US Senate

Subterms

    More stories

    • 200 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Larry Hogan says he doesn’t want to be a senator – but he’s polling well anyway

      by

      Larry Hogan, the Republican candidate for US Senate in Maryland who says he doesn’t really want to be a US senator but is running anyway, is tied with or leads his possible Democratic opponents, according to a poll released on Thursday.The former governor of Maryland leads Angela Alsobrooks, a state politician, by seven points in a hypothetical matchup and ties at 42% support with the US congressman David Trone, in a poll by Emerson College, the Hill and DC News Now.Governor from 2015 to 2023, Hogan left office as a popular moderate Republican in an otherwise generally Democratic state. Opposing Donald Trump’s grip on his party, and flirting with a third-party presidential run, Hogan repeatedly said he did not want to succeed the Democrat Ben Cardin in the Senate after Cardin retires next year.Last week, Hogan said he would run after all.Last May, Hogan said he did not “have a burning desire to be a senator”, would find sitting in the Senate “really frustrating on a personal human level”, thought being a senator was “not where my skill set lies” and said that although he could win a seat, “the problem was I would win and I would have to go be a senator”.On Wednesday he told CNN “not much” had changed.“I still feel exactly the same way,” he said. “Not a lot gets done in Washington. Who in their right mind would want to go in and be a part of that divisiveness and dysfunction? I said I wasn’t going to walk away from politics, I was going to try to be a voice, standing up to try to fix things, and you can’t just sit back and complain about things if you’re not willing to try to make a difference.“Still personally, there’s not a burning desire to go be a senator … I’m only doing it because I think I have a unique voice and perspective.”Hogan also said he only decided to run “a week ago, after the debacle that took place on the Senate floor”, when Republicans sank a border and immigration deal they themselves helped draft apparently in part because Trump told them to do so.The poll noted that Hogan also holds broad appeal in a matchup against Trone among independents, at 48%, and would attract the support of nearly a quarter of Democratic voters.Hogan was therefore a prized target for Mitch McConnell, the Republican Senate minority leader, who is seeking to take control of the chamber in November.“In Maryland I won huge numbers of suburban women and Black voters,” Hogan told CNN. “I have been able to reach out to people across the spectrum.”Asked about appealing to such voters while on a Republican ticket headed by Trump, Hogan said: “It’s a big challenge. Maryland is the most Democratic state in the country. But I’m not running as Donald Trump … I’m not running for the Republican party or for any candidate for president. I decided to run to kind of stand up and fight for the people of Maryland, and stand against the broken politics in Washington.”Hogan has held positions that could reduce his bipartisan appeal. Asked on CNN about his record on abortion – an issue that has fueled Democratic victories since the US supreme court removed the federal right in 2022 – Hogan said he was a moderate.“I’m personally not a proponent of abortion,” he said, “but I said I’m not going to take away that right for others to make that decision for themselves.”Calling Democratic attacks on the issue “tired”, Hogan said that as a senator, he would not vote for a national abortion ban.“I understand why this is such an important and emotional issue for women across Maryland and across the country,” he said, adding: “There’s no threat to the protection of these rights in Maryland, where it’s already a law. Voters have already weighed in on it. It’s settled law.”Hogan’s successor as governor, the Democrat Wes Moore, hit back, telling the Baltimore Banner: “Anyone who thinks that there is no threat to women’s reproductive rights and abortion access is delusional.” More

    • 225 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Mike Johnson declares ‘no need for public alarm’ after national security warning, reports say – as it happened

      by

      House speaker Mike Johnson has reportedly declared “no need for public alarm” regarding House intelligence committee chair Mike Turner’s national security warning. “Steady hands are at the wheel, we’re working on it, there’s no need for alarm,” Johnson told media on Wednesday afternoon.His comments come after Turner issued a statement that Congress had been made aware of a “serious national security threat” and called on Joe Biden to “declassify all information” related to it.During a press briefing, the national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, said he planned to meet with members of the House intelligence committee on Thursday.“We scheduled a briefing for the for House members of the Gang of Eight tomorrow,” said Sullivan. “I am a bit surprised that Congressman Turner came out publicly today in advance of a meeting on the books for me to go sit with him alongside our intelligence and defense professionals tomorrow.”Turner’s concerns are reportedly related to Russian military capabilities.Thanks for following along today, live blog readers. As we close up for the day, here’s a quick summary of today’s developments in U.S. politics – including the fallout from Alejandro Mayorkas’ impeachment and cryptic warnings about a looming national security threat:
      Democrats reacted to the Tuesday vote to impeach Department of Homeland Security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas – the first time in nearly 150 years that a Cabinet secretary has been impeached. “History will not look kindly on House Republicans for their blatant act of unconstitutional partisanship,” said Joe Biden, of the impeachment.
      The impeachment effort will almost certainly die in the senate, which would require a supermajority vote to impeach following a trial that begins in two weeks. Democratic senate majority leader Chuck Schumer has called the impeachment a “sham.”
      House intelligence committee chair Mike Turner warned in a cryptic statement of a national security threat, calling on Biden to “declassify all information related to this threat”. During a press briefing, the national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, declined to directly address the nature of the alleged threat and said he had “scheduled a briefing for House members of the Gang of Eight” on Thursday.
      The Washington Post reported that the security threat had been identified using surveillance permitted under section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (Fisa), a controversial provision that allows the government to surveil non-citizens abroad – but has also led to the surveillance of Americans’ phone calls, texts and emails. House Republicans are pushing to enact a version of Fisa that does not include a warrant requirement for the FBI – a reform critics of the legislation have long advocated.
      A Republican activist charged for his involvement in the fake elector scheme in Michigan testified today that he didn’t knowingly try to unlawfully subvert the results of the 2020 election. He was charged with creating a false public record.
      Democratic House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries said in a statement on the topic of the alleged national security threat that the “most urgent national security threat facing the American people right now is the possibility that Congress abandons Ukraine and allows Vladimir Putin’s Russia to win”.The Guardian’s Dan Sabbagh reports on Nato’s secretary general responding to Donald Trump’s disparaging comments about Nato countries: Jens Stoltenberg, Nato’s secretary general, has accused Donald Trump of undermining the basis of the transatlantic alliance as he announced that 18 Nato members were expected to beat the target of spending more than 2% of GDP on defence.It was the second rebuke by the Nato chief to the Republican frontrunner in less than a week, reinforced by a declaration that Germany was among the countries planning to spend over the threshold for the first time in a generation.“We should not undermine the credibility of Nato’s deterrence,” Stoltenberg said on Wednesday as he responded to comments made by Trump at a campaign rally at the weekend. “Deterrence is in the mind of our adversaries,” he added.On Saturday, Trump caused outrage in Europe when he said he would “not protect” any Nato member that had failed to meet the 2% target – and added that he would even encourage Russia to continue attacking them.A day later, Stoltenberg said Trump’s rhetoric “puts American and European soldiers at increased risk”, while on Wednesday, before a meeting of defence ministers, the normally diplomatic secretary general returned to the theme, arguing: “We should leave no room for miscalculation or misunderstanding in Moscow.”The Washington Post reports that the alleged security threat that House intelligence committee chairman Mike Turner warned about in a cryptic statement today was likely identified using surveillance permitted under section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (Fisa), a controversial provision that allows the government to spy on non-citizens living abroad – and has also led to the surveillance of Americans’ phone calls, texts and emails.House Republicans are pushing for a new version of the bill that does not include a warrant requirement for the FBI – a key reform critics of the legislation have pushed for.House speaker Mike Johnson has said there is “no need for public alarm” regarding the unconfirmed national security threat.In a statement, the chair of the Senate select committee on intelligence, Mark Warner, and the vice-chair of the committee, Marco Rubio, said the committee “has the intelligence” that House intelligence committee chair Mike Turner referred to in a Wednesday statement warning of a national security threat.According to the statement, the committee “has been rigorously tracking this issue from the start”. The statement warned against “potentially disclosing sources and methods that may be key to preserving a range of options for US action”.CNN has reported the alleged threat is related to Russian military capabilities.Nikki Haley blasted Donald Trump for his comments on her husband, who is currently deployed overseas. The Guardian’s Martin Pengelly puts Haley’s remarks in context:Donald Trump is “unhinged” and “diminished”, said Nikki Haley, the former president’s last rival for the Republican presidential nomination, on Wednesday.“To mock my husband, Michael and I can handle that,” the former South Carolina governor and UN ambassador told NBC News’s Today, referring to comments by Trump about Michael Haley, a national guard officer deployed in Djibouti.“But you mock one member of the military, you mock all members of the military … Before, when he did it, it was during the 2016 election, and everybody thought, ‘Oh, did he have a slip? What did that mean?’ The problem now is he is not the same person he was in 2016. He is unhinged. He is more diminished than he was.”In the 2016 campaign, Trump mocked John McCain, an Arizona senator and former nominee for president who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam. Having avoided the draft for that war, Trump was expected to pay a heavy political price but did not, going on to attract controversy in office for allegedly deriding those who serve.House speaker Mike Johnson has reportedly declared “no need for public alarm” regarding House intelligence committee chair Mike Turner’s national security warning. “Steady hands are at the wheel, we’re working on it, there’s no need for alarm,” Johnson told media on Wednesday afternoon.His comments come after Turner issued a statement that Congress had been made aware of a “serious national security threat” and called on Joe Biden to “declassify all information” related to it.During a press briefing, the national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, said he planned to meet with members of the House intelligence committee on Thursday.“We scheduled a briefing for the for House members of the Gang of Eight tomorrow,” said Sullivan. “I am a bit surprised that Congressman Turner came out publicly today in advance of a meeting on the books for me to go sit with him alongside our intelligence and defense professionals tomorrow.”Turner’s concerns are reportedly related to Russian military capabilities.A Michigan Republican accused of participating in a fake elector plot after the 2020 presidential election testified on Wednesday that he did not know how the electoral process worked and never intended to make a false public record, the Associated Press reports.“We were told this was an appropriate process,” James Renner, 77, said during a preliminary hearing for a half-dozen other electors who face forgery and other charges.People who falsely posed as electors in a six-state scheme to overturn the 2020 presidential election have been criminally charged in Georgia and Nevada. In Wisconsin, false electors agreed to a settlement in a civil case in December.“You have a majority of Americans who believe that we need to protect our democracy,” said White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre in response to a question about recent polling showing about 18% of Americans believe in the conspiracy theory that Taylor Swift is part of a plot by Democrats to deliver the 2024 presidential election to Joe Biden. That poll also found people who believe the Taylor Swift theory are also more likely to doubt the validity of the 2020 presidential election.The United States expects Israel to meet its commitment to allow a shipment of flour to be moved into Gaza, White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters on Wednesday, Reuters reports.Sullivan was responding to a question about an Axios report on Tuesday that said the Israeli government was blocking a US-funded flour shipment to Gaza.Jake Sullivan has finished taking questions from the media and has left the west wing now. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre will now take the briefing onto more domestic matters in US political news.Meanwhile, Axios wrote:
      Israeli ultranationalist Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich is blocking a U.S.-funded flour shipment to Gaza because its recipient is the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), two Israeli and U.S. officials told Axios.
      U.S. officials said this is a violation of a commitment Benjamin Netanyahu personally made to President Biden several weeks ago and another reason the U.S. leader is frustrated with the Israeli prime minister.
      CNN reports the national security threat that Congressman Mike Turner called on Joe Biden to declassify is related to a “highly concerning and destabilizing” Russian military capability.During a press briefing, the national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, declined to comment on the specifics of the threat.“We scheduled a briefing for the for House members of the Gang of Eight tomorrow,” said Sullivan. “I am a bit surprised that Congressman Turner came out publicly today in advance of a meeting on the books for me to go sit with him alongside our intelligence and defense professionals tomorrow.”National security adviser Jake Sullivan was asked at the White House press briefing about efforts to secure a “temporary pause” in the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza, and how that might work.There are international talks under way in Egypt about a ceasefire in Gaza and a deal with Hamas to return hostages it took during its attack on southern Israel on 7 October 2023, which provoked a crushing Israeli military response in Gaza. Our colleague Bethan McKernan reports that mediators are struggling to make progress in the face of a threatened Israeli offensive on Rafah, the Palestinian territory’s last place of relative safety.Sullivan described that a plan could “start with the temporary pause … The idea is that we have multiple phases as part of the hostage deal and we move from phase 1 to the next and we can extend the pause [in fighting] as more hostages come out.”He added: “What we would like to see is that Hamas is ultimately defeated, that peace and security come to Gaza, and then we work towards a longer term, two-state solution, with Gaza’s security guaranteed.”Our colleague Léonie Chao-Fong wrote this explainer piece over the weekend about the latest US push for a solution in the Middle East that would result in Israel and Palestine coexisting in peace. You can read it here.In a statement, Republican congressman Mike Turner, who chairs the House intelligence committee, warned that Congress had been alerted to a “serious national security threat” and called on Biden to “declassify all information related to this threat”. During a press briefing, the national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, declined to directly address the nature of the alleged threat and said that he had plans to meet with congressional intelligence lawmakers tomorrow. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Mayorkas impeachment: petty, doomed … but still potentially damaging

      by

      In 1876, the last US cabinet official to be impeached, William Belknap, resigned before the House could vote on the matter. Ulysses S Grant’s secretary of war was tried in the Senate anyway, on charges of corruption, but escaped conviction.Nearly 150 years later, in the House on Tuesday and at the second time of asking, Republicans corralled just enough votes to ensure Joe Biden’s secretary of homeland security, Alejandro Mayorkas, suffered Belknap’s fate. But Mayorkas has not resigned – and nor is he likely to be convicted and removed.Democrats control the Senate, which means Mayorkas is all but certain to be acquitted at any trial, regardless of reported doubts among Republican senators about their party’s case.After the 214-213 vote to impeach, Chuck Schumer, the Democratic Senate majority leader, set out what will happen next. House managers will present the articles of impeachment after Monday’s President’s Day holiday. Senators will be sworn in as jurors. And Patty Murray of Washington state, the Democratic Senate president pro tempore, will preside thereafter.Schumer also issued a stinging statement.“This sham impeachment effort is another embarrassment for House Republicans,” the New Yorker said. “The one and only reason for this impeachment is for Speaker [Mike] Johnson to further appease Donald Trump.”The Mayorkas impeachment is of a kind with Senate Republicans’ decision last week to detonate their own hard-won border and immigration bill because Trump, their likely nominee for president, wants to campaign on the issue.Schumer continued: “House Republicans failed to produce any evidence that Secretary Mayorkas has committed any crime. House Republicans failed to show he has violated the constitution. House Republicans failed to present any evidence of anything resembling an impeachable offense. This is a new low for House Republicans.”Most observers agree that the charges against Mayorkas – basically, that he performed incompetently and violated immigration law regarding the southern border – do not remotely rise to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanours”, as constitutionally required for impeachment and removal.Perhaps with a nod to the unfortunate Belknap, the Biden White House weighed in, saying: “History will not look kindly on House Republicans for their blatant act of unconstitutional partisanship that has targeted an honorable public servant in order to play petty political games.”But history also records that all impeachments (and impeachment efforts, such as that mounted by Republicans against Biden himself) are inherently political, so this one could prove as politically potent as did those of Trump. Both Trump impeachments concerned behaviour – blackmailing Ukraine for political dirt and inciting the January 6 attack on Congress – much closer by any standard to the status of high crimes and misdemeanours. Regardless, Republicans ensured Trump was acquitted in both and have since fed Trump’s fierce desire for revenge.The Mayorkas impeachment was driven by Trump-aligned extremists prominently including Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia.Speaking to reporters on the Capitol steps on Tuesday, the same day the Senate passed a $95bn national security package including funding for Ukraine in its war with Russia, Greene said she was “very thankful to our Republican Congress. We’re finally working together with the American people to send a message to the Biden administration that it’s our border that matters, not other countries’ borders. Our border matters.”Claiming Mayorkas was guilty of “willful betrayal of the American people and breaking federal immigration laws”, Greene also said the impeachment “sends a message to America that Republicans can get our job done when we work together and do what’s important and what the American people want us to do.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIf there were any remaining doubt that Mayorkas was impeached in service of pure politics, Greene said senators set to sit as jurors should “look at the polling. They know that our border security is the No 1 issue in every single campaign in every single state, every single city, in every single community … They better pay attention to the American people.”It is not certain, however, that a trial will happen.Joshua Matz, a lawyer who has written extensively on impeachment and worked on both impeachments of Trump, recently told Politico: “Impeachment trials are meant to be deadly serious business for matters of state – not free publicity for the House majority to air policy attacks on the current administration.”The Mayorkas impeachment articles, Matz said, are “so manifestly about policy disagreement rather than anything that could arguably qualify as high crimes and misdemeanours, that it would be unwarranted to waste the Senate’s time with the trial on the matter.“The articles are formally deficient in so many ways that any trial would be flagrantly unfair and create such grave due process issues that it would be outrageous to even proceed.”Senate Democrats could bring up a simple motion to dismiss the Mayorkas charges, a gambit which would be likely to succeed, given indicated support from the West Virginia centrist Joe Manchin, a key swing vote in the narrowly divided chamber. Less starkly, Democrats could seek to tie proceedings up in procedure, options including sending the charges to a committee, there to sit in limbo throughout an election year.All choices carry political peril, however. On Wednesday, the news site Semafor quoted an unnamed Republican aide as saying: “If Democrats give Republicans the opportunity to say that they are sweeping this under the rug, we will gladly take it.“If this is the sham Democrats claim it is, why would they be afraid of holding a trial?” More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Republicans’ topsy-turvy take on aid for Ukraine reveals party in thrall to Trump

      by

      Nearly a decade ago, as Russian troops entered the Crimean peninsula, congressional Republicans were in uproar, blaming Moscow’s land grab on what they claimed was a retreat from American leadership by then president Barack Obama. Loudest among the Republican critics was the South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham, who assailed Obama as a “weak, indecisive leader”.In a pre-dawn vote on Tuesday, Graham joined the majority of Senate Republicans in opposing a foreign aid package that would rush wartime assistance to Ukraine as it approaches the second anniversary of Russia’s full invasion.It was a shocking – if not entirely surprising – turn for one of the chamber’s leading defense hawks and a steadfast Russia critic. But these days Graham has another distinction: he is one of Donald Trump’s most loyal allies on Capitol Hill, where the former president – and likely Republican nominee – has been whipping up opposition to Ukraine’s war effort.Just 22 Republican senators broke with Trump to approve the aid package for Ukraine, Israel and other US allies – yet another sign of how thoroughly the former president’s America First vision has supplanted the party’s consensus toward internationalism and interventionism.There has long been an isolationist strain among hardline Republicans who contend that investment in foreign entanglements risks bringing the US closer to war and diverts money away from domestic challenges. But then Trump came to power and sidelined the defense hawks, ushering in a dramatic shift in Republican sentiment toward America’s allies and adversaries.Nearly half of Republicans and right-leaning independents said the US was providing too much aid to Ukraine, according to a survey by the Pew Research Center conducted late last year. This share rose sharply from the early stages of the war following Russia’s invasion in February 2022.In his statement on Monday night, Graham insisted that he still supported Ukraine but said unless and until lawmakers turn the $95bn military assistance package into a “loan instead of a grant”, he would oppose it.It echoed comments Trump made over the weekend, in an all-caps social media post addressed to the US Senate, in which he said foreign aid should be structured as a loan, not a “giveaway”. Later in a campaign speech, Trump rattled American allies in Europe when he claimed that he would encourage Russia to attack Nato allies who did not pay enough to maintain the security alliance.But in Washington, most Republicans dismissed or downplayed the remark.“I was here when he was president. He didn’t undermine or destroy Nato,” senator Marco Rubio, a Florida Republican who sponsored legislation to block a US president from unilaterally withdrawing from Nato, told reporters. The senator, who built a reputation as a defense hawk, voted against the military assistance measure on Tuesday.The bill, which includes $60bn for Ukraine, divided the Senate Republican leadership. From the Senate floor, Senator Mitch McConnell, the top Republican, delivered increasingly urgent pleas for his conference to rise to the occasion and support America’s allies, even after his plan to tie border security to foreign aid collapsed, torpedoed by Trump’s opposition.“This is about rebuilding the arsenal of democracy and demonstrating to our allies and adversaries alike that we’re serious about exercising American strength,” McConnell said. “American assistance with these efforts is not charity. It’s an investment in cold, hard US interests.”McConnell’s deputy, John Thune of South Dakota, voted for the measure, while John Barrasso of Wyoming, the No 3 Senate Republican, opposed it. Barrasso has endorsed Trump for president.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn a floor speech, Senator Rand Paul, who led the effort to delay the measure, accused McConnell, a fellow Republican from Kentucky, of collaborating with Democrats to “loot the Treasury”. He panned McConnell’s argument that bolstering Ukraine’s defense was critical to American national security as “ludicrous”.The Ohio senator JD Vance, another Trump loyalist, claimed the effort to replenish Ukraine’s war chest was a “plot” by the Republican establishment to “stop the election of Donald Trump”. Meanwhile, some arch-conservatives suggested it was time for McConnell to step down.Now the bill goes to the House, where the speaker, Mike Johnson, must tread carefully not to meet the same fate as his prematurely deposed predecessor. Johnson indicated that he was unlikely to bring the measure to the floor for a vote because it lacks border enforcement measures. But just last week he announced that he would refuse to bring a version of the bill that included a border security deal because the Trump-allied hardliners who hold outsized power over his thin majority were wary of handing Joe Biden anything that resembled a political victory.House Democrats and the remaining pro-Ukraine House Republicans are casting about behind the scenes for a solution. But there are many political and logistical hurdles to overcome before a majority bloc not accustomed to working together in the tribal House comes together to circumvent Johnson – and by extension Trump.“If it were to get to the floor, it would pass,” congressman Andy Biggs, a member of the hardline House Freedom caucus and a staunch opponent of the aid package, told a conservative radio host on Tuesday morning. “Let’s just be frank about that.”But until the bill reaches Biden’s desk, Biggs’s admission is cold comfort to American allies waiting for Congress to act. More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      US Senate moves forward $95bn Ukraine and Israel aid package

      by

      After many setbacks and much suspense, the Senate appeared on track this week to approve a long-awaited package of wartime funding for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, as Republican opponents staged a filibuster to register their disapproval over a measure they could not block.The Senate voted 66-33, exceeding a 60-vote margin, to sweep aside the last procedural hurdle and limit debate on the measure to a final 30 hours before a vote on passage that could come on Wednesday.Senators had worked through the weekend on the roughly $95bn emergency spending package, which cleared a series of procedural hurdles as it moved toward final passage. The chamber voted on the legislation on Monday night following hours of debate and a talking filibuster led by Republican senator Rand Paul and joined by a coterie of Donald Trump’s allies in the chamber.On Monday, Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, said the weekend votes demonstrated “beyond doubt that there’s strong support” for advancing the foreign aid package.Schumer said: “These are the enormously high stakes of the supplemental package: our security, our values, our democracy. It is a down payment for the survival of western democracy and the survival of American values.”He continued: “The entire world is going to remember what the Senate does in the next few days. Nothing – nothing – would make Putin happier right now than to see Congress waver in its support for Ukraine; nothing would help him more on the battlefield.”If the bill passes the Senate as expected, the bill would next go to the Republican-led House, where next steps are uncertain. Though a bipartisan majority still supports sending assistance to Ukraine, there is a growing contingent of Republican skeptics who echo Trump’s disdain for the US-backed war effort.“House Republicans were crystal clear from the very beginning of discussions that any so-called national security supplemental legislation must recognize that national security begins at our own border,” read a statement from House speaker Mike Johnson.The Republican speaker said the package lacked border security provisions, calling it “silent on the most pressing issue facing our country”. It was the latest – and potentially most consequential – sign of opposition to the Ukraine aid from conservatives who have for months demanded that border security policy be included in the package, only to last week reject a bipartisan proposal intended to curb the number of illegal crossings at the US-Mexico border.“Now, in the absence of having received any single border policy change from the Senate, the House will have to continue to work its own will on these important matters,” Johnson said. “America deserves better than the Senate’s status quo.”The measure includes $60bn in funding for Ukraine, where soldiers are running out of ammunition as the country seeks to repel Russian troops nearly two years after the invasion. Much of that money would go toward supporting Ukraine’s military operations and to replenishing the US supply of weapons and equipment that have been sent to the frontlines. Another $14bn would go to support Israel and US military operations in the region. More than $8bn would go to support US partners in the Indo-Pacific region, including Taiwan, as part of its effort to deter aggression by China.It also allots nearly $10bn for humanitarian efforts in Ukraine, Israel and Gaza, where nearly a quarter of residents are starving and large swaths of the territory have been ravaged.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionNot included in the package is a bipartisan border clampdown demanded by Republicans in exchange for their support for the foreign aid package. But after months of fraught negotiations, Republicans abandoned the deal following Trump’s vocal opposition to the border-security measure.Though its Republican defenders argued that it was the most conservative immigration reform proposal put forward in decades, Trump loyalists on Capitol Hill deemed it inadequate amid record levels of migration at the US southern border. Others were more explicit, warning that bipartisan action to address the situation could help Joe Biden’s electoral prospects in the November elections.Border security is top of mind for many Americans, the overwhelming majority of whom disapprove of the president’s handling of the issue.After the Senate failed to advance the border security measure, Schumer stripped it out and moved ahead with a narrowly-tailored foreign aid package. In floor speeches on Monday, several Republican senators lamented the absence of border enforcement policies, though all had voted to reject the bipartisan immigration deal last week.“Open the champagne, pop the cork! The Senate Democrat leader and the Republican leader are on their way to Kyiv,” Paul said, launching the filibuster. He continued: “They’re taking your money to Kyiv. They didn’t have much time – really no time and no money – to do anything about our border.” More

    • 200 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Larry Hogan launches Republican Senate bid after saying he lacks ‘burning desire to be a senator’

      by

      Larry Hogan, the former Republican governor of Maryland who on Friday announced a surprise US Senate run, told an interviewer last year he did not “have a burning desire to be a senator”, would find sitting in the Senate “really frustrating”, thought being a senator was “not where my skill set lies”, and said that though he could win a seat, “the problem was I would win and I would have to go be a senator”.Hogan made the stark remarks, which may now come to haunt him, in an interview last May with Johanna Maska, host of the Press Advance podcast and a former White House aide to Barack Obama.Hogan left office in Maryland in January 2023 after two terms as governor. A popular moderate Republican in a deeply Democratic state, he was long linked to a presidential bid with No Labels, a centrist group considering a challenge to Joe Biden and Donald Trump, the likely GOP nominee.On Friday, however, Politico first reported that Hogan was jumping into the race to succeed Ben Cardin, a long-serving, retiring Democrat, in the US Senate.Releasing a video announcement, Hogan said: “I am running for the United States senate – not to serve one party – but to stand up to both parties, fight for Maryland, and fix our nation’s broken politics. It’s what I did as Maryland’s governor, and it’s exactly how I’ll serve Maryland in the Senate. Let’s get back to work.”He may have work to do to explain his comments to Maska.Asked about previous comments in which he said he wouldn’t run for the Senate, and if he could change his mind, Hogan said: “You know, I’ve said over and over again that number one, I just didn’t have a burning desire to be a senator.“You know, I love being governor. I’ve been running businesses my whole life. I’m more of an executive. I got to make decisions every day that [affected] people’s lives and you have a lot of ability to make a difference.“The Senate, not to say it’s not an important job, but you’re one of 100 and you’re, you know, arguing all day and making speeches in committees but very little ever seems to get done. And so I think just on a personal human level, I think it’d be really frustrating to be sitting in the Senate, I’m not sure it would motivate me, it’s not where my skill set lies, I don’t think.”Hogan’s decision to run for Senate came the same week Republicans in the chamber tanked their own border and immigration reform bill at the command of Trump.Hogan is a rare Republican critic of the former president. In his interview with Maska, he referred to widely reported attempts by the Senate GOP to recruit him as a prized moderate in a party which has seen a succession of extremists defeated in key states.“I get why they’re coming after me,” Hogan said. “We haven’t elected a Republican senator [in Maryland] since 1986 [when Charles Mathias retired] and in the last seat that opened up, two years ago [the Democrat] Chris Van Hollen, a Washington Post poll said I would have beaten him by 12 points.“You know … I left [the governor’s mansion] with the highest approval rating of any politician in state history and so I probably could win the seat. But … the problem was I would win and I would have to go be a senator.”The former governor did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Maryland Republican party said it could not speak for Hogan. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Hospitalized lawmakers showing up for last-minute votes? Not as rare as you’d think

      by

      The US House of Representatives was on edge on Tuesday night: would the homeland security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, be impeached? The Republicans’ mission looked likely to succeed, just barely, when a lone Democrat in a wheelchair and a hospital outfit emerged and put a stop to it.That man was Al Green – not that Al Green, but a representative from Texas who’d taken an Uber from the hospital to make his views known. In a line perfectly tailored to a scene the New York Times compared to a political thriller, Green told the paper: “I came because it was personal.” He had undergone emergency abdominal surgery days before and was back in his hospital bed when he spoke to the reporter, Kayla Guo.It’s not the first time the US Capitol has played host to such a dramatic vote. Lawmakers have always had to balance their physical health with the demands of the job – and on occasions from the passage of the Civil Rights Act to the near-death of Obamacare, the results have been momentous.Green was the latest politician to make such a memorable entrance. “I had to cast this vote because this is a good, decent man whose reputation should not be besmirched,” he said of Mayorkas, who Republicans, in a partisan effort, accused of purposely failing to enforce immigration laws. Signs suggest they may attempt the process again – but for now, Green’s last-minute rush to the chamber prevented the first impeachment of a cabinet member since 1876.A comparable moment in recent memory came in 2017. After he was diagnosed with brain cancer, John McCain returned to the Senate to weigh in on the future of the Affordable Care Act, AKA Obamacare, travelling across the country from his home in Arizona. And that wasn’t the most surprising part: with Republicans only slightly outnumbering Democrats in the Senate, 52-48, there was little wiggle room in their effort to undo the health law.McCain’s return could have helped his party undermine legislation that members had been whining about for almost a decade – and which McCain himself opposed. But his views on the “skinny” repeal were more complicated. On 25 July, he voted to begin debate on the bill but expressed his reservations about it, calling it a “shell of a bill” and condemning the process that created it.A few nights later, with a scar over his left eyebrow, he told reporters to “wait for the show”. When it came time to vote, he gave a thumbs down, casting a decisive vote that salvaged the healthcare reform he had campaigned against; gasps could be heard in the chamber. “I was thanked for my vote by Democratic friends more profusely than I should have been for helping save Obamacare,” he later wrote. “That had not been my goal.” Still, the healthcare act lived on.Another historic piece of US legislation, the Civil Rights Act, benefited from the heroics of a single lawmaker in poor health. In 1964, the law had passed the House and was facing a Senate vote – but 18 senators were determined to filibuster it. Senator Richard Russell, a Georgia Democrat, said he and his allies would “resist to the bitter end” efforts “to bring about social equality” in the south. The chamber needed 67 votes to end the filibuster, and Senator Clair Engle, a California Democrat, was in the hospital with a brain tumor.View image in fullscreenOn the day of the vote, as Colin Son recounted in the journal Neurosurgical Focus, an ambulance carried Engle to the chamber. In a wheelchair, he struggled to speak; instead, he pointed to his eye, mouthing the word “aye”. Some colleagues were said to be in tears. The vote counted, and the measure passed, allowing the bill to move forward. Engle returned to the chamber for the last time nine days later, on 19 June, when the Senate passed the Civil Rights Act.Other instances of rushed trips to the Capitol have had somewhat lower stakes. In 1985, for instance, Pete Wilson of California arrived in the Senate in a wheelchair and a bathrobe at 1.32am after getting his appendix out. According to a Times report, he asked colleagues: “What was the question?” and then voted to pass Ronald Reagan’s 1986 budget, prompting cheers. And across the ocean, Westminster has seen its share of politicians overcoming illness to cast votes: in 2018, for instance, the Labour MP Naz Shah discharged herself from a hospital and traveled four hours to London for a vote on a Brexit amendment. “I was standing next to Laura Pidcock [the Labour MP for North West Durham], who is eight months pregnant and in agony,” she told the Guardian at the time.Shah called the voting process archaic; similar arguments have been made about the US system. Last year, several House Democrats introduced a bill to allow voting by proxy, which was permitted early in the pandemic but shut down when Republicans took control of the House. “Of course we’re going to try to get here no matter what, but we have medical emergencies, just like our constituents do,” Representative Deborah Ross told CQ Roll Call.Then again, some perfectly healthy US lawmakers have done the opposite. On multiple occasions, senators have had to be essentially hauled on to the chamber floor.In 1988, the Senate’s sergeant-at-arms was ordered to arrest no-shows – it was the only way to halt a filibuster. According to the chamber’s official history, he “led a ‘posse of six Capitol police officers’ in a post-midnight search” of their offices. Senator Robert Packwood, an Oregon Republican, had jammed a chair against his door, but officers finally managed to get him to the chamber.“By prearrangement, Senator Packwood collapsed into the arms of the officers who then transported him feet-first into the Chamber,” the history says. “On his feet again, he announced: ‘I did not come fully voluntarily.’” More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      US Senate advances wartime aid package for Ukraine and Israel

      by

      The Senate on Thursday advanced a wartime aid package for Ukraine and Israel, reviving an effort that had stalled amid Republican opposition to a border security bill they demanded and later abandoned.A day after blocking a measure that would have paired harsh new border restrictions with security assistance for Ukraine, Israel and other US allies, the Senate voted 67 to 32 to begin consideration of the $95bn emergency aid bill. Several Republicans who voted to block the broader border package agreed to open debate on the foreign policy-only version of the measure after securing the opportunity to propose changes, including the immigration enforcement measures that were stripped out.With Kyiv begging Washington for help battling Russian forces on the frontline, the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, hailed the preliminary vote as a “good first step”. But its prospects remained unclear as Republicans threatened to force a lengthy amendment process.“Failure to pass this bill would only embolden autocrats like [Russia’s Vladimir] Putin and [China’s] Xi [Jinping], who want nothing more than America’s decline,” Schumer said following the vote. He added: “We are going to keep working on this bill until the job is done.”If the Senate passes the bill it would face further uncertainty in the House, where Republicans hold a slim majority and have been increasingly opposed to sending aid to Ukraine.The new foreign aid package under consideration would include billions of dollars in military assistance for Ukraine and security assistance for Israel with humanitarian assistance for civilians in Ukraine, Gaza and the West Bank. However, it would not include the US border security measures outlined in the bipartisan measure, although some Republican senators expressed interest in adding border provisions through an amendment process.Among them was Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican of South Carolina, who voted against advancing the funding measure on Thursday “because I believe we have not done all we can to secure our southern border”.“I enthusiastically support Ukraine, Taiwan and Israel, but as I have been saying for months now, we must protect America first,” the Trump ally said in a statement.The Senate had held an initial vote on the foreign aid package on Wednesday, in which 58 members supported advancing it. That initial motion required only a simple majority for passage, so the bill was able to advance, but 60 votes were needed for advancement on Thursday.There was some apparent uncertainty over how much support the bill had on Wednesday, forcing senators to keep the initial vote on the proposal open for four hours as they debated the best path forward. That evening, Schumer took to the floor to announce that members would reconvene on Thursday to vote on the legislation.“We will recess until tomorrow and give our Republican colleagues the night to figure themselves out,” Schumer said. “We’ll be coming back tomorrow at noon, and hopefully that will give the Republicans the time they need. We will have this vote tomorrow.”Schumer’s comments came hours after the Senate voted 49 to 50 against advancing the bipartisan border bill. Sixty votes were required to start debate on the bill, but 44 Senate Republicans and six of their Democratic colleagues blocked the legislation from moving forward. Just four Senate Republicans – including James Lankford, a Republican of Oklahoma, who helped broker the border deal – supported advancing the bill.Schumer initially supported the bill’s advancement, but he then changed his vote, a procedural maneuver that would allow him to take up the legislation again later. In a floor speech delivered on Wednesday before the vote, Schumer criticized Republicans for opposing the bipartisan bill and accused them of doing Donald Trump’s political bidding. The former president had called on Republicans to oppose the border deal out of concern for how it might affect the presidential race and his campaign’s focus on the issue of immigration.“Donald Trump doesn’t like that the Senate finally reached a bipartisan border deal. So he has demanded Republicans kill it,” Schumer said. “He thinks it’s far better to keep the border in chaos so he can exploit it for personal political gains. And Senate Republicans – vertebrae nowhere to be found – are ready to blunder away our best chance of fixing the border in order to elevate what they see as the interests of Donald Trump above the interests of the country.” More