said early this week in a memo obtained by USA Today.“We all share the same goal of a more tolerant, respectful world. Where we may differ is in the tactics to get there.“And because this struggle is much bigger than any one bill in any one state, I believe the best way for our company to bring about lasting change is through the inspiring content we produce, the welcoming culture we create, and the diverse community organizations we support.”Chapek’s first public statements on the bill came in a shareholder’s meeting on Wednesday.“We were opposed to the bill from the outset but we chose not to take a public position on it because we thought we could be more effective working behind the scenes engaging directly with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle,” he reportedly said.Chapek claimed such efforts had taken place for weeks. The executive said he had called DeSantis to express Disney’s “disappointment” with the “Don’t Say Gay” bill.Chapek posted a statement online and emailed staffers on Friday, saying Disney was wrong to stay silent as the Republican-majority Florida legislature greenlit a bill he called “yet another challenge to basic human rights”.Republicans contend that parents, not educators, should discuss gender issues with children in early grades. The bill bars prohibits instruction on “sexual orientation or gender identity” in kindergarten through grade three.DeSantis, who has indicated that he supports the measure, has chafed at calls for a veto. A potential frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, he sent a fundraising email that said: “Disney is in far too deep with the communist party of China and has lost any moral authority to tell you what to do.”The statement shocked Republicans and Democrats. Disney theme parks are a multibillion-dollar economic engine for Florida. The company has given outsize amounts to state parties and politicians and holds significant influence in state government.DeSantis also criticized Disney at a campaign event in South Florida Thursday.“Companies that have made a fortune catering to families should understand that parents don’t want this injected into their kid’s kindergarten classroom,” DeSantis said. “Our policies will be based on the best interest of Florida citizens, not the musing of woke corporations.”Rick Wilson, a former Republican operative now part of the Lincoln Project, told the Associated Press: “The weird hypocrisy of Florida politics right now is DeSantis has been happy to take Disney’s money but to pass a bill that’s anathema to the values of their customers and their institution.”A Republican lawmaker who didn’t want to be named because he or she did not want to comment publicly against the governor told the same outlet Disney was the third-highest contributor to state Republican candidates. Disney has given millions to both Democrats and Republicans.Disney opened a theme park in China six years ago and has landed access to that country’s booming film market. It has also been accused of altering content to satisfy China’s leaders.DeSantis’s critics charged that he was opposing Disney out of his ambition to win the Republican primary.“It’s really pretty shocking,” former Republican governor Charlie Crist, now a Democratic congressman who hopes to challenge DeSantis, told the AP.Outcry as Georgia lawmakers aim to pass Florida-style ‘don’t say gay’ bill Read moreCrist noted that DeSantis has gone head-to-head with other industries important to Florida, pointing to a legal fight with cruise companies which wanted passengers to show proof of Covid-19 vaccinations.“Now it’s Disney. Who’s next on the hit list for this governor?” Crist commented.The Democratic US congressman Darren Soto also questioned the governor’s attack.“This is another strike in the hate agenda that Governor DeSantis is pushing right now,” Soto said, noting that Florida’s budget relies heavily on sales tax generated by Disney and other theme parks.“Now he’s putting that in jeopardy because he wants to attack LGBTQ+ families, families that make up a fundamental part of the Disney atmosphere.”
      The Associated Press contributed to this report
      TopicsFloridaRon DeSantisRepublicansLGBT rightsWalt Disney CompanyUS politicsUS domestic policynewsReuse this content More