Subterms
Can you beat Mastermind? It’s Clive Myrie’s Christmas quiz! Imagine yourself in the big black chair on the general knowledge round, with the G2 quiz of the yearTopicsLife and styleG2 quiz of 2021US politicsTelevisionquizzesReuse this content More
Why the collapse of Biden’s Build Back Better would be a major blow to the climate fightIt would be almost impossible for the US to comply with its greenhouse gas reduction pledges without the $1.75tn package that Manchin refuses to support The collapse of Joe Biden’s Build Back Better legislation would have disastrous consequences for the global climate crisis, making it almost impossible for the US to comply with its greenhouse gas reduction pledges made under the Paris accords.Dire end to Biden’s first year as Manchin says no on signature billRead moreThe US president’s sweeping economic recovery and social welfare bill is in serious trouble after the Democratic senator Joe Manchin announced his opposition to the $1.75tn spending package that includes the country’s largest ever climate crisis investment.The shock move by the fossil fuel-friendly West Virginia lawmaker came after a year of record-breaking fires, floods, hurricanes and droughts devastated families across America, and amid warnings that such deadly extreme weather events will intensify unless there is radical action to curb greenhouse gases.The Build Back Better (BBB) legislation earmarks $555bn to tackle the US’s largest sources of global heating gasses – energy and transportation – through a variety of grants, tax incentives and other policies to boost jobs and technologies in renewable energy, as well as major investments in sustainable vehicles and public transit services.It is by far the largest chunk of federal funding for Biden’s climate crisis initiatives, without which experts say it will be impossible to meet the administration’s target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 50% below 2005 levels by 2030.Globally, the US is the second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases after China, and scientists warn that even halving emissions by 2030 may not be enough to avoid a catastrophic rise in atmospheric and oceanic temperatures.But BBB would be a major step forward towards the US meeting the goals laid out by Biden at last month’s UN climate talks in Glasgow, with no time to waste given the regression during the Trump administration. Without it, the Biden administration would be forced to rely on a web of new regulations and standards which could be overturned by future presidents.Lawmakers, climate experts and labor groups have voiced intense anger and frustration over Manchin’s refusal to support the bill, which would leave the Democrats without the necessary votes to get it through the Senate.Raúl Grijalva, chair of the House natural resources committee, said the concentration of political power in a few hands had caused nothing but “gridlock and frustration”.“Our country has serious economic and environmental problems that demand government action. If we don’t take that action, we’ll look back at this moment as a decisive wrong turn in the life of our country,” Grijalva said in a statement.“Who died and made Joe Manchin king, how is this a democracy?” said Mary Annaïse Heglar, climate writer and co-host of the podcast Hot Take. “There’s been a dereliction of duty by politicians for decades who’ve failed to make the case for climate action … climate math won’t reset just because the political math did.”Writing on Twitter, Jesse Jenkins, an energy professor at Princeton University who leads a group analysing the potential of BBB, said Manchin’s decision was “devastating” given the high stakes. “Passing #BuildBackBetter would lower energy costs and secure both the US’s climate goals and its global competitiveness in some of the most important industries of the 21st century. Failure would cost Americans dearly.”BBB would build on a bipartisan infrastructure bill, signed into law last month, which contains important steps towards transforming America’s fossil fuel fired transport system by incentivizing zero emission public transit, a national network of electric vehicle chargers and a renewables energy grid.But BBB goes much further. For instance, homeowners would get incentives to install rooftop solar systems and insulate their homes.It also provides significant funding to address a range of environmental injustices which have led to Black, Latino, Indigenous and other marginalized Americans being disproportionately exposed to the harmful effects of fossil fuel pollution, ageing infrastructure like lead pipes, emerging toxins and the climate crisis.The bill includes billions of dollars in grants and other schemes to clean up pollution and create toxic-free communities, healthy ports and climate-resilient affordable housing, as well as research and development infrastructure at historically Black colleges and universities.So if Manchin move finally scuppers the BBB act – as is widely feared – frontline communities in the US, and across the world, would bear the brunt of the inaction.“Build Back Better is our once-in-a-generation opportunity to combat the climate crisis and advance environmental justice through transformative investments that only the government can provide,” said Abigail Dillen, president of the legal non-profit Earthjustice. “The urgency couldn’t be greater. As communities across our country are displaced by weather disasters and others breathe polluted air and drink poisoned water, political leaders like Senator Manchin cannot continue denying the crisis before us.”The climate crisis is undeniably causing havoc and misery across the world, with 2021 one of the deadliest ever years for weather disasters in the US. This year’s death toll includes at least 200 people killed by extreme heat in the Pacific north-west over the summer and 125 deaths caused by the extreme freeze in Texas in February.After years of scepticism, the majority of Americans now want government action to tackle the climate crisis but the majority of republicans – and a handful of democrats – continue to obstruct meaningful policy initiatives.Manchin, whose family profits from the coal industry in West Virginia, has already pushed out key climate policies during the BBB negotiations including a program to incentivize electricity utilities to use renewable power sources.Yet even some of Manchin’s core supporters are urging him to reconsider his opposition to the current bill, which includes several policies that would directly benefit large numbers of West Virginians including the state’s struggling coal miners.In a statement, the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA), which named Manchin as an honorary member last year, warned that benefits to coalminers suffering from black lung disease will expire at the end of this year unless BBB is passed. The union also supports the bill’s tax incentives that encourage manufacturers to build facilities on abandoned coalfields that would employ thousands of unemployed miners.Cecil Roberts, the union’s president, said: “We urge Senator Manchin to revisit his opposition to this legislation and work with his colleagues to pass something that will help keep coalminers working, and have a meaningful impact on our members, their families, and their communities.”TopicsUS politicsClimate crisisJoe BidenJoe ManchinUS CongressDemocratsfeaturesReuse this content More
Republican congressman refuses to cooperate with Capitol attack panelScott Perry is first sitting member of Congress to get request for interview as Trump announces 6 January press conference Scott Perry, a Pennsylvania Republican and the first sitting member of Congress to be requested to provide documents and sit for an interview with the committee investigating the Capitol riot, said on Tuesday he would not comply with the panel.Why Trump appears deeply unnerved as Capitol attack investigation closes inRead moreThe news came shortly after Donald Trump provocatively announced that he will hold a press conference at his Mar-a-Lago resort on 6 January, the first anniversary of the deadly attack on Congress.Perry’s refusal to appear sets up a potentially fraught battle if the panel decides to subpoena him and he – like other Trump allies – decides to ignore that too.The committee has already recommended other no-shows, such as Trump aide Steve Bannon, be prosecuted for their non-compliance.Perry claimed the 6 January committee was “illegitimate, and not duly constituted under the rules of the US House of Representatives”.Successive court rulings have said that the committee was properly formed and does have the investigative powers it is using.The House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, rejected an attempt by the minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, to put Republicans including Jim Jordan of Ohio – a close Trump ally and a subject of investigation regarding the Capitol attack – on to the 6 January committee. Only two Republicans, Trump critics Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, are now part of its work.Trump announced his press conference in a statement replete with familiar invective and lies about supposed electoral fraud and the House committee.“I will be having a news conference on 6 January [2022] at Mar-a-Lago to discuss all of these points, and more,” he said.“Until then, remember, the insurrection took place on 3 November, it was the completely unarmed protest of the rigged election that took place on 6 January.”Five people, including a Trump supporter shot by law enforcement and a Capitol police officer, died around the events of 6 January 2021, when a pro-Trump mob stormed Congress after he told supporters to “fight like hell” to overturn his defeat by Joe Biden.More than 700 people have been charged with offenses connected to the riot. Most rioters were not armed with guns but attacked police with other weapons. Guns and explosives were found and bombs planted. On Monday, one rioter who attacked police was sentenced to more than five years in jail.Trump was impeached for inciting an insurrection but acquitted at his Senate trial when enough Republicans stayed loyal.His continued presence in national politics and apparent intention to run for president again has stoked jagged divides which some observers fear point the US towards serious discord or even civil war.On Monday night the disgraced former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly, with whom the former president has staged an arena tour, said Trump was “gonna run again”.“I’m trying to tell President Trump, run on your record,” O’Reilly told NewsNation. “He’s gonna run again. I said, Run on your record, because your record’s pretty darn good.’”Trump seems determined to run, or merely to retain control of the Republican party, through stoking division and anger with false claims about the election and the most serious attack on the US Capitol since the war of 1812.In stark contrast, Pelosi has announced that Congress will mark the first anniversary of 6 January in a spirit of “solemn observance”.“Preparations are under way for a full program of events,” she said, “including a discussion among historians about the narrative of that day; an opportunity for members to share their experiences and reflections from that day; and a prayerful vigil in the evening.”The 6 January committee also expects to stage events in the new year, with public hearings as it closes in on Trump’s role in the riot. On Sunday, Kinzinger said the panel would determine if Trump committed a crime.“Nobody is above the law,” he said. “He’s not a king. Former presidents, they aren’t former kings.”Trump has sued, so far unsuccessfully, to stop the committee accessing White House documents from his time in power. Two of his closest aides are in serious legal jeopardy for taking similar stands.Bannon has pleaded not guilty to contempt of Congress for refusing to cooperate with the 6 January committee. He faces a fine and jail time if convicted.The House has recommended the same criminal charge for Mark Meadows, Trump’s last chief of staff and a former congressman.US ‘closer to civil war’ than most would like to believe, new book saysRead moreOn Monday, citing sources close to Trump, the Guardian revealed his deepening fear as the 6 January committee continues its work.“The former president’s anger largely mirrors the kind of expletives he once directed at the Russia inquiry and the special counsel investigation [led by Robert Mueller] when he occupied the White House,” the Guardian reported.“But the rapidly accelerating investigation into whether Trump and top aides unlawfully conspired to stop the certification of Joe Biden’s victory at the 6 January joint session appears to be unnerving him deeply.”On Twitter, Peter Strzok, a former FBI agent and member of the special counsel’s team, wrote: “Almost as if – what did he say about Mueller? – ‘I’m fucked.’”TopicsUS Capitol attackRepublicansUS CongressDonald TrumpUS politicsnewsReuse this content More
In 2019, former US President Jimmy Carter told a church congregation about a conversation he had with Donald Trump, the incumbent president at the time. He said Trump called him for advice about China. Carter, who normalized US ties with China in 1979, told the president that the United States had only been at peace for 16 years since the nation was founded. He also called the US “the most warlike nation in the history of the world.”
Biden’s New Culture of Brinkmanship
READ MORE
Carter considers his time in office to be peaceful, but his record says otherwise. Under his one term as president from 1977 to 1981, the US was still instigating conflicts across the world. The most notable was the Iran-Iraq War, which the US, the Soviet Union and their allies were heavily involved in by supporting the Iraqis.
Causing Trouble
The Civility Report 2021, a publication of the Peace Worldwide Organization, labels the US the world’s worst troublemaker. The evidence for this is clear.
First, the US maintains at least 750 military bases in around 80 countries. It also has more than 170,000 troops stationed in 159 countries. Second, in 2016, The Washington Post reported that the US has tried 72 times to overthrow governments of sovereign nations between 1947 and 1989. These actions were in clear violation of the UN Charter. Third, the US continues using economic sanctions against numerous countries to force their leadership to bow to Washington’s demands.
Embed from Getty Images
The worst example is Iran, which the US has sought to use a policy of “maximum pressure” against. Sanctions are also in clear violation of the UN Charter and affect civilians more than the political leaders they seek to squeeze. These unwarranted interventions in Iran have brought pain and suffering to people in a country that is not known for its human rights.
The US, meanwhile, is known well as a country that pays lip service to human rights, democracy and peace. It talks about a lack of democracy in some nations but favors tyrannical rulers in others. This includes countries like Bahrain, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia.
The US today is the world’s only superpower, and with such power comes great responsibility. If the US is truly interested in human rights, democracy and peace, then it too must change its actions. It must begin by complying with the UN Charter and respecting international law. Washington must right its many wrongs — particularly in the Middle East — not because it is forced to do so, but because it is the right thing for a world in which peace can prosper. For this to become a reality, there are a number of areas for the US to consider.
Never Forgotten
The first area is addressing the US relationship with Iran. In the 1980s, in violation of the Geneva Protocol of 1925, the United States and its European allies provided assistance to Iraq when it leader, Saddam Hussein, ordered the use of chemical weapons against Iranian troops. Most victims of that attack in 1988 died instantly, while many others are still suffering from the consequences. Some survivors of the chemical warfare now struggle to find inhalers in Iran, which is scarred by sanctions. The US should acknowledge the role it played in the war and provide reparations for the injuries and damage it caused.
Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries
Today, the draconian sanctions the US has placed on Iran has deepened a rift with the European Union, Russia and China, all of which signed a nuclear agreement with Tehran in 2015. The US withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2018 under US President Donald Trump led to the reintroduction of crippling sanctions that have hurt the Iranian middle class and the poor, causing hardship and death.
Washington must lift its unlawful sanctions, which Trump introduced to bring Iran to its knees. The US thinks that Iran is meddling in the affairs of countries like Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen, and that a policy of “maximum pressure” will force it to rethink its foreign policy. The Trump administration used this as an excuse to pull out of the nuclear deal, despite the Iranians complying with all of its obligations under the JCPOA. The US under President Joe Biden should also comply with the JCPOA by rejoining the agreement and lifting sanctions.
In the long term, a détente between the US and Iran could pave the way for the Iranians to forgive the 1953 coup d’état against the democratically elected government of Mohammad Mossadegh. During the Cold War, a US-orchestrated campaign led to the overthrow of Prime Minister Mossadegh. He was replaced with Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the brutal last shah of Iran, who himself was overthrown in the 1979 Revolution. In a country struggling under US sanctions, memories of the coup have never been forgotten.
Lies Over Iraq
Iraq is another country where US actions have not been forgotten. If you attack anyone without being provoked, any court with an ounce of justice would require you to repair the inflicted damage. Relations between nations work in the same way. If a nation harms another without provocation, the aggressor is expected to repair the damage caused.
In 2003, under the false pretext that the Iraqis had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and ties with al-Qaeda, the US under President George W. Bush invaded Iraq. The result was the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and his government, the destruction of infrastructure, the death of hundreds of thousands in the years to come and the displacement of 9.2 million Iraqis.
Embed from Getty Images
The US invasion inevitably led to the rise of radical groups like the Islamic State (IS), which in 2014 seized territory in Iraq and Syria. The trillions that American taxpayers paid for the Iraq War could have been well spent in the US on addressing poverty, building high-speed rail networks or repairing infrastructure. Instead, the dollars were spent on bombs and bullets to counter insurgents like IS.
When Iraqis led by Iranian General Qasem Soleimani and Iraqi militia leader Mahdi al-Muhandis formed a resistance against IS militants and expelled them from Iraq, many people were jubilant that their country was freed. Instead of congratulating Soleimani and Muhandis for the role they played, the US violated Iraq’s territorial integrity. In a US drone strike at Baghdad airport in January 2020, both men were assassinated in violation of international law. The US action was not only unlawful, but it also puts all foreign diplomats in danger by setting a precedent for other countries to assassinate enemies.
There are two ways the US can make up for its illegal actions of 2003. First, holding those responsible to account for the invasion and human rights violations would show the world that the US is serious about the rule of law. That includes the likes of Bush and his accomplices, who lied and betrayed the trust of the American people, as well as security and military personnel who went beyond the rules of war. Holding such persons to account would restore respect for the US across the world by demonstrating that no one, not even the president or American soldiers, is above the law. Second, providing reparations for the loss of Iraqi and American lives, the injuries caused, the people displaced and the property destroyed is essential.
Famine in Yemen
Yemen is another place where bombs have destroyed the country under the watchful eye of the Americans. In 2015, a Saudi-led coalition supported and armed by the United States, Britain and France began indiscriminatingly bombing Yemen in response to a takeover by Iran-backed Houthi rebels. The destruction of Yemen has led to accusations of war crimes by all parties involved. It has also resulted in 5 million people being on the brink of famine and millions more facing starvation.
Embed from Getty Images
The US must promptly stop all military and intelligence support to the coalition. As the one nation with such political power, the US must work on bringing the combatants together by implementing the UN Charter that calls for respecting “the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace.”
As citizens in a free world, we must assume responsibility for our political leaders’ actions. First, as a bare minimum, we should realize that the problems we cause for others, sooner or later, will come back to haunt us. The example of US support for the mujahideen during the 1980s in Afghanistan is well known. Second, electing the right political leaders who strive for freedom and peace will not only benefit people in faraway lands, but also in the US itself. Instead of taxpayer dollars being spent on weapons, cash can be reinvested into our society to educate children, improve access to health care and do much more.
United, we can put “maximum pressure” on the US to become a leader in creating a world free from war, oppression and persecution.
*[The author is the founder and president of Peace Worldwide Organization, a non-religious, non-partisan and charitable organization in the United States that promotes freedom and peace for all. It recently released its Civility Report 2021, which can be downloaded here.]
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More
On December 6, the world saw Myanmar’s leaders ousted by a military takeover earlier this year receive their first verdict in a series of trials. National League for Democracy (NLD) leader Aung San Suu Kyi and President Win Myint were both initially sentenced to four years in prison for inciting dissent and breaking COVID-19 rules. While her sentence was subsequently halved after a partial pardon by General Min Aung Hlaing, Suu Kyi faces a total of 11 charges that might see her spend the rest of her life in prison.
How Deep Are the Roots of Democracy in Southeast Asia?
READ MORE
When the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) declared Min Aung Hlaing persona non grata at the leaders’ summit back in October, it resulted in the quick release of over 5,600 political prisoners. However, it also precipitated resistance to ASEAN’s plan for a non-violent ceasefire. This was characterized by the rejection of the request by ASEAN’s envoy to Myanmar, Dato Erywan Yusof, to meet Aung San Suu Kyi and other detained leaders. With more verdicts pending, what will ASEAN’s next steps be?
Bitter Pill
It is easy to berate ASEAN for its delayed response to the February coup and to what has now become a humanitarian crisis, with nearly 1,300 dead, 200,000 displaced and 3 million in need of assistance. However, the immediate move by the United States, the European Union and the United Kingdom to enforce economic sanctions on Myanmar has not produced the hoped-for results.
Although economic sanctions affect many industries across the country, such as the military conglomerates Myanmar Economic Corporation and Myanmar Economic Holdings Ltd, they have done little to nudge the military leaders toward a ceasefire. Instead, repression and bloodshed intensify by the day.
The inefficacy of economic sanctions is a difficult pill to swallow, but it forces us to confront two realities. First, the military leaders assign very low importance to economic growth vis-à-vis the pursuit of their political agenda. In this crisis, the main focus of the military leaders is to right what they believe is wrong, namely nurturing a “true and disciplined democracy” based on the claim that the landslide NLD win in November 2020 was rigged.
Embed from Getty Images
The verdict against Aung San Suu Kyi is an indicator that despite a persistent international backlash, the economy has taken a backseat and will continue to be compromised if it means that the junta can legitimize its position.
Economic and travel sanctions like those implemented by the European Union, the US Treasury, New Zealand and the United Kingdom, among others, will limit the movement of the military leaders and hold businesses in a tight chokehold. As the fight for survival continues, economic sanctions will only cause the skyrocketing of prices on goods most people will no longer be able to afford. Along with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, this will only help to drag half of Myanmar’s population into poverty in 2022.
Secondly, curtailing Myanmar’s dealings with global actors like the US, the EU and the UN is not as fruitful as many would like to think. To offset the newest round of sanctions, Myanmar’s military leaders have linked arms with superpowers on the other side of the political spectrum, like China and Russia. Therefore, the remaining challenge for ASEAN is to develop a non-violent strategy that can bring a quick end to the bloodshed while making room for negotiations aimed at giving the people of Myanmar a say in their own future.
From 1988 to 2021
Despite the suppression of the 1988 uprising, when a military junta again seized power, and the ensuing crackdown on civil rights, then-Burma was admitted to ASEAN in 1997. The move was not without controversy, with continuing international pressure to make the admission contingent on democratic concessions from Yangon, but geopolitical and economic considerations drove ASEAN’s decision. Unsurprisingly, Myanmar’s accession opened a new set of challenges for the bloc, especially vis-à-vis its non-interference principle.
Embed from Getty Images
The policy discourages states from intervening in the internal affairs of fellow members, including criticism of state actions against its citizens, and condemns those perceived to be in breach of the non-intervention principle. It also denies support to any rebel group seeking to destabilize the government of a neighboring state, providing political support and material assistance to members to counter disruptive activity. To put it broadly, the non-interference policy means that all member states tend to take a hands-off approach when it comes to the national affairs of their regional counterparts.
As a result, one of the main criticisms faced by ASEAN over the decades has to do with its delay in interfering in regional emergencies, like the 2015 Rohingya crisis that was later identified as ethnic cleansing by the United Nations. Thus, it was only by 2005 that ASEAN arrived at a collective consensus to bar Myanmar from the 2006 chairmanship to void a boycott by the West, with the US and the EU condemning the military’s refusal to implement democratic transition and release Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, who won the 1990 election but was placed under house arrest instead of assuming office.
The association’s silence on its member states has become a significant liability for ASEAN’s reputation. Seeking to enhance the bloc’s international standing and to attract financial support and foreign investment, ASEAN nations finally had a common cause to intervene for the sake of regional stability. Myanmar’s eventual agreement to give up the chairmanship that year also meant the bloc was effective in keeping the military leaders updated on its incremental steps in having a more active approach for the sake of the social and economic stability of all member states.
Embed from Getty Images
Fast forward to February 2021, and both Myanmar and ASEAN find themselves in a near-identical predicament. After international criticism fueled lengthy discussions that lasted over two months, ASEAN reached the Five Point Consensus as its action plan. The surprise election of Dato Erywan Yusof as the bloc’s special envoy for Myanmar outside the original list of nominees followed, demonstrating not only the internal divides within the bloc but also indicating that Yusof was the only sound choice for ASEAN to earn the trust of all stakeholders and to make decisions with required caution.
These moves show that extensive efforts have been taken in order for ASEAN to reach a consensus with the Myanmar leaders and, more importantly, for ASEAN to ensure Myanmar was still included in the process. The Five Point Consensus is a gradual strategy that offers a way for ASEAN to begin negotiations with the Myanmar military through diplomatic engagement and respecting the hard-fought national independence of other member states.
Middle Ground
To find a middle ground, Yusof has proposed measured, non-violent strategies that would begin with humanitarian assistance and policy guidance through the ASEAN Humanitarian Assistance Centre, followed by a more substantive discussion with the junta in exchange for full access to all parties. ASEAN is currently playing a calculated game of push-and-pull. The military leaders need their relevance in Myanmar politics to be acknowledged, which ASEAN has already indirectly provided; in response, the junta’s lack of cooperation and reciprocity to the consensus protocol provided room for ASEAN to plan its next step.
In comparison to the economic sanctions, by barring Myanmar’s representatives from this year’s summit, ASEAN has taken a more calculative approach in allowing the junta to consider the consequences of non-cooperation. Simultaneously, ASEAN‘s secretary general, Dato Lim Jock Hoi, stressed that humanitarian assistance “should not be politicised.” At the end of the October leaders’ summit, His Majesty Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah reiterated that “Myanmar is an integral part of the ASEAN family and their membership has not been questioned.”
Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries
Despite repeated urgency for stronger action, ASEAN recognizes that coercive strategies are not effective in seeking a final resolution. As much as this is a race against time, it is also unproductive to rush political negotiations that can result in more harm than good. It is clear that ASEAN has moved beyond its non-interference principle and is exercising both caution and effort as the sole moderator in this crisis. Ultimately, continuous criticism can only achieve so much.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More
Dire end to Biden’s first year as Manchin says no on signature bill Senator’s announcement deals huge blow to president’s agenda and kicks off fiery recriminations among DemocratsJoe Biden had hoped to end his first year in office by signing his signature bill, the Build Back Better Act, a $1.75tn spending package that includes massive investments in healthcare, childcare and climate initiatives.Why Trump appears deeply unnerved as Capitol attack investigation closes inRead moreInstead, the president is ending the year with a member of his own party dealing a devastating blow to his legislative agenda and potentially Democrats’ prospects in next year’s midterm elections.The announcement by centrist West Virginia senator Joe Manchin that he will not support the Build Back Better Act has kicked off a round of fiery recriminations among Democrats, as party leaders rushed to determine whether the bill can still somehow be saved.But Manchin’s comments did not seem to leave much wiggle room for future negotiations. After announcing his opposition on Fox News Sunday, Manchin released a fuller statement saying the cost of the legislation, which had already been slashed in half to appease him, was too high to justify.“I have always said, ‘If I can’t go back home and explain it, I can’t vote for it,’” Manchin said. “Despite my best efforts, I cannot explain the sweeping Build Back Better Act in West Virginia and I cannot vote to move forward on this mammoth piece of legislation.”The White House was clearly blindsided by Manchin’s announcement, accusing the senator of reneging on commitments that he had reiterated to Biden just days earlier.“On Tuesday of this week, Senator Manchin came to the White House and submitted – to the president, in person, directly – a written outline for a Build Back Better bill that was the same size and scope as the president’s framework, and covered many of the same priorities,” press secretary Jen Psaki said on Sunday.“If his comments on Fox and written statement indicate an end to that effort, they represent a sudden and inexplicable reversal in his position, and a breach of his commitments to the president and the senator’s colleagues in the House and Senate.”Despite the significant setback, the White House pledged to keep advocating for the bill’s passage. “The fight for Build Back Better is too important to give up. We will find a way to move forward next year,” Psaki said. Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer has already said he will hold a vote on the Build Back Better Act once the chamber reconvenes in January.In a “Dear colleague” letter that singled out Manchin, Schumer said: “Senators should be aware that the Senate will, in fact, consider the Build Back Better Act, very early in the new year so that every member of this body has the opportunity to make their position known on the Senate floor, not just on television.”But the bill will likely have to undergo significant revisions to win the support of Manchin, and Democrats cannot move forward without him because of the 50-50 split in the Senate.For the left of the Democratic party, the dilemma represents a bitter case of “I told you so”. The Congressional Progressive Caucus had insisted that the bipartisan infrastructure bill should not pass until the Build Back Better Act could move forward as well. Instead, the House passed the infrastructure bill last month after Biden convinced progressives that he could also secure 50 Senate votes for the spending package.Despite Biden’s assurances, six progressives still voted against the infrastructure bill to protest the decoupling of the two proposals, and those lawmakers have expressed outrage over Manchin’s announcement, which has proven their predictions correct.“We have been saying this for weeks that this would happen, and we took the hits,” congresswoman Cori Bush told MSNBC on Sunday. “Having those coupled together was the only leverage we had. And what did the caucus do? We tossed it.”However, it is not just the left wing of the Democratic party expressing criticism of Manchin. Congresswoman Suzan DelBene, the chair of the centrist New Democrat Coalition, warned that the party would suffer severe consequences if the Build Back Better Act is not passed.“The challenges our country faces are too big and the cost of inaction is too high to throw in the towel on Build Back Better negotiations now,” DelBene said Sunday. “Failure is not an option.”In an effort to bring Manchin back to the negotiating table, DelBene suggested that the bill should be altered to focus on funding a smaller number of programs for a longer period of time.Manchin’s most recent gripe about the legislation is that it calls for some programs to be phased out after a year or a few years. The senator has complained that those programs will inevitably be renewed and result in even more government spending, although the White House has said any future renewals would be paid for through additional revenue-raising provisions.“At the start of these negotiations many months ago, we called for prioritizing doing a few things well for longer, and we believe that adopting such an approach could open a potential path forward for this legislation,” DelBene said.But the progressives who are outraged at Biden and Democratic leaders for their handling of the negotiations have endorsed a different tactic, calling on the president to use the power of the executive pen to enact immediate change.“Biden needs to lean on his executive authority now. He has been delaying and under-utilizing it so far,” New York congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said in a Monday tweet.“There is an enormous amount he can do on climate, student debt, immigration, cannabis, healthcare, and more. Time is running out. We need to move and use alternative paths.”Biden’s strategy in the coming weeks will likely have significant repercussions on the midterm elections. If Democrats cannot deliver on their promises to address the climate crisis and make childcare and healthcare more affordable, despite having full control of Congress and the White House, they will face many angry voters as they seek reelection next year. After months of drawn-out negotiations and no results to show for them, those voters may decide they are ready for a change in Washington.TopicsJoe BidenUS politicsDemocratsJoe ManchinnewsReuse this content More
By ditching landmark climate legislation, America makes the world unsafeKate AronoffThe rest of the world needs to start treating the US as what it is: a dangerous country that needs to be reined in As the now very likely collapse of the Build Back Better Act underlines, what’s exceptional about the United States is its extraordinary ability to dole out harm. Besides its ever-ballooning military budget and foreign wars, America also makes the world unsafe thanks to the prodigious amount of fossil fuel it continues to send around the world.US ‘closer to civil war’ than most would like to believe, new book saysRead moreOil Change International, Earthworks and the Center for International Environmental Law have found that burning the oil and gas expected to be drilled in the US alone over the next decade could gobble up 10% of the entire world’s remaining carbon budget, the amount of carbon dioxide that can be released before the planet warms above 1.5C.The Build Back Better Act wouldn’t have made a dent in that drilling, of course: constraining US fossil fuel production or exports has been a political third rail on both sides of the aisle, despite John Kerry having spent months hectoring other smaller and less wealthy nations about their own fossil fuel use in the lead-up to Cop26.Just last week, energy secretary Jennifer Granholm went out of her way to assure oil executives that the administration wouldn’t reinstate the longstanding crude oil export ban, assuring them: “I don’t want to fight with any of you.”West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin – whose promised no vote on Build Back Better seems to have hammered the nail into Biden’s legislative agenda – made half a million dollars last year off his family’s coal business, and was reportedly speaking weekly with ExxonMobil lobbyists this spring. But he’s hardly the only Democrat furthering the fossil fuel industry’s interests.What the Build Back Better bill represented was a bare minimum, at best: the roughly $55bn a year the bill would spend on incentives for renewables deployment, building upgrades and electric vehicles over the next decade is roughly half of what Americans spent on caring for their pets in 2020, and pales in comparison to the $768bn one-year Pentagon budget that breezed through both chambers last week.Even the White House’s topline goal of reaching net-zero emissions by 2050 is dangerously behind the times: that’s when the entire world should be carbon neutral. With its vast resources and outsized historical responsibility for the climate crisis, the US should get there much, much sooner. But what the United States should do to reduce emissions and what its staid, corporate-captured democratic institutions are capable of at this moment are two different things.That’s not to say the fight is over. Congressional leadership could finally call Manchin’s bluff and force a vote on Build Back Better. Biden has a slew of emissions-cutting executive actions at his disposal should he choose to use them, including the EPA’s ability to regulate carbon dioxide. And there are exciting victories at the state and local level to build on.But the road ahead is a rocky one. With a deadly Omicron surge encroaching, the child tax credit about to lapse and student loans payments starting up again in February, Democrats will struggle to point voters to success stories during next year’s midterm elections without Build Back Better in hand.They face a potential blowout in the House, where a Republican majority may well refuse to recognize that any Democrat could win the 2024 presidential election. It’s very likely that the United States, the world’s largest economy and second biggest greenhouse gas emitter, will not pass its first-ever comprehensive climate legislation for at least a decade.Should they take back control in Washington, Republicans will expand drilling as quickly as possible, rest of the world be damned. Countries committed to seeing temperatures not rise above 1.5 or 2C should start treating the US for what it is: an exceptionally dangerous country that needs to be reined in.
Kate Aronoff is a staff writer at The New Republic and the author of Overheated: How Capitalism Broke the Planet – And How We Fight Back
TopicsUS politicsOpinionJoe BidenClimate crisisUS domestic policycommentReuse this content More
Commander in, Major out: White House pet shakeup after biting incidentsJoe Biden brings in new German shepherd puppy, to be joined by a cat in January President Joe Biden on Monday introduced the newest member of his family, a purebred German shepherd puppy named Commander, while the first lady’s office said the cat she promised more than a year ago to bring to the White House would finally join them in January.But the news was not so good for another member of the Biden animal family. The family decided it was best for their other German shepherd, Major, to live in a quieter environment with friends after some biting incidents.Biden shared a photo on his official Twitter account of the three-month-old male puppy with a caption that said: “Welcome to the White House, Commander.” He also released a brief video of him tossing a ball to Commander and walking the leashed dog into the White House.Commander was born on 1 September and arrived at the White House on Monday afternoon, a gift from the president’s brother James Biden and sister-in-law Sara Biden, according to Michael LaRosa, a spokesperson for the first lady, Jill Biden.His name appears to be a play on Biden’s status as commander-in-chief of the US armed forces.The first lady said shortly after Biden won the November 2020 presidential election that they would be getting a cat. LaRosa said the feline would join the family in January.The Bidens had two other German shepherds – Champ and Major – with them at the White House before Commander.But Major, a three-year-old rescue dog, ended up in the proverbial dog house following two biting incidents in the months after his arrival last January. He was sent home to Delaware for training before he was returned to the White House. White House officials had explained Major’s aggressive behaviour by saying he was still getting used to his new surroundings.But he was sent away again. Now, his permanent exile from the executive mansion appears official.“After consulting with dog trainers, animal behaviourists, and veterinarians, the first family has decided to follow the experts’ collective recommendation that it would be safest for Major to live in a quieter environment with family friends,” LaRosa said in an emailed statement. “This is not in reaction to any new or specific incident, but rather a decision reached after several months of deliberation as a family and discussions with experts.”Champ died in June at the age of 13.CNN first reported Commander’s arrival after he was seen scampering around the White House south lawn on Monday.TopicsJoe BidenUS politicsDogsPetsAnimalsnewsReuse this content More
