World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden urges Democrats to unite around ‘historic’ $1.75tn investment package

      by

      Joe BidenBiden urges Democrats to unite around ‘historic’ $1.75tn investment package President’s visit to Capitol Hill prompts flurry of activity as Pelosi ramps up pressure on progressives to accept Biden’s frameworkLauren Gambino in Washington@laurenegambinoThu 28 Oct 2021 15.48 EDTFirst published on Thu 28 Oct 2021 08.11 EDTJoe Biden on Thursday unveiled a “historic economic framework” that he said would make the US more competitive and resilient, touting the $1.75tn plan to expand the nation’s social safety net and confront the climate crisis as a victory for consensus and compromise even as the path forward remained uncertain.‘We’re on the path to get this done’: Pelosi pushes infrastructure vote as progressives balk – liveRead moreThe president, who delayed his departure to Europe to finalize the proposal, cast the emerging deal as a once-in-a-generation opportunity to restore American leadership and show the world that democracies can still deliver in the 21st century.His remarks at the White House followed a visit to Capitol Hill on Thursday morning, where he pleaded with House Democrats to unite behind the agreement, saying that his presidency – and their political futures – depended on the passage of his domestic agenda.“I don’t think it’s hyperbole to say that the House and Senate majorities and my presidency will be determined by what happens in the next week,” he said, according to a source familiar with his private remarks to the caucus.The visit set in motion a flurry of activity on Capitol Hill, as Democratic leaders, eager to deliver Biden a legislative victory, ramped up pressure on progressives to accept the “framework” as a done deal, paving the way for them to join moderates in passing a related $1tn bipartisan infrastructure bill. With Republicans mostly aligned against the plan, Pelosi only has a handful of votes to spare.“When the president gets off that plane, we want him to have a vote of confidence from this Congress,” she told her fractious caucus on Thursday morning. “In order for us to have success, we must succeed today.”Twice during the course of the hour-long meeting, Democratic lawmakers rose to their feed and began to chant: “Vote, vote, vote.” But their enthusiasm was quickly tempered as her caucus’s most liberal members dug in.Leaving the meeting on Thursday, the Washington congresswoman Pramila Jayapal, chair of the House Progressive Caucus, said the deal was a sign of “tremendous momentum” but that her position remained unchanged: the bills must move in tandem.“I feel a bit bamboozled because this was not what I thought was coming today,” said congresswoman Cori Bush, a progressive from Missouri. Speaking personally about working a low-wage job and struggling to afford housing and childcare, Bush said she wasn’t ready to give up on fighting for policies that would lift her constituents from similar circumstances.Putting it more bluntly, congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, a Democrat from Michigan, said she was a “hell no” on the infrastructure bill if there was not a simultaneous vote on the larger spending plan.During a press conference, Pelosi did not commit to holding the vote on Thursday, saying only that the party was “on a path to get this all done”. Working franticly to advance the legislation, the framework was swiftly translated into a 1,684-page bill released shortly before a House rules committee hearing on the measure.“This is not the end of the process,” said congressman Jim McGovern, a Democrat from Massachusetts and the chair of the committee, affirming multiple times during the hearing that the social policy package would not be ready for a vote on Thursday. “This bill will continue to be perfected.”Complicating negotiations for Democratic leaders was a lack of certainty from the key holdouts, Senators Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona. Both sounded hopeful that a deal was within reach, but stopped short of offering their firm support.“After months of productive, good-faith negotiations with Biden and the White House, we have made significant progress on the proposed budget reconciliation package,” Sinema said, adding: “I look forward to getting this done.”Manchin also did not commit to supporting the legislation he played a significant role in shaping. Asked whether he would vote for the plan, he said only that its fate was presently “in the hands of the House”.After months of prolonged negotiations, the proposed framework is far smaller in size and scope than the $3.5tn package Biden initially envisioned. Even so, the president claimed a pre-emptive legislative achievement on par with those enacted by Franklin D Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson.“Any single element of this framework would be viewed as a fundamental change in America. Taken together they’re truly consequential,” Biden said during remarks from the East Room at the White House, pointing to new spending on childcare and climate mitigation.“If we make these investments, we will own the future,” he added.The package would make substantial new investments in childcare and caregiving as well as transitioning the US economy away from fossil fuels. According to the White House, the framework would put the US on track to meet the president’s pledge to slash planet-warming emissions by 2030.Among the other provisions in the bill are free preschool for every three- and four-year-old, expanded health coverage under the Affordable Care Act, and what the White House is calling the largest “effort to combat climate change in American history”.Stripped from the package were plans to provide 12 weeks of federal paid family leave and two years of free community college; ambitious climate initiatives and efforts to lower prescription drug prices. A proposal to expand Medicare to cover vision, dental and hearing was pared back to just hearing.Democrats spent the last several weeks haggling over plans to pay for their agenda, amid opposition from both Manchin and Sinema to various revenue-raising proposals. On Wednesday, a novel plan to tax billionaires’ assets was tossed aside after Manchin said the plan carried “the connotation that we’re targeting different people”.To offset their spending, Democrats said they would raise an estimated $2tn by increasing taxes on corporations and the highest earning Americans, and by rolling back some of the Trump administration’s tax cuts passed in 2017. It honors Biden’s campaign pledge that he would not raise taxes on Americans earning less than $400,000 a year, according to the White House.After weeks of frenetic negotiations, Democrats were scrambling to cobble together a deal that the president could tout when he travels to Rome, the Vatican, and then to the United Nations climate conference, known as Cop26, in Glasgow, Scotland, where he hopes to point to the accord as evidence of the US’s commitment to confronting the climate crisis.“We are at an inflection point,” Biden told House lawmakers. “The rest of the world wonders whether we can function.”Internal disputes over the bill delayed its passage for weeks, as Democrats blew past self-imposed deadlines in an effort to find a compromise that could satisfy the broad ideological expanse of their party.The result is a bill that reflected the limits of their governing coalition, Biden said, indicating that this was the best deal Democrats could hope to achieve with paper-thin majorities and unified Republican opposition.“No one got everything they wanted, including me,” he said. “But that’s what compromise is. That’s consensus. And that’s what I ran on.”The Vermont senator Bernie Sanders, chair of the powerful budget committee, called the framework a “major step forward” but warned that there were also “major gaps” in the legislation. He cited the lack of paid family and medical leave for workers and the failure to expand Medicare benefits to include dental and vision as well as herding, a major priority for the senator.Without all 50 senators, the legislation will not pass.TopicsJoe BidenUS CongressUS politicsDemocratsJoe ManchinnewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      $555bn in climate action but no new tax on billionaires: what’s in Biden’s plan?

      by

      Joe Biden$555bn in climate action but no new tax on billionaires: what’s in Biden’s plan?President’s $1.75tn spending framework includes investments in childcare and healthcare, but 12 weeks of paid family leave is out Lauren ArataniThu 28 Oct 2021 12.15 EDTLast modified on Thu 28 Oct 2021 12.39 EDTJoe Biden on Thursday released the framework of a $1.75tn social and climate spending proposal after weeks of fraught negotiations with congressional Democrats.Biden makes $1.75tn pitch: ‘My presidency will be determined by what happens next’ – liveRead moreThe framework includes investments in childcare, climate change mitigation and an expansion of healthcare, but it is a significantly pared-down version of the original $3.5tn agenda Biden had proposed.In a statement, the White House said the president is confident this framework of the bill would be able to pass the House and Senate, although it appears negotiations on the proposal’s specific details will continue.Here is what we know so far:What’s in the bill?The bill includes substantial investment in young children, specifically funding for childcare and early childhood education. Under the proposal, most American families will save more than half of their spending on childcare, with bolstered benefits to working and low-income parents. It also includes universal pre-school for children aged three and four.A hallmark of the proposal’s climate mitigation plan is $555bn to reduce climate pollution and invest in clean energy. The proposal includes consumer rebates for Americans who invest in renewable energy, for example installing rooftop solar panels or buying an electric vehicle.The bill also includes incentives to expand renewable energy in the domestic supply chain, an accelerator program that will fund sustainability projects and funding for restoration and conservation efforts.The framework includes some provisions to bolster healthcare, including reducing healthcare premiums and tax credits to people who have been locked out of Medicaid because their state refused to expand Medicaid access. It will also include investments in affordable housing and an extension of the child tax credit.What was taken out?A few provisions that some Democrats were heavily advocating for were left out of the framework.Most notably, the proposal does not include 12 weeks of paid family leave. Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia was the primary holdout for the provision. Manchin has indicated that he believes a reconciliation bill – which would require only the support of Democrats in the Senate – is “not the place” for “a major policy”.Significant expansions to healthcare were cut out of the framework, including provisions to have Medicaid cover dental and vision costs, a plan to expand Medicaid to Americans in states that have refused to expand it themselves under the Affordable Care Act, and a proposal to empower Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices.Biden’s plan for free tuition at community colleges was also left out.The framework notably does not include the “billionaire tax” that was floated by some Democrats on Wednesday before it was swiftly killed by centrist holdouts.The billionaire tax would have seen a complete shift in the way Americans worth more than $1bn would pay taxes, targeting the billions of dollars in shares they own in their companies. Hours after the proposal was unveiled, Manchin said he would not support such a provision.How are Democrats planning to pay for it?Biden estimates the framework will cost about $1.75tn, and the White House says the bill will be funded “by asking more from the very largest corporations and the wealthiest Americans”.A central provision in the bill’s payment plan is shifting the corporate tax rate to 15% for corporations with more than $1bn in profits. While the current corporate tax rate is 21%, Democrats have agreed that loopholes allowed corporations to report lower profits to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) while boasting lofty profits to shareholders. The next tax rate will apply to the profit that is reported to shareholders.The bill also includes a surtax on the 0.02% wealthiest Americans and investments in IRS auditing enforcements.What’s next?The framework released by Biden on Thursday represents a broad outline of what will end up in the final bill. Congressional Democrats will need to get to work at drafting the actual legislation if everyone, particularly the party’s most progressive and conservative members, can agree on the basic framework. When that will happen will depend on how quickly everyone says they are on board.TopicsJoe BidenUS domestic policyUS CongressUS politicsJoe ManchinnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden plan pledges ‘largest effort to combat climate change in US history’

      by

      Joe BidenBiden plan pledges ‘largest effort to combat climate change in US history’Hundreds of billions to be given to clean energy, electric vehicles and flood defenses, officials say – but some key parts left out Oliver Milman in New York@olliemilmanThu 28 Oct 2021 11.41 EDTLast modified on Thu 28 Oct 2021 15.05 EDTThe Biden administration has said a vast spending bill is set to result in the “largest effort to combat climate change in American history”, with hundreds of billions of dollars set to be funneled into supporting clean energy, electric vehicles and new defenses against extreme weather events. But some key parts of Joe Biden’s original plan were left out.Biden makes $1.75tn pitch: ‘My presidency will be determined by what happens next’ – liveRead moreFollowing negotiations with Joe Manchin and Krysten Sinema, two centrist Democratic senators who have opposed large portions of the original Build Back Better bill, the White House said it was confident a reduced version of the legislation will be able to pass both houses of Congress and will “set the United States on course to meet its climate goals”.This proposed framework includes $555bn in incentives, investments and tax credits aimed at bolstering the deployment of renewable energy such as solar and wind, as well as a tax break that will deliver up to $12,500 to people who buy an electric car. The bill will help deploy new electric buses and trucks, build community resilience to disastrous wildfires and floods and employ 300,000 people in a new “civilian climate corps”.In all, the White House said the legislation will cut planet-heating emissions by 1bn tons by 2030 and bring the US significantly closer to its goal of slashing carbon pollution in half this decade.At a press conference held on Thursday, Biden said the bill will represent “the most significant investment to address the climate crisis ever” and “will truly transform this nation”.“We are going to get off the sidelines of manufacturing solar panels and wind farms,” the president said, adding that the package will help double the number of electric cars on US roads within three years and provide 500,000 new charging stations for the vehicles. “We are once again going to be the innovators. It’s a big deal.”“The weather is not going to get better, it’s going to get a heck of a lot worse,” Biden continued. “It’s a blinking code red for America and the world.”The legislation has been significantly reduced following objections raised by Manchin and Sinema over its scope – Biden needs every Senate Democrat to vote for the bill to overcome unified Republican opposition to it – but the remaining framework still represents the first, and largest, major attempt by the US to tackle the unfolding climate crisis.“It’s a historic day for people and the planet,” said Gene Karpinski, president of the League of Conservation Voters. “Congress must swiftly pass the Build Back Better Act and send it to President Biden to sign into law.”On Thursday, Biden will travel to Europe for crucial UN climate talks to be held in Scotland. The US president has said it would be “very, very positive” for the reconciliation bill to pass before the Cop26 summit, in order to bolster American credibility and help convince other countries to do more to address the catastrophic wildfires, floods and heatwaves increasingly being unleashed by global heating.This effort has been repeatedly stymied by the objections of Manchin, a West Virginia senator with deep ties to the coal industry who managed to strike out of the bill a system that would have phased out fossil fuels from America’s electricity grid. This plan was responsible for a third of the emissions cuts in the original version of the legislation, according to analysts.The new framework does not include fees paid by oil and gas producers when they emit methane, a potent greenhouse gas. Manchin was also opposed to this fee in the original bill and rejected a proposal to include a tax or price on carbon emissions. The Environmental Protection Agency is, however, poised to regulate methane emissions through its existing powers.These omissions mean that the legislation’s framework represents a historic investment in clean energy but doesn’t include any mechanisms to reduce fossil fuel usage or even cut subsidies flowing to the oil, coal and gas companies that have caused the climate crisis.“Given the prime opportunity to cancel billions of dollars in domestic subsidies for oil and gas polluters, the president and congressional leadership have rolled over,” said Mitch Jones, policy director of Food and Water Watch. “A climate plan that fails to directly confront the oil and gas industry cannot possibly be considered meaningful.”Climate experts have, however, pointed out the bill, if passed, would represent a major step forward in acting on the climate crisis, while making clear that further emissions cuts will be needed to avoid the US, and the world, spiraling into a barely livable climatic state.Leah Stokes, a climate policy expert at the University of California, Santa Barbara, said it would be “great news” if the legislation passes because “the climate math is brutal”.“Even if we are lucky enough to get this bill over the finish line, we need more next year,” she tweeted. “The climate clock is ticking.”TopicsJoe BidenClimate crisisUS domestic policyUS CongressJoe ManchinUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 188 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      How Texas Republicans are rigging the system against minority voters | The fight to vote

      by

      Fight to voteTexasHow Texas Republicans are rigging the system against minority votersRepublicans currently have a 23-13 advantage over Democrats, and the new map gives them a good chance to pick up two extra seats – what might happen next? The fight to vote is supported byAbout this contentSam Levine in New YorkThu 28 Oct 2021 10.00 EDTLast modified on Thu 28 Oct 2021 10.01 EDTSign up for the Guardian’s Fight to Vote newsletterHello Fight to vote readers,You don’t have to be an expert to see why Texas’ new maps for its state legislature and congress discriminate against minority voters. Ninety-five per cent of the state’s growth over the last decade has been driven by minorities. But the new maps Texas enacted don’t include a single new district where there is a Hispanic majority.It’s an astounding fact that underscores how powerfully Texas Republicans have wielded the control they have over the once-a-decade redistricting process.Republicans currently have a 23-13 advantage over Democrats in the congressional delegation, and the new map gives them a good chance to pick up the two extra seats.The boundaries of several of the congressional districts Donald Trump barely won in 2020 have become safe GOP seats. I wrote about one of those districts, the 22nd congressional district a few weeks ago. The new map transforms it from one Trump won by about 1 percentage point in 2020 to one he would have carried by 16 points.A few days before the Texas governor, Greg Abbott, approved the maps, I spoke with Nina Perales, a lawyer at the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund (Maldef), who filed the first of two lawsuits challenging the maps, and who is one of the most widely respected redistricting attorneys in the country. I asked her to walk me through how exactly Texas Republicans had gone about entrenching control and what might happen next.“These maps are intended to protect incumbents against the effects of demographic change,” said Perales, who has been involved in Texas redistricting cases for decades. “They’re also maps to kind of protect white voters and the power of white voters at the expense of clearly Latino voters, because Latinos are the large demographic that’s growing very quickly.”Of the two new seats, “one is made into a white majority Republican seat. And the other one is made into a white-majority Democratic seat. So white people win and people of color don’t get anything,” she added.Texas has a long history of discriminating against minority voters in redistricting – courts have struck down districts in every redistricting cycle since the Voting Rights Act was enacted in 1965. For years a key provision of the act required Texas to get its maps pre-approved by the federal government before they went into effect. But the US supreme court gutted that provision in 2013. That means this year will be the first time since 1965 that Texas won’t have to get its maps pre-cleared before they go into effect.That puts Perales and other people challenging the maps at a huge disadvantage. One reason is that the burden now falls on those who challenge the map to demonstrate why districts are discriminatory. Before, the burden was on Texas to show why the maps didn’t discriminate.“Essentially, we have to prove race discrimination. That’s very hard to prove. The working assumption is always going to be that the state did not discriminate. And it’s our burden to establish that the state did discriminate. And courts are just very, very reluctant to accept the idea that a state actor has discriminated on the basis of race, even unintentionally.”The new Texas districts should be the poster child that show why pre-clearance is still needed, Perales said. Given clear evidence of recent discrimination in redistricting, Texas should have a burden to show why the new plans don’t discriminate, Perales said.Yet as they were drawing the districts, Republicans were already building a shield against claims that the maps were drawn with race in mind. “I’ve stated it, and I’ll state it again – we drew these maps race blind,” Joan Huffman, the GOP state senator, who oversaw the redistricting process in her chamber said during a public hearing.Perales said that kind of claim was “a lie”.“Do you think she was blind to the fact that the Rio Grande Valley is heavily Hispanic? Or the border region is heavily Hispanic? Do you think the historic wards of Houston, historic Black neighborhoods, that she’s somehow unaware of those things? It’s just not true,” she said.When she testified at one of the legislature’s redistricting hearings, Perales urged lawmakers not to repeat the mistakes of the past. Afterwards she realized she had said something nearly identical during the redistricting cycle 10 years ago.“I feel almost cursed,” she said. “I go to these hearings. I tell them about the cases that they’ve lost. I tell them not to repeat the mistakes. I tell them the plans are likely illegal. And they go ahead and do it anyway.”Reader questionsThank you to everyone who wrote in last week with questions. You can continue to write to me each week at sam.levine@theguardian.com or DM me on Twitter at @srl and I’ll try and answer as many as I can.Andy in Washington writes: Are there mechanisms that can be put into place to help reduce lawsuits (such as those impacting election law) that have no sound basis before they drag through the courts? Asking this because we all watched as the Trump team put the legal system to task claiming election fraud, and lost over 50 of these cases. It was clear to most rational people what was going on, yet our legal system allowed this continuance of abuse of power to great detriment.Yes, there are mechanisms in place that are supposed to hold bad-faith actors accountable in the legal system.In August, a federal judge in Detroit sanctioned Sidney Powell and L Lin Wood, two attorneys involved in several of Trump’s post-election suits, for making bad-faith arguments. Powell and Wood were ordered to take legal education classes and pay attorneys fees to the city of Detroit and the state of Michigan. Rudy Giuliani also had his law license suspended in New York and Washington DC for spreading election lies.TopicsTexasFight to voteUS voting rightsUS politicsfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Is Joe Biden about to show up to Cop26 empty-handed? | Kate Aronoff

      by

      OpinionCop26Is Joe Biden about to show up to Cop26 empty-handed?Kate AronoffThe tools at Biden’s disposal to limit dangerous global heating are enormous. If he wants it, he can do it – but does he want it? Thu 28 Oct 2021 09.24 EDTLast modified on Thu 28 Oct 2021 12.39 EDTAfter months of bullish rhetoric about the United States’ climate leadership, the US could still show up to COP 26 empty handed. That doesn’t have to be the case – whatever charismatic obstructionists like Joe Manchin or Kyrsten Sinema have to say about it. The climate certainly isn’t waiting on them to change: the UN Emissions Gap Report released this week finds that the world is on track to warm by a catastrophic 2.7C degrees.The White House has pegged its Paris Agreement success on being able to pass an ambitious spending package, with plenty of money built in for key climate priorities. In recent weeks the administration pegged its audacious goal, of slashing emission by at least 50 percent below 2005 levels by 2030, to something called a Clean Electricity Payments Program (CEPP). That’s out. And even if the compromise $55bn a year of climate spending the White House promised on Thursday makes it through to legislation, carrots for green spending can only go so far. The US will still not have picked up critical sticks needed to go after the polluting industries driving up temperatures. The dirty dozen: meet America’s top climate villainsRead moreThey’re desperately needed. According to the UN-backed 2021 Production Gap Report, the world’s governments are on track to produce double the amount of fossil fuels than is consistent with capping warming at 1.5C degrees. In the US, oil and gas production are now on track to expand by 17 and 12%, respectively, by 2030.The United States showing up in good faith to Glasgow will require it to step on the third rail of both US and global climate politics: going after fossil fuels. Those words don’t appear in the Paris Agreement itself. But rapidly winding them down is essential to achieving its goals of limiting warming by “well below” 2C degrees, with an aspiration (repeated frequently by the Biden administration) to limit temperature rise to just 1.5C degrees.The Biden administration is also on track to approve more oil and gas drilling on federal lands than any president since George W Bush. Sadly, this is not the first time Democrats have let us down on climate action. It was just days after the Paris Agreement that the Obama administration quietly repealed the 40 year-old crude oil export ban as part of an omnibus, must-pass spending measure in 2015. In the four years after its passage crude oil exports expanded by 750%, allowing the US to eventually cross the threshold to becoming a net oil exporter in the winter of 2020. The same year the United States was the world’s third largest gas exporter.This trajectory is plainly out of step with a liveable planet. Indigenous leaders who converged in Washington under the banner of People v Fossil Fuels earlier this month were joined by 13 members of Congress recently in calling on the administration to use the full extent of its powers to start treating the climate crisis like the emergency it is, putting a stop to fossil fuel expansion. The tools at Biden’s disposal, as they note, are enormous.The EPA has the power to stringently regulate carbon dioxide and methane, which it’s expected to make steps toward soon. By declaring a national emergency, Biden could reinstate the crude oil export ban virtually overnight, stemming the flow of US fossil fuels being burned abroad to make a handful of executives here rich.Such a declaration would unlock the power to finally put the US on a wartime footing to rapidly deploy renewable energy and create millions of union jobs in the process, rather than relying only on piecemeal measures like tax credits. The Department of Energy could reject export permits under the Natural Gas Act. The Department of Interior could stop selling below-market rate leases to drill on public lands, activity that accounts for roughly a quarter of the country’s greenhouse gas emissions.There’s plenty of other low-hanging fruit, too: Biden could move to cancel the Line 3 pipeline, along with the Dakota Access Pipeline, Line 5 and the Mountain Valley Pass Pipeline. A recent analysis by Oil Change International, in fact, found that the White House has to prevent 1.6bn metric tonnes of emissions per year by rejecting those and another 20 fossil fuel projects. Existing laws like the Clean Water Act and National Environmental Policy Act grant the executive branch broad authority to do so. Internationally, the administration could join the UK and Italy at the G20 this week in pushing to phase-out coal and formally end overseas financing for all oil and gas projects through the US Export-Import Bank, as well. The State Department could drop its longstanding objections to concrete discussions of loss and damage financing and historical responsibility for rising temperatures at the UN climate talks in Glasgow.Joe Biden and members of his administration have frequently called climate change an “existential threat.” If the White House wanted to act like that’s true – and assert real US leadership at COP 26 – it could.
      Kate Aronoff is a staff writer at The New Republic. She is the co-author of A Planet To Win: Why We Need A Green New Deal (Verso) and the co-editor of We Own The Future: Democratic Socialism, American Style (The New Press)
      TopicsCop26OpinionClimate crisisJoe BidenUS politicsUS foreign policyJoe ManchincommentReuse this content More

    • 225 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      The 2009 financial crisis taught us hard lessons. Have Democrats learned them? | David Sirota and Alex Gibney

      by

      OpinionUS politicsThe 2009 financial crisis taught us hard lessons. Have Democrats learned them?David Sirota and Alex GibneyThe political meltdown of a decade ago crushed faith in hope and change, and led to Maga and mayhem Thu 28 Oct 2021 06.37 EDTLast modified on Thu 28 Oct 2021 07.07 EDTA first-term Democratic president with a majority in Congress and an uncompromising Republican opposition. A country disillusioned by a previous administration’s corruption and mismanagement. A working class traumatized by an economic downturn. An establishment calling not for aggressiveness and boldness, but for half measures and compromise.Democrats’ tax plan to pay for Biden agenda would affect 700 of America’s super-richRead moreIf this sounds familiar, it is not only because it describes this current moment, but because it is the experience we lived through 12 years ago – a political meltdown that destroyed many Americans’ remaining faith in their government, and ultimately birthed Donald Trump’s presidency.That meltdown crushed faith in hope and change, and led to Maga and mayhem. And if Democrats continue making the same choices again, we should expect the same results – or worse.2009 was not 2021, but history tends to rhyme. Back then, the contagion wasn’t a virus, it was a financial panic brought on by the collapse of what had been the American economy’s most stable pillar: the mortgage. But the homes were built atop a precarious foundation. After a spate of bank deregulation, Wall Street giants had transformed themselves into the newest peddlers of the old swampland-in-Florida schemes, enticing borrowers and pension funds to bet life savings on unsustainable housing prices and debt.When enough homeowners couldn’t make their payments and home prices cratered, millions faced foreclosure, retirement systems faced huge losses on mortgage-related investments, 401k plans faced stock market declines, and banks faced the prospect of insolvency.Amid this financial pandemic, though, there was a glimmer of something better – Barack Obama, who had campaigned on an inspiring promise to “bring a new era of responsibility and accountability to Wall Street and to Washington”.That FDR-esque rhetoric resulted in a 2008 election landslide, a huge Democratic congressional majority, and high hopes that a new administration would fight the Great Recession with the same kind of robust New Deal that Franklin Roosevelt deployed to successfully combat the Great Depression.But that didn’t happen.Obama had helped the Bush administration forge the Troubled Asset Relief Program (Tarp), whose name seemed to promise assistance for homeowners, but which instead provided most of its benefits to a handful of financial institutions. When he took office, Obama could have changed how Tarp money was being spent, but he and his administration kept funneling the cash to Wall Street. The relative pittance that trickled out to aid borrowers mostly stretched out foreclosures to “foam the runway” for financial institutions, as Obama’s treasury secretary Tim Geithner reportedly said.Soon after, the Wall Street-bankrolled Obama administration scaled back its economic stimulus plan, backed off its promise to reform bankruptcy laws, refused to prosecute bankers, abandoned legislation to limit the size of too-big-to-fail banks, and allowed bailout money to subsidize lavish executive bonuses.Some lonely voices in Washington tried to sound an alarm. Tarp Inspector General Neil Barofsky warned that the opaque bailout was being misused. Congressman Brad Miller, a Democrat from North Carolina, tried to hold Obama to his promise to let judges write down mortgagors’ loans. And Senators Carl Levin and Ted Kaufman, a longtime aide to Joe Biden, pressed their party to prosecute and break up the banks.They were largely ignored – and Obama later justified the brush-offs by insisting that doing anything more would have “required a violence to the social order, a wrenching of political and economic norms”.But defending the banks and failing to deliver material gains to a nation ravaged by corporate malfeasance gave conservatives a political bailout, allowing them to further shred the social fabric once stitched together by a belief in shared sacrifice.Boosted by Glenn Beck’s blubbering broadsides and Rick Santelli’s CNBC dog-whistle rant against mortgage “losers”, Republicans were able to divide the country and portray themselves as populists – and shellack Democrats in 2010’s Tea Party election.A few years later, Democratic leaders confidently predicted that they would be able to overcome working-class rage with support from wealthier suburbanites. After all, the top 10% of income earners saw their fortunes rise by 27% during Obama’s presidency.But every other stratum saw incomes decline, and countless neighborhoods were eviscerated by more than 6m foreclosures, dooming families to losing battles with bank bureaucracy, government red tape, and a judicial foreclosure machine.There was Detroit’s Sandra Hines, who tearfully told a congressional committee about being thrown out of her home in the dead of winter after she fell behind on her mortgage payments.There was Florida oncology nurse Lisa Epstein, who, just after giving birth to an infant daughter, faced foreclosure and then endured a Kafkaesque struggle to expose fraudulent mortgage practices – which resulted in a slap-on-the-wrist settlement that netted her just $600.These experiences, repeated ad nauseam as Wall Street executives swelled their stock portfolios, convinced many to view the past promises of “hope and change” as a ruse. The subsequent outrage helped Republicans complete their takeover with Trump, a billionaire charlatan ginning up racial animosity and depicting himself as singularly able to “make America great again.”The throughline from the financial crisis to Democrats’ failure to deliver help to the rise of Trump is evident in a study from the Center for American Progress. The Democratic thinktank found that “larger proportions of underwater homeowners were prominent features” of more than a third of the 206 counties won by Obama in 2012 that flipped to Trump in 2016.“The legacy of the financial crisis is Donald J Trump,” concluded Trump consigliere Steve Bannon.For today’s Democrats, the takeaway is not merely that Trump is a pathological liar, a racist and an anti-democratic menace who exacerbated the problems he diagnosed. The lesson is more elemental: when America votes for hope and change and is instead force-fed more of the same, the backlash can be swift – and can benefit conservative opportunists who will make things worse.A dozen years later, with Democrats assuming power amid another national crisis, there were initial signs that this lesson had been learned: the Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer said at the outset of the Biden presidency that Democrats must pass bills that are “big and bold and strong”, and he added that “we will not repeat that mistake” of watering down legislation. The child tax credit in the initial Covid relief package was a solid victory – it significantly reduced child poverty, and a recent poll shows less anti-Biden animus among Trump voters who received it.However, much of the direct aid in that legislation has been stalled, cut off or scheduled for expiration – even as nearly one in five households lost all of their savings during the pandemic. Worse, Biden and Democrats have been considering big cuts to their already scaled-back package of housing, anti-poverty and climate initiatives. They’ve also pondered defanging provisions to reduce drug prices, and considered adding means-testing and work requirements that could make direct aid more difficult to access.Taken together, it feels like 2009 all over again.Billionaires are doing better than ever, while more and more Americans are getting economically pulverized – and simmering with rage. Just a year out from the midterm election, the latest polls show Biden’s approval rating plummeting, with particular erosion among Democratic constituencies who were promised change, but seem to be feeling like they’re only getting more of the same.Once again, progressive voices sounding the alarm are getting drowned out by conservative Democrats, their corporate donors, and pundits demanding surrender. Meanwhile, Trump and his Republican mini-mes are barnstorming the country preening as populists, all while a new crop of rightwing media hucksters are converting popular discontent into increasing support for rightwing authoritarianism.But let’s remember: the past does not have to be prelude. If the Democrats are willing to learn from recent history, they still have time to make different choices.In Congress, Democratic lawmakers can realize there is no “middle-ground” compromise with Republicans or corporate greed. They can end the filibuster and ignore the business lobbyists and the donors trying to halt their legislative program, which may be the last chance to help workers and ward off a climate cataclysm.In the White House, Biden can break from Obama’s fetishization of bipartisanship. He can instead try to be a modern-day Lyndon Johnson, arm-twisting his recalcitrant party members into embracing real hope and change.Though none of this would guarantee success, it would at least give the party a fighting chance to enact its agenda and materially improve people’s lives.That simple objective is often obscured in the social media-driven miasma of politics. But history suggests that going big and delivering tangible help to a nation in need is probably the only way to restore some faith in government, ward off an authoritarian takeover and end the meltdown of disillusionment that threatens to incinerate our democracy.
      Investigative reporter David Sirota and Oscar-winning documentarian Alex Gibney are the executive producers of the new podcast series Meltdown, which explores the aftermath of the financial crisis
      This essay is being published in conjunction with the launch of Meltdown. Find the podcast episodes here
      TopicsUS politicsOpinionDemocratsFinancial crisisJoe BidencommentReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Joe Manchin pushes for climate cuts as West Virginia battered by crisis

      by

      West VirginiaJoe Manchin pushes for climate cuts as West Virginia battered by crisis The conservative Democrat is busy trying to strip out many of the policies to tackle the problems his home state is facingKyle Vass in West VirginiaWed 27 Oct 2021 03.00 EDTLast modified on Wed 27 Oct 2021 03.02 EDTThe rise of Joe Manchin as a key power player for Democratic policymaking in 2021 is the result of a perfect storm for the US senator from West Virginia.Spies next door? The suburban US couple accused of espionageRead moreHis position as the Senate’s most conservative Democrat means he often has final say in what his party is able to push through, especially when it comes to Joe Biden’s ambitious domestic agenda on infrastructure, far-reaching social policies and a powerful attempt to tackle the climate crisis.A drive through West Virginia’s countryside – which is still enthusiastically Donald Trump country – reveals a patchwork of communities battered by the climate crisis and barely held together by deteriorating infrastructure. Yet Manchin – balking at a $3.5tn price tag of Biden’s reconciliation bill – is busy trying to strip out many of the policies that would try to tackle these crises that are so seriously affecting many of his fellow West Virginians.West Virginia, a landlocked state, leads the nation in the number of the infrastructure facilities – hospitals, fire stations, water treatment plants, power stations – located on land prone to severe flooding. It even beats out Louisiana and Florida. Of course, the climate crisis is seeing flood events hit record levels across the US.Beyond the inspiration for John Denver’s hit song, West Virginia’s country roads are actually a source of fear and frustration for residents. Nearly half of the roads in the state are routinely battered by severe flooding.When power outages – some of the longest and most frequent in the nation – hit the state, they are often lethal, a reality made clear when a single flood event in 2016 took out power for over half of the state’s homes and killed 23 people in 12 hours.Earlier this year, tens of thousands of people were left without power for more than two weeks in freezing temperatures when ice storms felled trees on to power lines across the state and closed roads.But, for many West Virginians the reality of flooding and infrastructure failure are more insidious than isolated events.For Jill Hess, it’s trying to make it back to Fairmont, her home town and the birthplace of Joe Manchin, every time there’s talk of a storm. For the past five years, Hess made it a priority to see to it that her mother, Sue Hess, who was surviving on oxygen concentrators, wasn’t stranded powerless and alone.“Every time it would rain or snow she would really go into panic mode.”Jill said that growing up, outages weren’t frequent. But as her mother grew older and weaker, so has the power grid.Despite spending over a billion dollars trying to prevent the grid from failing, the frequency and duration of outages have steadily increased as the temperature of the Earth has risen, causing places like West Virginia to experience increased storm activity.“I can’t tell you how many times she would say, ‘I need you to be ready and available if anything happens because we have a severe thunderstorm warning coming through.’”Jill would hop in her car to drive towards her mother, dependent on oxygen machines, in Fairmont. But with storms in West Virginia come road closures, shutting down the most direct route to any given place. Adding 15 minutes to be rerouted around a mountain felt like 15 hours to Jill knowing her mother was running out of oxygen.For Jill, there’s a cruel irony to how her mother spent her final years. Sue had been a home health nurse, traveling across the county to help people who couldn’t make it to hospital. In 1968, she traveled to nearby Farmington, the 375-person town, to take care of wounded survivors of the Farmington mine disaster. In the floods of 1985 that killed 38 people across the state, Sue had gone from house to house helping provide medical assistance and supplies to families whose livelihoods had been devastated by flooding.Now, despite having retired in a nice home less than a mile away from the same hospital at which she had completed her nursing program, Sue found herself helpless. She relied on a combination of asking her daughter to drive in and calling 911 for ambulance rides to take to her somewhere she could breathe.Before she died, Sue racked up a four-figure ambulance bill nearly every time the power went out.“They would just literally park her in the waiting room of the ER, on oxygen until it was clear that the power came on.” The average power outage in the state lasts for 11.4 hours – the second highest in the nation.The five years of needless suffering her mother was put through before she died in December comes down to infrastructure for Jill. What she finds especially frustrating is that Manchin isn’t detached from this reality – it’s the one he grew up in. Before he was a politician, the Hess family used to get Christmas cards from the Manchins.Jill has no doubt that Manchin knows exactly how hard climate change is making life for the people he grew up around.National news outlets have been quick to connect the financial dots on Manchin. Clean energy initiatives could affect his bottom line in multiple ways because that bottom line is joined at the hip to one of the biggest drivers of climate change in the world: the fossil fuel industry.Put simply, the US senator is blocking legislation that would demand better of the dirty energy companies that make up his investment portfolio and his 2022 election cycle contributors list. And, he’s doing so to the environmental, social and economic detriment of his state.According to a report by the West Virginia Climate Alliance, efforts at addressing climate change such as the Green New Deal, which Manchin has opposed, would create 10m jobs across the nation and introduce regulations that could clean West Virginia’s notoriously polluted waterways – a byproduct of the state’s reliance on coal.Manchin’s own coal company, which he formed before assuming public office, has earned him $5.2m in dividends over the past 10 years. Manchin also has received more money from oil and gas companies than any other senator in next year’s election.As Manchin has gotten richer, his state has gotten warmer. The decrease in cold snaps through the year could, according to the Climate Alliance report, bring about a proliferation of invasive plant species and a significant increase in ticks which transmit Lyme disease and Rocky Mountain spotted fever.But, putting personal profits over his own party and its environmental initiatives is hardly new for Manchin. In fact, it’s a fundamental part of the story behind his rise to power.Before he was the single greatest source of frustration for Democrats in America, he showed West Virginia he would rather work with Republicans against his own party than support anything that resembled environmentalism.In 1996, Charlotte Pritt beat Manchin in the Democratic primary for governor – the only person, to this day, to hand him a defeat in an election. But Pritt ran as an environmentalist, urging West Virginia to develop industries that weren’t centered on polluting the earth and creating deplorable working conditions.Shortly after losing to Pritt, Manchin sent 900 letters to top Democrats around the state saying he wouldn’t support Pritt because she wasn’t “interested in the concerns of moderate and conservative Democrats”. Instead, Manchin’s letter added he would be supporting the Republican candidate, Cecil Underwood. Underwood won.But, two decades later, economists and climate scientists have sided with Pritt, not Manchin, on what’s best for the state.A 2019 report from the West Virginia Center on Budget & Policy emphasized the dangers of the state continuing to depend on its “rich non-renewable depleting natural resources”, because it made terrible financial sense. Failures to diversify the economy, the author wrote, only perpetuates the boom and bust economies that have plagued the state and put it on a “collision course with efforts to combat climate change.”Nicolas Zégre, a hydrologist at West Virginia University, agrees that there is a false dichotomy where economic progress is wrongly pitted against combating climate change. Zégre, who researches flood risk vulnerability in West Virginia, said in fact it’s the opposite: the state and its already struggling economy can’t afford to continue to be battered by climate change.Pelosi ‘very confident’ Democrats will reach deal to salvage Biden agendaRead more“What are our elected representatives doing to protect West Virginians? The answer is very little.”For Zégre, the way forward for Manchin and anyone claiming to represent the interest of West Virginians is to invest in a sustainable and clean version of what this state could be, adding “none of that is going to happen until our decision makers, first of all, acknowledge that climate change is happening”.One example of how Zégre sees the state positioning itself for both economic diversification and a shift towards alleviating climate change is by cleaning up its waterways – 70% of which are too dirty to “support natural biological function”.A shift towards clean water, according to Zégre, would create a pathway for West Virginia to provision even more water than it does for surrounding states, a practice that’s only going to increase in value as climate change causes unprecedented droughts.Zégre urges West Virginia’s politicians, especially Manchin, to realize how vulnerable their state is to the reality of climate change.“We have so much opportunity, yet many of our leaders look backwards for a model of what the future should be.”TopicsWest VirginiaClimate crisisDemocratsUS CongressUS SenateUS politicsnewsReuse this content More