World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Ted Cruz and other Republican senators oppose certifying election results

      by

      Ted Cruz of Texas, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and nine other Republican US senators or senators-elect said on Saturday they will reject presidential electors from states where Donald Trump has contested his defeat by Joe Biden, “unless and until [an] emergency 10-day audit” of such results is completed.
      The move is largely symbolic and unlikely to overturn the presidential election. Nonetheless, it adds to a sense of deepening crisis affecting US democracy.
      Trump has refused to concede, though Biden won more than 7m more votes nationally and took the electoral college by 306-232, a margin Trump called a landslide when he won it over Hillary Clinton in 2016.
      The Trump campaign has lost the vast majority of more than 50 lawsuits it has mounted in battleground states, alleging electoral fraud, and before the supreme court.
      On Friday, a federal judge dismissed a suit lodged by a House Republican which attempted to give the vice-president, Mike Pence, who will preside over the certification of the electoral college result on Wednesday, the power to overturn it.
      Nonetheless, the senators and senators-elect who issued a statement on Saturday followed Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri in committing to challenging the result.
      Objections are also expected from a majority of House Republicans. Objections must be debated and voted on but as Democrats control the House and the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, and other senior Republicans have voiced opposition, the attempt to disenfranchise a majority of Americans seems doomed to fail.
      On Saturday, Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said she would vote to certify the results, writing: “The oath I took at my swearing-in was to support and defend the constitution of the United States, and that is exactly what I will do.”
      But Cruz and Johnson were joined by Senators James Lankford (Oklahoma), Steve Daines (Montana), John Kennedy (Louisiana), Marsha Blackburn (Tennessee) and Mike Braun (Indiana). Senators-elect Cynthia Lummis (Wyoming), Roger Marshall (Kansas), Bill Hagerty (Tennessee) and Tommy Tuberville (Alabama) also signed on.
      “The election of 2020,” they said, “like the election of 2016, was hard fought and, in many swing states, narrowly decided. The 2020 election, however, featured unprecedented allegations of voter fraud, violations and lax enforcement of election law, and other voting irregularities.”
      No hard evidence for such claims has been presented. Federal officials including former attorney general William Barr and Christopher Krebs, a cyber security chief fired by Trump, have said the election was secure.
      Regardless, the senators said Congress “should immediately appoint an electoral commission, with full investigatory and fact-finding authority, to conduct an emergency 10-day audit of the election returns in the disputed states. Once completed, individual states would evaluate the commission’s findings and could convene a special legislative session to certify a change in their vote, if needed.”
      The senators made reference to the contested election of 1876, which ended in the appointment of such a commission.
      “We should follow that precedent,” they said.
      Most well-informed observers would suggest otherwise, given that process put an end to post-civil war Reconstruction and led to the institution of racist Jim Crow laws across the formerly slave-owning south.
      In August, the Pulitzer-winning historian Eric Foner told the Guardian: “The election of 1876 would not have been disputed at all if there hadn’t been massive violence in the south to prevent black people from voting and voter suppression like we have today. Now, voter suppression is mostly legal.”
      Presciently, given baseless claims that voting under a pandemic was abused by Democrats, he added: “Today, I can certainly see the Trump people challenging these mail-in ballots: ‘They’re all fraudulent, they shouldn’t be counted.’ Challenging people’s voting.”
      Cruz, like Hawley, is prominent among Republicans expected to run for president in 2024, and thus eager to appeal to supporters loyal to Trump. On Saturday, Christine Pelosi, daughter of House speaker Nancy Pelosi and a member of the Democratic National Committee, referred to the bitter 2016 primary when she tweeted: “Ted Cruz is defending Trump’s assaults on democracy with more energy than he defended his own family against Trump’s assaults on his wife and father.”
      The Democratic strategist Max Burns wrote: “The exact same Senate GOP that refused to allow a single witness during President Trump’s impeachment trial now wants to … call a bunch of witnesses to ‘investigate’ Joe Biden’s 2020 victory.”
      Biden did not immediately comment. In Congress, the Connecticut senator Richard Blumenthal branded the statement “pathetic”, “un-American” and “an attack on our democracy”. Amy Klobuchar, from Minnesota, said Biden “will be inaugurated on 20 January, and no publicity stunt will change that”. More

    • 125 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden seeks term-defining wins in Georgia runoffs Trump called 'illegal'

      by

      Campaigning continued in Georgia on Saturday in two Senate runoff elections which will define much of Joe Biden’s first term in office.Regardless of Donald Trump’s bizarre New Year’s Day decision to call the runoffs “illegal and invalid”, the contests on Tuesday will decide control of the Senate and therefore how far Biden can reach on issues such as the pandemic, healthcare, taxation, energy and the environment.Democrats Jon Ossoff and the Rev Raphael Warnock must win to split the chamber 50/50. Kamala Harris, the vice-president-elect, would then act as tiebreaker as president of the Senate. Responding to that threat, Republican incumbents Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue have placed themselves squarely behind Trump, making hugely exaggerated claims about the dangers their opponents supposedly pose.In Perdue’s and Loeffler’s telling, a Democratic Senate would “rubber stamp” a “socialist agenda”, from “ending private insurance” and “expanding the supreme court” to adopting a Green New Deal that would raise taxes by thousands each year.Besides misrepresenting the policy preferences of Biden and most Democratic senators, that characterization ignores the reality of a Senate in which centrist Democrats and Republicans are set for a key role.At one campaign stop this week, Ossoff said Perdue’s “ridiculous” attacks “blow my mind”. He also scoffed at the claim that his ideas, aligned closely with Biden, amount to a leftist lunge. But he agreed with his opponent on how much Georgia matters.“We have too much good work to do,” Ossoff said, “to be mired in gridlock and obstruction for the next few years.”Ossoff also made headlines this week with his response to a Fox News reporter about Loeffler’s claims that her opponent, Warnock – pastor of a church formerly led by Martin Luther King Jr – is “dangerous” and “radical”.“Here’s the bottom line,” Ossoff said. “Kelly Loeffler has been campaigning with a klansman. Kelly Loeffler has been campaigning with a klansman and so she is stooping to these vicious personal attacks to distract from the fact that she’s been campaigning with a former member of the Ku Klux Klan.”The claim was misleading: Loeffler was pictured with a former member of the Klan but did not campaign with him. Loeffler responded by calling Ossoff “a pathological liar” and “a trust-fund socialist whose only job has been working for the Chinese Communist party in recent years”, a reference to payments to Ossoff’s media company from a Hong Kong conglomerate.Perdue entered quarantine this week after exposure to Covid-19. He and Loeffler must also contend with a deepening Republican split over Trump’s refusal to concede defeat in the presidential election.Trump has spread unfounded assertions of voter fraud and blasted Georgia Republicans including the governor, Brian Kemp, who have defended the elections process, attacks which led to his Friday night tweet about the legality of the runoffs. As Perdue and Loeffler have backed up Trump’s claims, some Republicans have expressed concern it could discourage loyalists from voting. Others are worried the GOP candidates have turned off moderates repelled by Trump.“No Republican is really happy with the situation we find ourselves in,” said Chip Lake, a longtime Georgia Republican consultant. “But sometimes when you play poker, you have to play the hand you’re dealt, and for us that starts with the president.”Trump will visit Georgia for a final rally with Loeffler on Monday evening, hours before polls open. It is unclear whether Perdue will attend.Democrats are fine with their opponents’ decision to run as Trump Republicans and use exaggerated attacks.“We talk about something like expanding Medicaid. We talk about expanding Pell grants” for low-income college students, Ossoff said at a recent stop in Marietta, north of Atlanta. “David Perdue denounces those things as socialism?”Ossoff noted Perdue’s claims that a Democratic Senate would abolish private health insurance. Ossoff and Warnock in fact back Biden’s proposal to add a federal insurance plan to private insurance exchanges.“I just want people to have the choice,” Ossoff said.Biden beat Trump by about 12,000 votes out of 5m in Georgia, making him the first Democrat to carry the state since 1992. His record vote total for a Democrat in the state was fueled by racially and ethnically diversifying metropolitan areas but also shifts in key Atlanta suburbs where white voters have historically leaned Republican.Yet Perdue landed within a few thousand votes of Trump’s total and led Ossoff by about 88,000. Republican turnout also surged in small towns and rural areas and Democrats disappointed down-ballot, failing to make expected gains.“We’ve won this race once already,” Perdue has said. His advisers think they can corral the narrow slice of swing voters by warning against handing Democrats control of the House, Senate and White House.Biden sold himself as a uniter and a seasoned legislative broker. But even a Democratic-held Senate would not give him everything he wants, as rules still require 60 votes to advance most major legislation. Biden must win over Republicans.A Democratic Senate would, however, clear a path for nominees to key posts, especially on the federal judiciary, and bring control of committees and floor action. A Senate led by current majority leader Mitch McConnell almost certainly would deny major legislative victories, as it did in Barack Obama’s tenure.Biden will travel to Atlanta on Monday to campaign with Ossoff and Warnock. Harris will campaign on Sunday in Savannah. In his last visit, Biden called Perdue and Loeffler “roadblocks” and urged Georgians “to vote for two United States senators who know how to say the word ‘yes’ and not just ‘no’.” More

    • 200 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden wants to fill federal court seats – but he needs to win the Senate first

      by

      During the disastrous first presidential debate in September, Donald Trump mocked Barack Obama, and Joe Biden by extension, for leaving office with so many federal court seats unfilled.“I’ll have so many judges because President Obama and him left me 128 judges to fill,” Trump said, slightly inflating the 105 vacancies he inherited. “When you leave office, you don’t leave any judges. That’s like, you just don’t do that … If you left us 128 openings, you can’t be a good president.But as is often the case with Trump’s attacks, there is much more to the story than that. It is true that Trump inherited nearly twice as many federal court vacancies as Obama did in 2009. However, Democrats blamed the high number of vacancies on what they described as an unprecedented level of obstruction from Republicans after they took control of the Senate in 2015.Over Trump’s lone term as president, he and the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, have successfully remade the federal judiciary, and Democrats are anxious to confirm liberal judges once Biden takes office. But some Democratic lawmakers are already voicing concern that Republicans will once again obstruct judicial nominations if they keep the Senate by winning at least one of the Georgia runoff races next month.Dick Durbin, who is seeking to become the top Democrat on the Senate judiciary committee, raised that concern in late November, predicting Biden would have “very little” impact on the federal judiciary if Republicans maintain control of the chamber.“If the last two years of the Obama administration were any indication, they’ll freeze them out,” Durbin told Politico. “Hope springs eternal, but I believe in history.”Daniel Goldberg, the legal director of the progressive Alliance for Justice, said Durbin’s comments underscored the importance of the Georgia Senate elections. If Democrats were to win both of the 5 January runoff races, the Senate would be 50-50, and Vice-President-elect Kamala Harris could provide a tie-breaking 51st vote.“I think Senator Durbin just made clear how important the Georgia elections are. The stakes could not be higher,” Goldberg said.If Republicans were to win at least one of the Georgia races and keep control of the Senate, Chuck Grassley is expected to chair the judiciary committee, and the Iowa senator would have the ability to block Biden’s nominees from receiving hearings.“If Grassley decides to play hardball, he could just not bring them up for hearings, and there’s nothing the other side can do,” said Josh Blackman, a professor at South Texas College of Law Houston and an adjunct scholar at the libertarian Cato Institute.That possibility is distressing to Democrats, who have watched with dismay as the Senate has approved more than 200 of Trump’s judicial nominees since 2017. While Obama was able to have 55 of his nominees to the federal appeals courts approved over eight years, 54 of Trump’s nominees have been confirmed over just four years. Roughly a quarter of all trial-level federal judges are now Trump appointees.Risk for RepublicansJosh Blackman also warned there could be potential consequences for Republicans if they choose to “play hardball” with Biden’s nominees. “If the Democrats take the Senate in 2022, they could just fill the vacancies then, so you may get more moderate nominees now to fill the void,” Blackman said. “If you wait two more years, they might become less moderate.”That calculus may be part of why some Democrats are more optimistic than Durbin about the likelihood of Biden’s judicial nominees being confirmed.“I think the dynamic is very different than the dynamic with Donald Trump as president,” said Russ Feingold, a former Democratic senator from Wisconsin. “Having served in the Senate for 18 years, 16 years on the judiciary committee, I can tell you people back home want those seats filled. And there is pressure from newspapers, from the legal community when that doesn’t happen.”Feingold, the president of the American Constitution Society (ACS), argued Biden’s team has also prioritized judicial nominations in a way that the Obama administration didn’t.“Because of the economic situation and the need to pass healthcare, this didn’t get the attention it deserved” during Obama’s presidency, Feingold said. “I believe the Biden transition and the Biden administration will give it the attention it deserves and make it a higher priority.”The ACS has already provided Biden’s team with extensive lists of potential nominees, in the hope of ensuring a smooth nomination process once a seat on the federal judiciary opens up.“It’s not just getting past McConnell,” Feingold said. “It’s being ready and getting those names moving and being ready when there are vacancies.”Legal experts argue that, if McConnell were to blockade Biden’s judicial nominees, the repercussions for the country would be severe. Not only would courts probably struggle to handle their caseloads with vacancies piling up, but the potential standoff could jeopardize the reputation of both the federal judiciary and the Senate.“The American people just repudiated Donald Trump, and they elected Joe Biden to the presidency, and one of the critical roles of the presidency is nominating individuals to sit on our federal courts,” Goldberg said. “I think what the American people expect is the Senate to not have one set of rules for Donald Trump and one set of rules for Joe Biden.”Although Feingold is more optimistic than Durbin about Biden’s judicial nominees receiving hearings, he acknowledged it was likely to be a hard-fought fight. If Democrats lose the Senate, Feingold said, they should not wallow but instead prepare for battle.“I understand it will be a challenge, a tremendous challenge that will involve a lot of negotiating, should the Democrats not be able to control the Senate,” Feingold said. “But it’s a challenge that I think can be met … We shouldn’t despair. We should be ready for the fight.” More

    • 150 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      US judge dismisses suit filed against Pence seeking to overturn election result

      by

      A US judge has rejected a lawsuit from a Republican congressman that sought to allow vice president Mike Pence to reject electoral college votes for Joe Biden when Congress meets on Wednesday to certify his victory over president Donald Trump.The latest long-shot attempt by Trump’s Republican allies to overturn the November election result was dismissed by one of Trump’s own appointees to the federal bench, Jeremy Kernodle.He ruled that representative Louie Gohmert of Texas and a slate of Republican electors from Arizona could not show they suffered any personal harm “fairly traceable” to Pence’s allegedly unlawful conduct and, therefore, lacked legal standing to bring the case.The standing requirement “helps enforce the limited role of federal courts in our constitutional system. The problem for plaintiffs here is that they lack standing,” Kernodle wrote.A spokesman for Trump referred questions to Pence’s office. A spokesman for Pence declined to comment.Gohmert and his fellow plaintiffs said they would appeal. In an interview with the broadcaster Newsmax, the congressman said the ruling was “an example of when the institutions that our constitution created to resolve disputes so that you didn’t have to have riots and violence in the streets, it’s when they go wrong.”“All this stuff about it [election fraud] being debunked, unsubstantiated, those are absolute lies,” he said, without evidence. “Basically in effect the ruling would be that you got to go to the streets and be as violent as antifa and BLM [Black Lives Matter].”Trump has refused to concede defeat and has repeatedly falsely claimed the election was tainted by widespread fraud. He and his allies have lost dozens of court efforts seeking to reverse the election results.Biden beat Trump by a 306-232 margin in the electoral college and is set to be sworn in on 20 January.Under the electoral college system, electoral votes are allotted to states and the District of Columbia based on their congressional representation.Some Republicans have said they plan to object to the count of presidential electors next week in Congress. The effort could trigger a lengthy debate in the Senate but has virtually no chance of overturning the results.A justice department lawyer representing Pence on Thursday had urged Kernodle to dismiss the lawsuit, saying they had sued the wrong person because they raised “a host of weighty legal issues about the manner in which the electoral votes for president are to be counted”.“The Senate and the House, not the vice president, have legal interests that are sufficiently adverse to plaintiffs to ground a case or controversy,” Pence’s filing said. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      The Guardian view on liberal Christians: is this their moment? | Editorial

      by

      “No one is saved alone,” writes Pope Francis in Let Us Dream, a short book of Covid-related reflections published last month. Those words carry an obvious Christian resonance. But the meaning that the pope intends to convey is primarily secular. The pandemic, he believes, has underlined our shared vulnerability and mutual dependency. By shocking us out of everyday indifference and egotism, our present troubles can open up the space for a new spirit of fraternity. A fresh emphasis on looking out for each other, claims the pope, can become the theme of a more generous and caring post-pandemic politics.Let Us Dream is a pastoral, spiritual book that aspires to address a lay audience as well as a religious one. In its emphasis on civic solidarity, tolerance, concern for the poor and the environment, it is also the latest attempt by Pope Francis to shift the dial of 21st-century Christianity away from the culture wars that have consumed it.There is an obvious temptation to respond wryly: “Good luck with that.” In a number of high-profile ways, 2020 was another depressing year for liberal-minded Christians. The Polish Catholic church worked hand in glove with the state in an attempt to effectively ban abortion and trample over LGBTQ+ rights. The strong disapproval of a majority of Poles, who have no wish to live in a theocracy, cut no ice. In neighbouring Hungary, the Reformed, Lutheran and Catholic churches kept stumm as Viktor Orbán’s government continued to bully minorities in the name of “illiberal Christianity”. During the lead-up to November’s US presidential election, Donald Trump’s cynical weaponisation of the abortion debate helped ensure strong Christian backing for the most profane, religiously illiterate president in the country’s history. And this week, Pope Francis himself indicated his disapproval of the legalisation of abortion in his native Argentina.But this stark summary of the church at odds with the liberal world does not tell the whole story. In Britain, as elsewhere, Christian churches, alongside mosques and synagogues, played a frontline role in the community activism that kept people and families afloat during months of acute uncertainty and hardship. It is from that wellspring of fellow feeling and altruism, the importance of which is suddenly front and centre in our lives, that Let Us Dream believes a “new humanism” can emerge. For those who share that aspiration, whether secular or religious, there are genuine grounds for hope in 2021.A liberal CatholicThe election to the White House of Joe Biden, a Democrat who is also a practising Catholic, is the best news liberal Christians have had for a long time. In a book published last month, the conservative Australian cardinal George Pell said Mr Trump was “a bit of a barbarian, but in some important ways he’s ‘our’ (Christian) barbarian”. The end of that cynically transactional relationship between Mr Trump’s White House and the religious right signals new possibilities. In his victory speech, Mr Biden quoted from Ecclesiastes, saying that for a divided America, “it was a time to heal”. When he has discussed his faith, the president-elect has tended to talk about altruism, decency and personal integrity, steering clear of provocative dividing lines.Mr Biden has backed access to abortion and same-sex marriage. He will, as a result, be relentlessly targeted by conservative Catholic critics and evangelicals. The president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, José Gomez, has convened a working group to address the “difficult and complex” situation of dealing with a liberal Catholic in the White House. But the Catholic vote was split evenly between Mr Biden and Mr Trump. And, crucially, Pope Francis is likely to have the new president’s back.This relationship could constitute an important new axis of liberal influence in the west. After a recent phone call between the two, a statement from Mr Biden’s transition team said the president-elect “expressed his desire to work together on the basis of a shared belief in the dignity and equality of all humankind, on issues such as caring for the marginalised and the poor, addressing the crisis of climate change and welcoming and integrating immigrants and refugees into our communities”. This was to more or less tick off the list of priorities the pope has attempted to set, while under constant assault from religious conservatives. The disruption of the recent alliance between Christianity and rightwing populism carries significant implications not only for America, but for the battle against global poverty, the climate emergency and the migration crisis.Fraternity as the new frontierMr Biden’s election is not the only hopeful sign for Christians who long for their leaders to look beyond the narrow preoccupation with reproductive rights and sexuality. Last year was marked by two significant theological documents, one from the eastern church and one from the west. Towards a Social Ethos of the Orthodox Church, published during Lent, is a radical clarion call for Orthodox Christians to engage with deepening inequalities in developed societies, and to confront wealthy nations with their moral obligations to refugees. The tone is set by the opening words of the text: “Our spiritual lives … cannot fail to be social lives.” Endorsed by Bartholomew I, the spiritual leader of the Orthodox church, the document recalls that “[the] early and Byzantine church had a bold voice on social justice”. This, it states, must be revived and renewed. Pope Francis’s recent encyclical, Fratelli Tutti (Brothers All), was written in the same spirit. Ideas of fraternity and friendship are developed as a necessary complement to the familiar political categories of liberty and equality. The argument is summed up in Let Us Dream, where the pope writes: “Without the ‘we’ of a people, of a family, of institutions, of a society that transcends the ‘I’ of individual interests, life … becomes a battle for supremacy between factions and interests.”Intriguingly, variations on this theme have been explored in a string of recent publications, both secular and religious. In his valedictory work Morality: Restoring the Common Good in Divided Times, the late chief rabbi, Jonathan Sacks, criticises the modern priority of “I” over “we”. Robert Putnam and Shaylyn Romney Garrett’s The Upswing and Michael Sandel’s The Tyranny of Merit both attempt to map out a civic territory that avoids the twin dangers of selfish individualism and illiberal populism.In recent years, Christian leaders have too often been silent, complicit or cravenly proactive, as the Bible has been deployed as a weapon in conservative culture wars. The image of Trump marching through teargassed streets to brandish a bible outside a Washington church encapsulated a kind of capitulation. But in the new year, liberal Christians have grounds for cautious optimism. In the necessary project of carving out a new space for a less polarised, more fraternal public square, they have a vital role to play. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump looks back and Biden looks ahead in contrasting new year messages

      by

      The 1 January messages from the president and president-elect were both short, simple and upbeat.“Happy New Year,” Donald Trump tweeted on Friday morning.“Here’s to 2021,” Joe Biden had posted as his last tweet of 2020.That’s about where the similarities ended between the lame duck Republican destined to leave the White House in less than three weeks and the incoming Democrat who will take his place.A little earlier, in dueling New Year’s Eve declarations, Trump boasted of accomplishments in office, calling them “historic victories” despite his resounding loss in November’s election and a pandemic that has never been under control and is entering its darkest phase with record deaths in parallel with chaotic early vaccine distribution.Biden praised healthcare workers on the front lines and looked ahead to his prospects of delivering what he has promised will be a transformative first 100 days in office in terms of dealing with the coronavirus, the battered economy, global re-engagement by the US and taking action on the climate crisis.After weeks of fighting to remain in office, Trump said in a video posted on Twitter in the evening on 31 December: “We have to be remembered for what’s been done.”Trump, who has yet to formally concede his November election defeat to his Democratic rival, returned to Washington early from his Florida resort amid a fight with Congress over a defence bill and coronavirus aid checks.Speaking from Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, Biden paid tribute to healthcare workers and encouraged people to get vaccinated in a brief appearance with his wife, Jill Biden, on the long-running ABC special Dick Clark’s New Year’s Rockin’ Eve with Ryan Seacrest 2021.“I’m absolutely, positively confident – confident – we’re going to come back and we’re going to come back even stronger than before,” said Biden, who takes office on 20 January.He repeated his call for vaccines to be distributed more quickly.Trump, who had Covid-19 in October, frequently played down the severity of the pandemic and oversaw a response many health experts have criticised as disorganised, cavalier and having sometimes ignored the science behind virus transmission.But in his new year remarks he noted that the US had produced a Covid-19 vaccine in record time and that he had correctly predicted it would come before the year ended.The US has been one of the countries worst-hit by Covid-19 and leads the world in fatalities, with more than 340,000 deaths officially attributed to the virus.Trump was originally scheduled to attend a New Year’s Eve party at his Mar-a-Lago resort.The White House has given no reason for why he returned to Washington early, but it coincides with Trump’s fight with Congress over his veto of a major defence bill and his demand for increased Covid-19 stimulus checks, as well as a spike in tensions with Iran.The Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, the top Republican in the chamber, dealt a probable death blow on Wednesday to Trump’s effort to boost coronavirus aid to Americans, declining to schedule a swift vote on a bill to raise relief checks to $2,000 from the $600 included in a $892bn relief package passed by Congress earlier this month.Trump’s fellow Republicans in Congress have largely stuck with him through four turbulent years, but he lashed out at them in recent days for not fully backing his unsupported claims of election fraud, rejecting his demand for bigger checks and moving towards the veto override.On Thursday, McConnell again rejected a vote on a standalone bill that would increase the stimulus checks, calling it “socialism for rich people” and “a terrible way to get help to families who actually need it”. The bill was passed by the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives on Monday.McConnell also said there should be nothing controversial about approving the $740bn National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which Trump vetoed because it does not repeal certain legal protections for tech companies.“We’ve enacted an annual NDAA for 59 straight years and counting,” McConnell said. “In the next few days – the easy way or the hard way – we’re going to do our job once again. This body will fulfil our responsibility to the men and women who protect our country.”The House voted to overturn Trump’s veto on Monday. The Senate will convene again on Friday at noon EST for a rare New Year’s Day session, in which lawmakers are expected to cast the first of two procedural votes aimed at overriding the veto. If that succeeds, the Senate is expected to hold a second procedural vote on Saturday followed by a final vote on passage.The Republican senator Josh Hawley of Missouri has said he will object to Biden’s victory when Congress convenes to officially tally the electoral college votes on 6 January, which could trigger a lengthy debate in the Senate but has no chance of overturning the results. CNN reported that about 140 Republicans in the House were expected to engage in similar tactics.Some Republican senators had supported Trump’s call for an increase in the stimulus payments, notably David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, who face runoff elections in Georgia on 5 January that will determine which party controls the Senate under Biden.But Perdue’s campaign suffered a setback on Thursday, saying the senator was quarantining after coming into contact with someone who had tested positive for the coronavirus. More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Trump attacks and vote by mail: the top voting rights stories of 2020

      by

      The fight over access to the ballot was one of the most important stories in America in 2020.
      The country faced a pandemic that both offered new barriers to the ballot box and exacerbated existing ones. After election day, America faced an unprecedented effort to undermine faith in the election results as Donald Trump and Republican allies baselessly claimed fraud and brought a flurry of unsuccessful lawsuits seeking to get election results overturned.
      Even though those efforts have failed, Republicans have created a dangerous precedent, laying out the playbook for future losing candidates to refuse to accept election results. More immediately, Republicans may use the uncertainty Trump helped create to justify new restrictions on the right to vote.
      Here are a few of the biggest stories around voting rights from 2020:
      Donald Trump’s efforts to undermine the election
      As it became clear that a record number of Americans were going to vote by mail, experts warned that election officials would probably need more time to count and verify ballots after the polls closed, making it unlikely that Americans would know the winner of the presidential race on election night. Moreover, because Democrats were more likely to vote by mail, they warned that initial election results might show Trump ahead, only to see his advantage slip away as more votes were counted. The uncertainty, they warned, opened a dangerous opportunity for Trump to claim victory before all votes were counted after months of falsely saying vote by mail would lead to fraud.
      On election night, Trump did exactly that, making a late-night appearance at the White House to claim he won the election as votes were still being counted. In the days that followed – as Biden’s lead widened – the president and his legal team escalated claims of wrongdoing, alleging things such as that poll workers weren’t given adequate access to observe ballot counting. They began waging long-shot legal battles in both federal and state court, which rejected them overwhelmingly. Trump tried, and failed, to pressure some state lawmakers to override the popular vote in their state and award him electors anyway.
      By December, Trump and his allies had lost dozens of cases in court across the country, but that didn’t seem to matter to many Republicans. A total of 126 Republicans in the US House, nearly two-thirds of the entire caucus, signed on to an amicus brief supporting a last-minute effort by Texas to block electors in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia – all states Biden won. The US supreme court rejected the case, but the fact that so many Republicans were willing to embrace the claims underscored how the party embraced Trump’s baseless claims.
      Switching to vote by mail
      When America began shutting down because of the Covid-19 pandemic, it became clear there was going to be a surge in the number of people who cast their ballots through the mail. That presented a huge problem for many states, including key swing states like Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, where vote by mail was not widely used before.
      Loud alarm bells sounded early on. During an April election in Wisconsin, there were reports of voters not receiving their ballots on time while others waited hours in line to vote. In Pennsylvania’s June primary, there were reports of similar delays and election officials struggled to count the influx of ballots. The Brennan Center for Justice estimated states needed about $4bn to adequately conduct elections during the pandemic, but Congress allocated just a fraction of that in the spring, $400m.
      As state election officials scrambled to get new procedures in place, a significant new problem for mail-in voting emerged during the summer. Americans began experiencing severe mail delays, a problem critics attributed to changes implemented by Louis DeJoy, a prominent Republican donor who took over the US Postal Service in June. Many worried that a poorly functioning postal service would disenfranchise many voters, who would not be able to get their ballots and return them in time to have their vote counted. In a remarkable admission, Trump said publicly that he opposed additional funding for the postal service because it would make it harder to vote by mail.
      Facing several lawsuits and congressional inquiries, DeJoy pledged to reverse the changes and ensure timely delivery of ballots. As the election moved into its final months, there was a sprint to get voters to request and return their ballots as early as possible. State elected officials encouraged voters to return their ballots in person, either to an election office or to a ballot drop box. Some states, facing legal pressure, extended the deadline for returning an absentee ballot.
      When election day arrived, those efforts paid off – there were no reports of widespread disenfranchisement because of the mail. And preliminary data shows Democrats’ focus on voting by mail paid off. Some of the places where voters were the most likely to return their ballots saw some of the biggest swings towards Democrats compared to 2016.
      Drop boxes
      Amid worries about mail service, Republicans in some places began cracking down on ballot drop boxes.
      In Ohio, Frank LaRose, the state’s top election official, refused to allow counties to offer more than one location for voters to return their ballots, even as courts said there was nothing preventing him from doing so.
      The most egregious example may have been in Texas, where Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, unilaterally said in October that counties could offer just one ballot drop box. The decision meant that Harris county, home to 2.4 million registered voters, could offer just one location for voters to leave their ballots instead of the 12 it had planned. Texas already makes it extremely difficult to vote by mail, and the decision meant that voters in Harris cunty, one of the most diverse in Texas, had to travel long distances if they wanted to return their ballots in person.
      The supreme court’s conservative turn on voting rights
      The unique conditions of the 2020 elections unleashed a flood of litigation aimed at easing rules around mail-in voting. The suits, filed in large part by Democrats and voting rights groups, sought to suspend things like witness requirements for mail in ballots as well as state policies that allowed officials to reject a ballot based on a voter’s signature without first giving the voter a chance to fix the ballot.
      Several of those cases reached the United States supreme court, where the court’s conservative majority kept restrictions in place. In June, for example, the court allowed Texas to keep in place a law that only allowed a certain group of voters to cast their ballot by mail. It also said Alabama could block some counties from offering curbside voting.
      In the week before the election, the supreme court declined to overturn decisions from state courts in North Carolina and Pennsylvania extending the ballot receipt deadline. But it did overturn a federal court ruling doing the same in Wisconsin. In that case, Brett Kavanaugh wrote a concurring opinion strongly suggesting that state supreme courts could do little to question state election laws because the constitution gives state legislatures clear authority over elections. The opinion alarmed many observers, who worried it could handcuff state courts from striking down suppressive voting laws in the future.
      In a case not related to the pandemic, the supreme court also left in place a 2019 Florida law requiring people with felony convictions to repay fines and other court costs before they could vote again. Voting rights advocates challenged the measure, saying it effectively amounted to a poll tax and gutted a 2018 constitutional amendment eliminating Florida’s lifetime ban for people with felonies. An estimated 774,000 people in the state are blocked from voting because of the law, according to an estimate by the American Civil Liberties Union, which helped represent some of the plaintiffs in the case.
      The decision, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in dissent, blocked some people from voting, “simply because they are poor”.
      Attacks on the census
      Even before the pandemic, the 2020 census, which aims to count every living person in America, faced enormous challenges. Advocates worried that immigrants, turned off by Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric, would not respond to the decennial survey. They also worried about new technological changes – this was the first census where the government encouraged people to self-respond online.
      An inaccurate census would be catastrophic. The survey is used to determine how many seats in Congress each state gets as well as how $1.5tn in federal funds get allocated. Businesses and local governments also rely on the data to make decisions about where to open stores, build schools, roads and implement transportation routes.
      When the pandemic hit, it upended carefully prepared census plans and the bureau had to pause operations. After initially supporting an extension in completing the survey, the Trump administration reversed course, and said it was going to try to complete the census on-schedule, even as the bureau fell behind. That decision was probably linked to a July memo in which the president ordered undocumented immigrants excluded from the data used to determine how many seats in Congress each state gets. Several federal courts have since blocked the order, but the US supreme court reversed those decisions earlier in December without deciding on the merits of the memo, saying the suit was premature.
      Deep concerns remain about the reliability of the data, given the Trump administration’s rush to complete the process. The consequences of the rush are likely to become clearer when the bureau begins to release data in the coming weeks. More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Fauci calls for extra resources as US misses Covid vaccination target

      by

      [embedded content]
      The top infectious disease expert in the US, Anthony Fauci, called on the federal government on Thursday to deploy more resources to vaccinate Americans after the country missed its goal to get 20 million people inoculated by the end of the year.
      As overworked, underfunded state public health departments scrambled to administer the vaccines, some senior citizens waited overnight to receive their first dose in Florida.
      “We would have liked to see it run smoothly and have 20m doses into people today, by the end of 2020, which was the projection,” Fauci said.
      “Obviously it didn’t happen, and that’s disappointing,” he told NBC in an interview.
      The US failure to meets its end-of-year vaccine distribution goal comes as concerns grow about the newly identified variant of Covid-19 circulating in the UK, which was reported to have reached the US this week, with cases in Colorado and California.
      More than 14m vaccine doses had been distributed in the US, but only 2.1 million people have been vaccinated, said leaders of the federal vaccine program, Operation Warp Speed, at a Wednesday news conference.
      The chief adviser to Operation Warp Speed, Moncef Slaoui, said: “We know it should be better and we are working hard to make it better.”
      Terry Beth Hadler was so eager to get vaccinated that the 69-year-old piano teacher stood in line overnight in a parking lot in Florida with hundreds of other senior citizens.
      She waited 14 hours and a brawl nearly erupted before dawn on Tuesday when people cut in line outside the library in Bonita Springs where officials were offering shots on a first-come, first-served basis to those 65 or older.
      “I’m afraid that the event was a super-spreader,” she said. “I was petrified.”
      Overworked, underfunded state public health departments are scrambling to patch together plans for administering vaccines. Counties and hospitals have taken different approaches, leading to long lines, confusion, frustration and jammed phone lines.
      A multitude of logistical concerns have complicated the process of trying to beat back the scourge that has killed over 340,000 Americans. More