Categories
Politics

Traditionally Black Faculties Lastly Get the Highlight

John S. Wilson Jr., who served as President of Morehouse College and White House adviser on historically black colleges, said the institutions collectively known as HBCUs need to seize this moment.

“Is this a lasting moment that represents a new era?” Said Dr. Wilson, whose forthcoming book Up From Uncertainty focuses on the future of historically black colleges. “I think this answer could be ‘yes’ for many HBCUs. Unfortunately, I think it will be ‘no’ for some institutions too. “

Most black colleges and universities were founded in the 19th century to train people to be freed from slavery. Some students literally had to build their schools: at Tuskegee University in Alabama, they dug up the clay and shaped and burned the bricks that were used to build their campus.

The schools became centers of learning and intellectualism that produced most of the country’s black doctors, teachers, and judges and alumni such as the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., filmmaker Spike Lee, writer Toni Morrison, and the Rev. Raphael Warnock, Democratic Senator from Georgia.

The more established colleges have used the new money to build on their legacies. For example, Spelman and Morehouse, both in Atlanta, and Hampton University in Hampton, Virginia, have started entrepreneurship programs. And Howard in particular is able to attract talented faculty members who would otherwise have gone elsewhere.

Ms. Hannah-Jones, a New York Times Magazine staffer who won a 2020 Pulitzer Prize for her work on the 1619 project, turned down an offer from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill after controversy over whether to get a job would. She chose Howard and brought $ 20 million in donations from the Knight Foundation, Ford Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, and an anonymous donor.

Categories
Politics

How Senate Democrats’ $3.5 trillion funds tackles local weather change

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and President Joe Biden arrive at the U.S. Capitol for a Senate Democratic luncheon on July 14, 2021.

Drew Angerer | Getty Images News | Getty Images

President Joe Biden and Senate Democrats have vowed to push forward a $3.5 trillion budget resolution framework that would fund a clean energy transition and policies to combat climate change.

The blueprint, which contains nearly all the elements of the president’s American Families Plan — including funding for child care, paid leave and education — comes after Biden’s climate proposals were slashed from the bipartisan infrastructure deal during negotiations with Senate Republicans.

The plan involves tax incentives for clean energy and electric vehicles, as well as major investments to transition the economy away from fossil fuels and toward renewable sources such as wind and solar power.

The resolution also proposes a clean energy standard, a mandate that would require a portion of U.S. electricity to come from renewables.

Such a mandate has received widespread support from environmental activists and scientists, who say it’s critical to meet the president’s commitment to slash carbon emissions in half over the next decade and put the U.S. on track to become carbon neutral by 2050.

Democrats are looking to pass the bill later this summer on a party-line vote. If the budget resolution is signed into law, it would be the biggest legislative push in U.S. history to combat climate change.

The last big effort to pass climate legislation was in 2009, when congressional Democrats failed to approve a carbon pricing system under former President Barack Obama.

The resolution includes the creation of a civilian climate corps program for young people, which would produce more jobs that address climate change and help conserve the planet.

CNBC Politics

Read more of CNBC’s politics coverage:

There is also proposed funding for energy-efficient building weatherization and electrification projects, as well as language about methane gas reduction and polluter import fees to raise revenue and increase greenhouse gas emissions reduction efforts.

Progressive Senate Democrats have so far praised the inclusion of climate policy in the resolution. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., the Budget Committee chairman, earlier this week said the agreement will start “the process of having this great country lead the world in transforming our energy system.”

However, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., the moderate Democrat whose support may be critical in the bill’s passage, told reporters that he’s “very, very disturbed” by climate provisions that he believes could eliminate fossil fuels.

“I know they have the climate portion in here, and I’m concerned about that,” said Manchin, who is chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. The Democrat did not rule out his support for the resolution.

EPA Administrator Michael Regan on Wednesday said that the inclusion of a clean energy standard in the resolution has received “a very favorable response from many people on both sides of the aisle.”

“There are things in there for the American people that equate to jobs, global competitiveness, a strong infrastructure and preparation for climate change,” Regan said during an interview on NPR.  

Congress is working on the resolution in tandem with the $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure plan, which is still being drafted.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said he wants to have votes on the budget resolution and the infrastructure bill before the Senate goes on recess in August.

— CNBC’s Christina Wilkie contributed to this report.

Categories
Politics

Fb To Biden: ‘We Aren’t The Cause Vaccination Objective Was Missed’

WASHINGTON – Facebook and the Biden government had an increasingly vicious back and forth over the weekend after the government condemned the social media giant for spreading misinformation about the Covid-19 vaccines.

On Sunday, General Surgeon Vivek Murthy reiterated warnings that false stories about the vaccines had become a dangerous health hazard. “These platforms need to recognize that they have played an important role in increasing the speed and extent with which misinformation spreads,” Murthy said on CNN on Sunday.

In a blog post on Saturday, Facebook asked the administration to stop “pointing the finger” and set out what it had done to encourage users to vaccinate. The social network also described how it cracked down on lies about the vaccines, which officials said led to people refusing to be vaccinated.

“The Biden administration has chosen to blame a handful of American social media companies,” said Guy Rosen, Facebook’s vice president of integrity, in the post. “The fact is that the adoption of vaccines by Facebook users in the US has increased.”

Mr Rosen added that the company’s data showed that 85 percent of its users in the United States were or were about to be vaccinated against the coronavirus. While President Biden’s goal was to have 70 percent of Americans vaccinated by July 4th, which the White House missed, “Facebook isn’t the reason it missed that target,” Rosen said.

Facebook’s response followed a firm condemnation of the company by Mr Biden. When asked on Friday about the role of social media in influencing vaccinations, Mr Biden stated in unusually strong language that the platforms “kill people”.

“Look,” he added, “the only pandemic we have is that of the unvaccinated, and that – and they kill people.”

Other White House officials have also increasingly commented on how social media has stepped up vaccine flights.

On Thursday, Mr Murthy accused social media companies of not doing enough to stop the spread of dangerous misinformation about health, calling it a national health crisis that fueled refusal to vaccinate among Americans. On Friday, White House press secretary Jen Psaki also called for misinformation “that is causing people not to take the vaccine and people to die from it.” She said the White House was responsible for bringing up the issue.

The White House declined to comment on Facebook’s blog post on Saturday.

On Sunday morning, Mr Murthy also responded to allegations made by a Facebook official who spoke anonymously to CNN, saying the government was looking for “scapegoats for missing its vaccination targets.”

Updated

July 18, 2021, 12:38 p.m. ET

The company representative told CNN before Mr Murthy’s appearance on the news network that Mr Murthy had “praised our work” in private conversations while he had publicly criticized the company.

Mr. Murthy disproved the characterization.

“I’ve been very consistent in what I’ve been saying to tech companies,” Murthy said Sunday morning on CNN. “If we see good steps, we should acknowledge them,” he said, adding, “But I also said that it was not enough. We are still seeing an increase in misinformation on the Internet. “

Facebook, Twitter and other social media sites have long struggled with their role as platforms for speech while protecting their users from disinformation campaigns such as Russian efforts to influence presidential elections or false statements about the pandemic.

In the past few months, Facebook has taken steps against anti-vaccination advertisements and misrepresentation about the vaccines. In October, it announced that it would no longer allow ads against vaccinations on its platform. In February, the company went ahead and said it would remove false claims posts about vaccines, including claims that vaccines cause autism or that it is safer for people to contract the coronavirus than receiving the vaccinations.

But online misinformation about the vaccines has not been eradicated. Lies have been spread that vaccines can alter DNA or that vaccines won’t work.

On Saturday, Mr Rosen said in the blog post that American Facebook users’ reluctance to take vaccines had decreased by 50 percent since April and vaccine acceptance had increased by 10 to 15 percentage points, or from 70 percent to over 80 percent.

“Although social media plays an important role in society, it is clear that we need a society-wide approach to end this pandemic,” said Rosen. “And facts – not allegations – should help support this effort.”

The White House’s frustration with Facebook has increased over several months, said those knowledgeable about the matter. While the Biden government asked Facebook to share information about the spread of misinformation on the social network, the company refused to cooperate, the people said.

On Friday, White House digital director Robert Flaherty said in a tweet: “I think the question remains simple: How many people have seen misinformation about Covid vaccines on Facebook?”

Categories
Politics

‘They’re killing individuals’ with vaccine misinformation

President Joe Biden said Friday that platforms like Facebook are killing people by allowing misinformation about Covid-19 vaccines through their services.

When asked what his message was regarding Covid disinformation on platforms like Facebook, Biden said: “They kill people”.

“I mean, they really, you see, the only pandemic we have is among the unvaccinated, and that is – they kill people,” said Biden on the South Lawn of the White House.

Biden echoed previous comments made by White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki.

“We are dealing with life or death here, so everyone has a role to play in making sure there is accurate information,” said Psaki. “They are a private sector company. They will make decisions about additional steps they can take. It is clear that more can be done.”

Psaki’s comments come a day after she said the Biden government reported problematic posts for Facebook that spread misinformation.

“We regularly make sure social media platforms are aware of the latest dangerous public health narratives that we and many other Americans see on all social and traditional media,” she said. “We are working to work with them to better understand the enforcement of the guidelines for social media platforms.”

An example highlighted by Psaki is the spread of a false narrative that coronavirus vaccines cause infertility.

“This is disturbing, but an ongoing narrative that we and many have seen, and we want to know that social media platforms are taking steps to address it,” said Psaki. “This is inaccurate, incorrect information.”

Psaki noted that Facebook and other social media services can take additional steps to combat misinformation. This includes publicly sharing the impact of misinformation on their services, promoting quality information, and taking faster action against harmful posts.

“As you all know, information travels pretty quickly,” she said. “If it’s up there for days, when people see it, it’s hard to put that back in a box.”

Facebook spoke out against the White House claims.

“We will not be distracted by allegations that are not supported by the facts,” said a spokesman. “The fact is, more than 2 billion people have viewed authoritative information about COVID-19 and vaccines on Facebook, more than any other place on the internet. More than 3.3 million Americans have also used our vaccine finder tool to find out where and how to get a vaccine. The facts show that Facebook helps save lives. Point.”

Categories
Politics

Guantánamo Prosecutors Ask to Strike Data Gained From Torture

WASHINGTON — Military prosecutors have asked to wipe from the record information gleaned from the torture of a detainee now held at Guantánamo Bay, reversing their earlier position that the information could be used in pretrial proceedings against the man.

By law, prosecutors in a military commission trial are forbidden to submit evidence derived from torture. But in May, the judge, Col. Lanny J. Acosta Jr., ruled that while juries could not see that type of evidence, judges could consider it in determining pretrial matters.

Biden administration lawyers were troubled by the decision because they would be expected to defend the use of such information before appeals courts. The ruling, the first known instance in which a military judge permitted prosecutors to use information gained through torture, also carries larger implications for all cases at Guantánamo.

The chief prosecutor at Guantánamo for a decade, Brig. Gen. Mark S. Martins, had cited a statement obtained through torture, clashing with senior administration officials who questioned his authority to do so. The dispute played a part in his unexpected decision to retire from the Army 15 months early, on Sept. 30.

The detainee, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, is a Saudi man accused of orchestrating Al Qaeda’s bombing of the U.S. Navy destroyer Cole off Yemen in 2000, which killed 17 sailors.

At issue has been an effort by Mr. Nashiri’s lawyers to learn more about the reasons for a U.S. drone strike in Syria in 2015 that killed another man suspected of being a Qaeda bomber, Mohsen al-Fadhli. Pursuing a possible defense argument, they have sought to determine whether the United States has already killed men it considered to be the masterminds of the Cole bombing.

Prosecutors asked the judge to end that line of inquiry, pointing to a classified cable that reported that Mr. Nashiri had told C.I.A. agents as he was being interrogated at a black site in Afghanistan that Mr. Fadhli had had no involvement.

Mr. Nashiri’s lawyers protested the use of the C.I.A. information and added that the prisoner had made the disclosure as interrogators used a broomstick in a particularly cruel way, causing him to cry out.

The judge has yet to decide the overarching question of whether defense lawyers can continue to seek classified information about the drone attack. But he sided with the prosecutors, ruling that he could consider what Mr. Nashiri had said in deciding the matter. In response, defense lawyers filed an emergency appeal with a higher court, seeking a reversal. Government lawyers have yet to respond.

But Friday, prosecutors asked the judge, Colonel Acosta, to remove from the record information about the C.I.A. interrogation. Still, they asked him to retain the essence of his ruling, which found that there were occasions when a judge could consider such information while recognizing that “statements obtained through torture are necessarily of highly suspect reliability.”

Doing so, they wrote in a six-page filing, “can serve judicial economy” and “advance this case toward trial.” It was signed by General Martins and two other prosecutors.

Defense lawyers called the move insufficient and said they would continue to seek a reversal.

“Removing the sentences citing evidence obtained by torture, but not their motion saying the judge is free to use torture pretrial, or the judge’s ruling saying that it is lawful to do so, accomplishes little,” said Capt. Brian L. Mizer of the Navy, Mr. Nashiri’s lead military defense lawyer.

Mr. Nashiri, 56, has been held since 2002, spending four years in C.I.A. custody. His trial had been expected to start in February 2022, but that timetable is in doubt because the coronavirus pandemic has paralyzed progress in the pretrial proceedings at Guantánamo.

The judge has scheduled a two-week hearing in the case starting Sept. 20. The court last convened in January 2020.

Categories
Politics

U.S. warns firms concerning the dangers of doing enterprise in Hong Kong as China clamps down on rights

The national flags of the USA and China fly in front of a building.

The Eng Koon | AFP via Getty Images

WASHINGTON – The Biden government on Friday warned companies with offices in Hong Kong of far-reaching financial and regulatory risks as China continues to restrict political and economic freedoms in the area.

The nine-page Hong Kong Business Advisory – jointly published by the Departments of State, Finance, Trade and Homeland Security – warns that US firms in Hong Kong are exposed to a number of risks posed by China’s national security law.

The report states that “companies are exposed to risks in connection with electronic surveillance without an arrest warrant and the disclosure of data to authorities as well as“ restricted access to information ”.

“Beijing has damaged Hong Kong’s reputation for accountable, transparent governance and respect for individual freedoms and has broken its promise to keep Hong Kong’s high levels of autonomy unchanged for 50 years,” Foreign Minister Antony Blinken wrote in a statement.

“In light of Beijing’s decisions last year that stifled the democratic aspirations of the Hong Kong people, we are taking action. Today we are sending a clear message that the United States is resolutely on the side of the Hong Kong people, ”added the country’s top diplomat.

The Biden government also imposed US sanctions on seven Chinese officials for violating Hong Kong’s autonomy.

The Chinese embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Earlier this week, the Biden government issued a warning to companies with investment ties to China’s Xinjiang Province, citing growing evidence of genocide and other human rights abuses in the country’s northwestern region.

Washington has openly criticized Beijing’s comprehensive national security law, passed in June 2020, aimed at restricting Hong Kong’s autonomy and banning critical literature about the Chinese Communist Party.

The then Foreign Secretary Mike Pompeo described the measure as an “Orwellian move” and an attack “on the rights and freedoms of the people of Hong Kong”.

Former President Donald Trump soon signed a law imposing sanctions on China in response to its interference with Hong Kong’s autonomy. He also signed an executive order ending the preferential treatment that Hong Kong has long enjoyed.

CNBC policy

Read more about CNBC’s political coverage:

“Hong Kong is now being treated like mainland China,” Trump said during a July 2020 speech from the White House rose garden.

“No special privileges, no special economic treatment and no export of sensitive technologies,” said Trump. “Also, as you know, we are imposing massive tariffs and have imposed very high tariffs on China.”

China’s State Department fired back, saying Beijing would impose retaliatory sanctions on US people and businesses.

Categories
Politics

Greg Abbott and Dan Patrick Steer Texas Far to the Proper

One is a former State Supreme Court justice who acts with a lawyer’s caution; the other a Trumpist firebrand who began his political career in the world of conservative talk radio. They have sparred at times, most recently this winter over the deadly failure of their state’s electrical grid.

But together, Gov. Greg Abbott and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, the two most powerful men in Texas, are the driving force behind one of the hardest right turns in recent state history.

The two Republicans stand united at a pivotal moment in Texas politics, opposing Democrats who have left the state for Washington in protest of the G.O.P.-controlled Legislature’s attempt to overhaul the state’s election system — blocking Republicans from advancing any bills to Mr. Abbott’s desk. Any policy differences between the governor and lieutenant governor have melted away in the face of the realities of today’s Republican Party, with a base devoted to former President Donald J. Trump and insistent on an uncompromising conservative agenda.

“The lieutenant governor reads off the playbook of the far right, and that’s where we go,” said State Senator Kel Seliger, a moderate Republican from Amarillo. “The governor less so, but not much less so.”

Now, if Mr. Abbott and Mr. Patrick hope to sustain momentum for Texas Republicans — and if the ambitious two men hope to strengthen their career prospects — they must navigate a political and public relations battle over voting rights involving an angry base, restive Republican lawmakers and a largely absent yet outspoken Democratic delegation.

Mr. Abbott, 63, a lawyer who has held or been campaigning for statewide office since 1996, has shifted to the right as he prepares for a re-election bid next year that will involve the first challenging Republican primary he has ever faced. While Texas voters broadly approve of his leadership and he is sitting on a $55 million war chest, far-right activists and lawmakers have grumbled about his perceived political moderation. And Mr. Abbott is viewed by some in Texas as eyeing a potential presidential run in 2024, which could further sway his political calculations.

Mr. Patrick, 71, who started one of the nation’s first chains of sports bars before becoming a radio host and the owner of Houston’s largest conservative talk station, holds what is perhaps the most powerful non-gubernatorial statewide office in the country, overseeing the Senate under Texas’ unusual legislative rules. His years of tending to the conservative base are paying off for him now: He is running unopposed for renomination, after leading Mr. Abbott and the state down a more conservative path than the governor has ever articulated for himself.

Both leaders are highly cognizant of what the Republican base wants: Stricter abortion laws. Eliminating most gun regulations. Anti-transgender measures. Rules for how schools teach about racism. And above all there is Mr. Trump’s top priority: wide-ranging new laws restricting voting and expanding partisan lawmakers’ power over elections.

Republicans continue to hold most of the cards, but they face the prospect of appearing toothless amid frustrating delays and rising calls from conservatives to take harsh action against the Democrats.

The divergent styles of the governor and lieutenant governor could be seen in how they reacted to the news on Monday that Democrats were leaving the state. Mr. Abbott told an Austin TV station that the lawmakers would be arrested if they returned to the state and pledged to keep calling special sessions of the Legislature until they agreed to participate. Mr. Patrick — whose social media instincts could be seen as far back as 2015, when he began his inaugural speech by taking selfies with the crowd — mocked the Democrats by posting a photo of them en route to the Austin airport, with a case of beer on the bus.

“They can’t hold out forever,” Mr. Patrick said of Democrats during a Fox News appearance Thursday. “They have families back home, they have jobs back home and pretty soon their wives or husbands will say, ‘It’s time to get back home.’”

For the moment, Mr. Patrick has far more power in shaping and moving bills through the State Senate than the governor does. While Mr. Abbott convened the special session of the Legislature and dictated the topics to be discussed, he is not an arm-twister and, with the Democrats gone, there are no arms to be twisted.

“The lieutenant governor is riding very high in the Texas Senate and he has regular appearances on Fox and I think he is running pretty freely right now,” said Joe Straus, a moderate Republican from San Antonio who served as the speaker of the Texas House for a decade until, under pressure from conservatives, he chose not to seek re-election in 2018. “He is very influential in setting the agenda at the moment.”

Representatives for Mr. Abbott and Mr. Patrick declined interview requests for this article. The Times spoke with Texas Republicans who know the two men, as well as aides and allies who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

Mr. Abbott and Mr. Patrick have tussled occasionally in recent years over how far to the right to take Texas. This winter, Mr. Patrick implicitly criticized the governor’s stewardship of the state’s electrical grid after a snowstorm caused widespread power failures that led to the deaths of more than 200 people.

But though Mr. Abbott is now aligned with Mr. Patrick against the state’s Democrats, he is drawing criticism, even from some Republicans, for pushing his agenda as a matter of political expediency, now that he is facing a crowd of primary challengers from the right. His rivals include Allen West, the former congressman and chairman of the state Republican Party, and Don Huffines, a former state senator who was an outspoken critic of Mr. Abbott’s initial coronavirus restrictions.

The governor needs to win at least 50 percent in the primary to avoid a runoff that would pit him against a more conservative opponent — a treacherous position for any Texas Republican.

“These are issues that the grass roots and the Republican Party have been working on and filing bills on for 10 years,” said Jonathan Stickland, a conservative Republican who represented a State House district in the Fort Worth area for eight years before opting out of re-election in 2020. “Abbott didn’t care until he got opponents in the Republican primary.”

Paul Bettencourt, who holds Mr. Patrick’s old Senate seat and hosts a radio show on the Houston station that Mr. Patrick still owns, was blunt about who he thought was the true leader on conservative policy. “The lieutenant governor has been out in front on these issues for, in some cases, 18 years,” Mr. Bettencourt said.

Mr. Abbott’s allies say his priorities have not shifted with the political winds. “To me and anyone who pays attention, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that Greg Abbott is a conservative and he is a border security hawk,” said John Wittman, who spent seven years as an Abbott aide. The governor is being more heavily scrutinized on issues like guns and the transgender bill, Mr. Wittman said, because “these were issues that bubbled up as a result of what’s happening now.”

Mr. Abbott predicted that Democrats would pay a political price for leaving the state.

“All they want to do is complain,” he told the Fox News host Sean Hannity on Thursday. “Texas voters are going to be extremely angry at the Texas House members for not showing up and not doing their jobs.”

No bill has produced more outrage among Democrats than the proposals to rewrite Texas voting laws, which are already among the most restrictive in the country.

The Republican voting legislation includes new restrictions that voting rights groups say would have a disproportionate impact on poorer communities and communities of color, especially in Harris County, which includes Houston and is the state’s largest.

The Fight Over Voting Rights

After former President Donald J. Trump returned in recent months to making false claims that the 2020 election had been stolen from him, Republican lawmakers in many states have marched ahead to pass laws that make it harder to vote and that change how elections are run, frustrating Democrats and even some election officials in their own party.

    • A Key Topic: The rules and procedures of elections have become central issues in American politics. As of June 21, lawmakers had passed 28 new laws in 17 states to make the process of voting more difficult, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, a research institute.
    • The Basic Measures: The restrictions vary by state but can include limiting the use of ballot drop boxes, adding identification requirements for voters requesting absentee ballots, and doing away with local laws that allow automatic registration for absentee voting.
    • More Extreme Measures: Some measures go beyond altering how one votes, including tweaking rules concerning the Electoral College and judicial elections, clamping down on citizen-led ballot initiatives, and outlawing private donations that provide resources for administering elections.
    • Pushback: This Republican effort has led Democrats in Congress to find a way to pass federal voting laws. A sweeping voting rights bill passed the House in March, but faces difficult obstacles in the Senate, including from Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia. Republicans have remained united against the proposal and even if the bill became law, it would most likely face steep legal challenges.
    • Florida: Measures here include limiting the use of drop boxes, adding more identification requirements for absentee ballots, requiring voters to request an absentee ballot for each election, limiting who could collect and drop off ballots, and further empowering partisan observers during the ballot-counting process.
    • Texas: Texas Democrats successfully blocked the state’s expansive voting bill, known as S.B. 7, in a late-night walkout and are starting a major statewide registration program focused on racially diverse communities. But Republicans in the state have pledged to return in a special session and pass a similar voting bill. S.B. 7 included new restrictions on absentee voting; granted broad new autonomy and authority to partisan poll watchers; escalated punishments for mistakes or offenses by election officials; and banned both drive-through voting and 24-hour voting.
    • Other States: Arizona’s Republican-controlled Legislature passed a bill that would limit the distribution of mail ballots. The bill, which includes removing voters from the state’s Permanent Early Voting List if they do not cast a ballot at least once every two years, may be only the first in a series of voting restrictions to be enacted there. Georgia Republicans in March enacted far-reaching new voting laws that limit ballot drop-boxes and make the distribution of water within certain boundaries of a polling station a misdemeanor. And Iowa has imposed new limits, including reducing the period for early voting and in-person voting hours on Election Day.

Democrats are most worried about provisions in the Texas bills that would expand the authority of partisan poll watchers, who have become increasingly aggressive in some states, leading to fears that they may intimidate voters and election workers.

“We’re seeing backtracking on the progress that has been made in voting rights and access to the ballot box across this country,” State Representative Chris Turner, the Democratic leader in the Texas House, said this week. “There’s a steady drumbeat of Republican voter suppression efforts in Texas and also across the country, all of which are based on a big lie.”

Mr. Abbott, Mr. Patrick and other Republicans say the elections legislation will simplify voting procedures across a state with 254 counties and 29 million people.

The two Republican leaders have been largely aligned this year on legislative priorities beyond an electoral overhaul. Mr. Patrick has been the driving force for social issues that animate right-wing Texans, pushing for new restrictions on transgender youths and ordering a state history museum to cancel an event with the author of a book that seeks to re-examine slavery’s role in the Battle of the Alamo, a seminal moment in Texas history.

Mr. Abbott used an earlier walkout by Democrats over voting rights as an opportunity to place himself at the center of a host of conservative legislation, including a proposal for additional border security funding during the special session that began last week. This follows a regular session in which Texas Republicans enacted a near-ban of abortions in the state and dropped most handgun licensing rules, among other conservative measures.

Mr. Abbott’s position, however, has left him without much room to maneuver to reach any sort of compromise that could end the stalemate and bring the Democrats home from Washington. So far he has vowed to arrest them and have them “cabined” in the statehouse chamber should they return to Texas — a threat that has not led to any discussion between the two sides.

Mr. Straus, the former State House speaker, said the episode illustrated a significant decline of bipartisan tradition in Texas, one he said was evident under the previous governor, Rick Perry.

“I was speaker when Governor Perry was there as well and we had some bumps with him too, but he was always able to work with the Legislature,” Mr. Straus said. “He was able to do this without sacrificing his conservative credentials. That seems to be missing today, as everyone’s dug in doing their tough-guy act.”

Manny Fernandez contributed reporting.

Categories
Politics

Man accused of bomb plot in opposition to Democrats abused steroids, proclaimed ‘REVOLUTION’

Two California men have been indicted for allegedly plotting to attack the Democratic Party headquarters in Sacramento with explosive devices following last year’s presidential election. 

The men were charged Thursday in a San Francisco federal court with conspiracy to destroy a building affecting interstate commerce and other related crimes, in a scheme to attack the John L. Burton Democratic Headquarters in Sacramento. 

Ian Rogers, 45, of Napa, and Jarrod Copeland, 37, of Vallejo, began plotting a series of “specific, detailed, and serious” plans to attack Democrats with incendiary devices after the 2020 presidential election, according to court documents. The men also attempted to gain support from militia groups in hopes that their attack would spark a movement to overthrow the government. 

The charges come as authorities are on heightened alert for potential political violence following the Jan. 6 invasion of Capitol Hill by supporters of then-President Donald Trump who sought to block the certification of Joe Biden’s victory in the presidential election.

“Do you think something is wrong with me how I’m excited to attack the democrats?” Rogers asked Copeland on a messaging app last December.

Copeland, who was arrested Wednesday, later told police that he didn’t take Rogers’ statement seriously and was only listening to him “blow off steam.”

But court records indicate that Copeland encouraged Rogers’ discussions about violence with messages stating that they would take action to keep Trump in office. 

“If we see [Trump] can’t win we strike,” Copeland said in one message. “If they don’t listen to trump they will hear us.” 

Copeland also contacted the Proud Boys and Three Percenters, two extreme anti-government militia groups, and attempted to recruit individuals to join their plot in late December, authorities said. 

Court records state that Copeland had joined the military in 2013 but was arrested for desertion twice and was discharged in 2016 in lieu of court martial. He then joined the Three Percenters and later became an officer within the militia group, court records say.

The two men continued discussions of violent attacks on Democrats after election results were certified on Jan. 6, according to the charges. Prosecutors alleged that the insurrection at the Capitol had inspired them, citing Copeland’s excited messages on that day that fantasized about violence. 

“REVOLUTION,” “REVOLUTION,” “REVOLUTION,” Copeland said about the insurrection. “I’m f—— juiced!!!!!”

“Damnit I wanna roll into sac geared up,” another message of his said, referring to Sacramento and his military-style tactical gear and weapons. 

The Democratic headquarters in Sacramento was selected as their first target to attack with explosive devices, and the two men had discussed attacking the Twitter and Facebook headquarters next, prosecutors charged. 

“Heads must be taken,” Copeland said. “I don’t like to think it but I think we will have to die for what we believe in.”

Rogers was arrested on Jan. 15 accused of possessing five pipe bombs and remains in state custody in Napa County on multiple weapons charges. In addition to the pipe bombs, authorities seized nearly 50 firearms and about 15,000 rounds of ammunition from his home and business, according to a criminal complaint. 

Materials used to make destructive devices were also found at his business, including black powder, pipes and end caps and several manuals, such as “The Anarchist Cookbook,” the “U.S. Army Improvised Munitions Handbook” and “Homemade C-4: A Recipe for Survival,” the complaint said. 

Authorities also reported discovering a sticker on Rogers’ vehicle window that is commonly used by Three Percenters. 

A day after Rogers’ arrest, Copeland purged all past communications with Rogers in fear of being traced. 

Court records also allege Copeland abuses anabolic steroids, noting a $1,200 purchase of steroids in December and the seizure of steroids from his home in January.

“The danger he poses to anyone with opposing political views is obvious,” the court records said. 

If convicted, the two men could face a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, a three-year term of supervised release and a $250,000 fine for the conspiracy charge, according to the Department of Justice.

Rogers also faces a maximum of 10 years in prison for his additional weapons charge, and Copeland faces a maximum of 20 years in prison for his destruction of evidence charge. 

Rogers’ attorney declined CNBC’s request for comment, and Copeland’s attorney could not be reached for comment. 

“Firebombing your perceived political opponents is illegal and does not nurture the sort of open and vigorous debate that created and supports our constitutional democracy,” said U.S. Attorney Stephanie M. Hinds. “The allegations in the indictment describe despicable conduct. Investigation and prosecution of those who choose violence over discussion is as important as anything else we do to protect our free society.”

Rusty Hicks, chair of the California Democratic Party, called their alleged plot “extremely disturbing.”

“We are relieved to know the plot was unsuccessful, the individuals believed to be responsible are in custody, and our staff and volunteers are safe and sound,” Hicks said in a statement Thursday. “Yet, it points to a broader issue of violent extremism that is far too common in today’s political discourse.”

— CNBC’s Dan Mangan and Amanda Macias contributed to this report.

Categories
Politics

Democrats See Early Edge in 2022 Senate Map

Three other Republicans in the running outperformed Mr. Greitens: Rep. Vicky Hartzler, Attorney General Eric Schmitt, and Mark McCloskey, best known for waving his gun outside his St. Louis home when protesters marched last year. Some national Republican strategists fear that if Mr. Greitens survives a crowded primary, he could prove toxic even in a heavily Republican state.

Scott has promised to remain neutral in the party’s primary election, but Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, has long preferred promoting candidates he believes can win in November.

“The only thing that matters to me is eligibility,” McConnell told Politico this year. With Mr. Scott on the sidelines, a McConnell-sponsored super-PAC, the Senate Leadership Fund, is expected to handle most of the interventions.

Mr. Trump, who often argues with Mr. McConnell, has been particularly involved in the races in Arizona and Georgia, largely because of his own narrow losses there. He has publicly urged former soccer player Herschel Walker to run in Georgia – Mr Walker has not signed up to a campaign – and attacked Arizona Republican Governor Doug Ducey, even after Mr Ducey said he was not running for the Senate is running. Some Republican agents continue to hope to pull Mr. Ducey into the race.

Mr. Trump gave early Senate approval to North Carolina MP Ted Budd, who raised $ 953,000, which is less than the $ 1.25 million withdrawn from former Governor Pat McCrory. Some Republicans see Mr. McCrory as the stronger potential candidate because of his track record in winning nationwide.

In Alaska, Kelly Tshibaka is running as a pro-Trump challenger for Senator Lisa Murkowski, who voted for Trump’s conviction after his second impeachment. Ms. Murkowski, who has not officially said whether she will run again, more than doubled Ms. Tshibaka in the most recent quarter, from $ 1.15 million to $ 544,000.

In Alabama, Trump gave MP Mo Brooks another early endorsement and recently attacked one of his rivals, Katie Britt, the former chief of staff for retired incumbent Richard Shelby. Ms. Britt entered the race in June, but she raised Mr. Brooks by $ 2.2 million to $ 824,000. A third candidate, Lynda Blanchard, is a former Trump-appointed ambassador who loaned $ 5 million to her campaign.

Categories
Politics

Choose orders Biden administration to cease approving new DACA purposes

A federal judge in southern Texas on Friday ordered the Biden administration to stop granting new applications to the Obama-era immigration program that shielded hundreds of thousands of young immigrants from deportation.

The order declared that the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, known as DACA, was “created in violation of the law and whose existence violates the law.”

But current recipients of DACA won’t immediately have their status pulled as a result of the order, the judge noted.

The ruling, which puts in jeopardy the program that President Joe Biden had sought to preserve, came as news outlets reported arrests at the U.S.-Mexico border hitting their highest levels in more than a decade.

Former President Donald Trump had sought to end DACA, but his effort was blocked in 2020 by the Supreme Court, which ruled 5-4 that his order to wind the program down was unlawfully “arbitrary and capricious.”

In a five-page order Friday afternoon, U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen declared, “From this date forward, the United States of America, its departments, agencies, officers, agents, and employees are hereby enjoined from administering the DACA program.”

Those entities are also barred from reimplementing the program without compliance with another law that governs federal regulatory procedure, Hanen’s order said.

The White House and the Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.

The judge’s order said that the DACA program, created in 2012 through a policy memorandum from then-President Barack Obama’s Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano, was “illegally implemented.”

But since hundreds of thousands of DACA recipients now rely on DACA, Hanen’s order reasoned that “it is not equitable for a government program that has engendered such significant reliance to terminate suddenly.”

“Nothing in this injunction should be read as ordering DHS or any other governmental entity to cancel or otherwise terminate DACA status for any individual who currently is, as of this date, a DACA recipient in good standing,” Hanen wrote.

“Further, nothing in this injunction requires DHS or the Department of Justice to take any immigration, deportation, or criminal action against any DACA recipient, applicant, or any other individual that either would not otherwise take,” he wrote.

Omar Jadwat, head of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said in a statement that Hanen’s ruling “is wrong and is subject to appeal.”

Jadwat called on the Democrat-majority Congress to provide a pathway to citizenship for the “Dreamers” and other undocumented people in the U.S.

“Dreamers’ futures shouldn’t be in the hands of the courts,” he said.