Tag: Democrats

Categories
Politics

Democrats and Activists Deal with the Filibuster After a Defeat on Voting Rights

Democrats and Activists Focus on the Filibuster After a Defeat on Voting Rights

For Democrats, the only way to break their voting rights legislation free of Republican opposition is by changing the Senate’s filibuster rules — an institution-shaking step that so far remains out of reach. But while the filibuster is proving hard to kill, it has been wounded.

The unanimous Republican refusal to allow the Senate to open a debate sought by every Democrat on the expansive elections and ethics measure — coupled with the recent filibuster of other legislation with bipartisan support — has armed opponents with fresh evidence of how the tactic can be employed to give the minority veto power over the majority.

Democrats and activists say the increasing Republican reliance on the filibuster will only intensify calls to jettison it and potentially bring about critical mass for a rules change as Democrats remain determined to pass some form of the elections measure and other parts of their agenda opposed by Republicans.

“I think as people see them stopping more things, minds might change,” Senator Amy Klobuchar, Democrat of Minnesota and one of the chief sponsors of the voting bill, said on Wednesday.

Ms. Klobuchar, who leads the Rules Committee, is planning to conduct a field hearing on voting rights in Georgia to build public support for the legislation, choosing a state where Republican lawmakers have put in place restrictive voting rules after sustaining election losses.

The White House, which has been criticized for not engaging aggressively enough on voting rights, is promising more from President Biden on the issue next week, though Mr. Biden, a senator for 36 years, has not explicitly endorsed eliminating the filibuster.

But to curb the power of the filibuster through a rules change, all 50 Democrats would have to agree to do so on the floor, and so far Senators Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona have expressed strong public opposition to doing that. Ms. Sinema’s latest pronouncement came in a Washington Post op-ed published just before this week’s procedural vote, much to the frustration of some of her colleagues.

Other Democrats also remain reluctant to make significant changes to the filibuster, though they are much less outspoken than their two colleagues. One of them, Senator Angus King, a Maine independent who votes with Democrats and has previously voiced openness to changing the filibuster rule, said on Wednesday that doing so still felt premature.

“I don’t think we are done trying to find a solution,” Mr. King said, referring to long-shot attempts to lure Republicans to support a compromise on voting legislation. “We need to give them another chance to see how they feel about democracy.”

As they regroup, Democrats involved in shaping the voting rights measure agreed the next step was to produce a narrower version incorporating some of the changes sought by Mr. Manchin that their party could then rally around. That willingness to accept elements of Mr. Manchin’s proposal won his support on Tuesday for beginning debate on the legislation, allowing Democrats to present a unified front.

Senator Jeff Merkley, Democrat of Oregon and a chief author of the elections bill, said Democrats and Mr. Manchin could then try anew to recruit Republicans behind the revised bill — a prospect he acknowledged was unlikely to succeed.

Multiple Republicans have said they cannot see themselves backing any Democratic proposal imposing new voting rules on states. Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the minority leader, has drawn a firm line against cooperating with Democrats and most Republicans will be very reluctant to cross him, counting on Mr. Manchin and Ms. Sinema to keep their commitment not to alter the filibuster rules requiring 60 votes to proceed on legislation.

“If that fails,” Mr. Merkley said on Wednesday about new outreach to Republicans, “then the 50 of us who want to defend our Constitution, defend the right to vote, stop billionaires from buying elections have to be in a room and figure out how do we get around Mitch McConnell obstructing this.”

Though he was not specific, Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader, said on Tuesday after the vote that Democrats “have several serious options for how to reconsider this issue and advance legislation to combat voter suppression.”

“We will leave no stone unturned,” he said on Wednesday. “Voting rights are too important.”

But Mr. Schumer has other items on his to-do list, notably an infrastructure proposal prized by the White House that will consume much, if not all, of July, detracting from efforts to highlight both the voting rights measure and the drive to rein in the filibuster.

Pressed on how they can hope to convert Mr. Manchin and Ms. Sinema considering how strongly they have registered their opposition, Democrats and antifilibuster activists noted that Mr. Manchin only a few weeks ago had been dead set against the expansive voting rights bill. Democrats appeared to have lost his vote only to see him come forward with his own plan and join them on Tuesday.

The Battle Over Voting Rights

After former President Donald J. Trump returned in recent months to making false claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him, Republican lawmakers in many states have marched ahead to pass laws making it harder to vote and 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 May 14, lawmakers had passed 22 new laws in 14 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 Electoral College and judicial election rules, 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.

At the same time, some Democrats who had been reluctant to tinker with the filibuster, like Senators Jon Tester of Montana and Chris Coons of Delaware, have expressed some willingness to do so now if Republicans maintain their blockade against the voting rights bill, though they have not taken a definitive stance.

“Time will tell,” Mr. Tester said on Wednesday about what his position would be if it came to a filibuster showdown.

After already investing heavily in campaigns in the news media, antifilibuster activists intend to use the coming two-week Senate recess to build more support for the voting rights bill and put pressure on Democrats to change the filibuster to enact it.

“This is going to be a huge motivating factor for grass-roots activists across the country to take this procedural loss and turn it into a legislative win,” said Meagan Hatcher-Mays, the director of democracy policy for the progressive group Indivisible, one of several organizations planning events while senators are back home.

Past confrontations have shown that building to significant changes in Senate rules can take some time. In 2013, Harry Reid, then the Senate Democratic leader, spent months making the case on the Senate floor that Republicans led by Mr. McConnell were unfairly using the filibuster to impede President Barack Obama from filling important judicial vacancies with highly qualified nominees.

For most of that time, Mr. Reid appeared to lack the support to institute a rules change with Democratic votes. But by November 2013, most Senate Democrats had had enough and voted to eliminate the 60-vote threshold to advance most executive branch nominees over strenuous Republican objections.

Mr. Reid, watching from afar in Nevada, said he believed something similar would eventually happen when Democratic frustration with Republican filibusters boiled over.

“The filibuster is on its way out,” Mr. Reid said in an interview. “There is no question in my mind that the filibuster is going to be a thing of the past shortly. You can’t have a democracy that takes 60 percent of the vote to get things done.”

Categories
Politics

Bipartisan Senate plan faces opposition from Democrats

Bipartisan Senate plan faces opposition from Democrats

The Democratic and Republican senators who propose an infrastructure deal face the first hurdles to get their $ 1 trillion plan through Congress.

The bipartisan proposal, elaborated by 10 senators, would focus on transportation, broadband and water and not increase taxes to offset costs. A handful of Democrats seeking a broader plan to tackle climate change and social programs, paid for by raising taxes on business or the rich, have opposed the framework.

Senators have to walk a fine line because concessions to win one party jeopardize the support of the other. Despite growing opposition from Liberals, one Republican who worked on the plan is hoping the group will be supported by enough GOP senators to overcome the Democrats’ loss of votes.

“It should definitely be,” Senator Rob Portman, R-Ohio, told CNBC on Tuesday when asked if there would be enough Republican support to pass the plan. “I mean, this is a proposal for infrastructure that Republicans have traditionally supported. It is also a proposal with no increase in income taxes. … I think there will be a lot of support on both sides of the aisle. “

CNBC policy

Read more about CNBC’s political coverage:

President Joe Biden’s second major legislative initiative proposed an infrastructure and economic stimulus program worth $ 2.3 trillion. After its talks with Republicans failed due to disagreements about what to include in law and how to pay for it, lawmakers made a last-ditch effort to work out a bipartisan plan.

While the 10 Senators are trying to win support for their proposal, the Democrats have laid the groundwork to pass a bill themselves through a budget reconciliation. During a meeting with House Democrats on Tuesday, White House aide Steve Ricchetti said the government would wait “a week or 10 days” to see if a bipartisan deal was reached, the House Budget Committee chairman said , John Yarmuth, D-Ky. If not, “the Democrats go along with the reconciliation for everything,” said Yarmuth.

A Democratic-only bill seems blocked for the time being, however, as at least one Democrat involved in the talks, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, insists on wanting to pass a bipartisan support plan.

Congress leaders have a math problem. To get through the evenly split Senate in the normal process, the legislation would need the support of all Democratic factions and at least 10 Republicans – or more if Democrats are defective. If the Democrats try to legislate on budget balancing themselves, they cannot lose a single vote.

U.S. Senators Mitt Romney, Kyrsten Sinema, Susan Collins, Joe Manchin and Mark Warner are leaving after they passed away on Aug.

Evelyn Hockstein | Reuters

The bipartisan strategy faces its share of skeptics. Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent Vermonter who works with the Democrats, told reporters Monday he would not vote for the plan.

“The bottom line is that there are many needs in this country,” he said. “Now is the time to meet those needs and it has to be paid for in a progressive way as we have massive income and wealth inequality in America.”

At least two other Democrats – Sens. Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Jeff Merkley of Oregon – have signaled that they will oppose an infrastructure deal unless more is invested in fighting climate change.

Passing a bill in the Senate will also depend on whether the bipartisan group can win over Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, DN.Y., and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. No senator approved the framework.

McConnell is “open-minded, as he has told the media. … I think the Democrats are talking to Senator Schumer too, and I think he’s open-minded too, ”Portman told CNBC.

While McConnell said he hopes to reach a bipartisan infrastructure deal, he has also vowed to combat Biden’s economic agenda.

Schumer said Monday that “discussions about infrastructure investments are advancing in two ways”. The Democrat added that during the bipartisan talks, the Senate committees are also working on a plan based on Biden’s proposal, “which will be considered even if he does not have bipartisan support”.

He also signaled that he would like greater investments in climate protection.

“And as a reminder of the Senate, a reminder of the Senate: As I said from the start, in order to make progress on infrastructure, we must take courageous measures to protect the climate,” he said.

The challenges are not limited to the Senate. House progressives have begun to oppose a bipartisan plan smaller than the one proposed by Biden. House spokeswoman Nancy Pelosi, D-California, also said a provision to index gas taxes to inflation would not receive the blessings of the White House.

“The President of the United States is a big factor in this, and he said he would not support taxes for those earning less than $ 400,000 a year, and that includes increasing gas taxes,” she said on Sunday opposite CNN.

Portman said Tuesday that the bipartisan framework would include a “slight increase” in the tax.

Pelosi did not rule out on Sunday that her group would support a tighter infrastructure package. She said the Democrats would likely need assurances that they will next pass a broader bill that includes more party priorities.

“If [a bipartisan deal] is something to be agreed on, I don’t know how we can sell it to our group unless we know there is more to come, “she said.

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

Categories
Politics

DOJ watchdog will probe reported Trump-era subpoenas of Apple for Democrats’ knowledge

DOJ watchdog will probe reported Trump-era subpoenas of Apple for Democrats' data

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) speaks outside of a closed session before the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight Committees of the House of Representatives in Washington, DC on October 28, 2019. Capitol in front of media representatives. Also pictured are (LR) Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA).

Mark Wilson | Getty Images

The Justice Department’s internal watchdog office will investigate after a bomb report alleged that the Trump administration clandestinely summoned Apple over the House Democrats’ data, the office said on Friday.

The investigation will review the “use of subpoenas and other judicial authorities to obtain communications records” by members of Congress, their staff and the news media “in connection with the recent investigations into alleged unauthorized disclosure of information to the media by government officials”. This was announced by Inspector General Michael Horowitz in a statement.

The move follows a growing chorus of Democratic lawmakers, including the two whose records have reportedly been subpoenaed, demanding that the Justice Department inspector-general open an investigation into Trump-era behavior.

CNBC policy

Read more about CNBC’s political coverage:

The New York Times reported Thursday night that Trump’s Justice Department seized records in 2017 and early 2018 from at least a dozen people associated with the House Intelligence Committee, including the House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff, D-California, and that Committee member Eric Swalwell, D-Calif.

The agency also reportedly obtained data from the accounts of carers and family members, one of whom was a child.

Prosecutors for the DOJ, then headed by Attorney General Jeff Sessions, were looking for sources of harmful news of contacts between Trump employees and Russia, the report said.

When Trump’s prosecutors investigated the source of the leaks, they reportedly investigated the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee, whose members have access to sensitive documents.

The investigation did not link the House committee to the leaks – but Sessions replacement, William Barr, kept the investigation going, the Times reported.

U.S. President Donald Trump (left) speaks with William Barr, U.S. Attorney General, during the 38th annual National Peace Officers Memorial Day service at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC, May 15, 2019.

Kevin Dietsch | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Apple was silenced by a gag order that expired earlier this year, according to a company spokesman who confirmed the subpoena in a statement to CNBC on Friday evening.

“It would have been virtually impossible for Apple to understand the intent of the information you want without sifting through the accounts of the users,” said Apple spokesman Fred Sainz. “In accordance with the request, Apple limited the information it provided to account subscriber information and did not provide content such as emails or images.”

Microsoft similarly confirmed a 2017 subpoena and gag order regarding a personal email account on Friday.

“As soon as the gag rule expired, we notified the customer who told us that he was a congress employee. We then gave a briefing to the agent’s employees after this announcement, ”a Microsoft spokesman said in a statement to CNBC.

Assistant Attorney General Lisa Monaco referred the matter to the Department of Justice’s inspector general, an agency official told CNBC on Friday.

Schiff welcomed the move in a statement as “an important first step”. But the watchdog investigation “will not eliminate the need for other forms of oversight and accountability – including public oversight by Congress – and the ministry must work together in those efforts too,” Schiff said.

Monaco, the second official in the Justice Department, was ratified by the Senate in April. Horowitz has been Inspector General since 2012.

Horowitz said Friday that his investigation “will investigate the ministry’s compliance with applicable DOJ policies and procedures, and whether such use or investigations were based on improper considerations.

“If circumstances warrant, the OIG will consider other issues that may arise during the review,” he said, adding, “The review does not replace the OIG’s judgment on the legal and investigative judgments made in matters raised by OIG are checked, have been taken. “

The Times article came weeks after reports that the Trump administration had secretly received records from journalists from several news outlets.

On Thursday evening, Schiff called for an investigation into the Trump DOJ’s actions in “these and other cases that indicate the arming of law enforcement by a corrupt president”.

Trump had “tried to use the ministry as a club against his political opponents and media representatives,” Schiff said in a statement. “It is becoming increasingly clear that these demands have not fallen on deaf ears.”

Swalwell said in his own statement that Apple informed him last month that his files had been turned over to the Trump administration “as part of a politically motivated investigation into his supposed enemies.”

“Like many of the most despicable dictators in the world, former President Trump showed utter contempt for our democracy and the rule of law,” said Swalwell. “This kind of behavior is unacceptable, but unfortunately on the mark for a president who has repeatedly shown that he would put our constitution aside for his own benefit.”

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, DN.Y., and Senate Justice Committee Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Added Friday that Congress must obtain testimony from Sessions and Barr.

“The revelation that the Trump Justice Department secretly subpoenaed metadata from members and staff of the House Intelligence Committee and their families, including a minor, is shocking,” Schumer and Durbin said in a joint statement on Friday.

“This is a gross abuse of power and an attack on the separation of powers. This appalling politicization of the Justice Department by Donald Trump and his flatterers must be investigated immediately by both the DOJ Inspector General and Congress, ”said the Senate leaders.

“Former Barr and Sessions attorneys-general and other officials involved must testify under oath before the Senate Judiciary Committee. If they refuse, they will be summoned and forced to testify under oath, ”said Schumer and Durbin.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden, D-Ore., Also joined calls for a full investigation, saying he plans to introduce laws to increase transparency and reform “abuse of gag orders”.

“The current Justice Department needs to act with much greater urgency to both detect abuses and ensure full accountability of those responsible,” said Wyden.

Read the full New York Times report.

—Sara Salinas of CNBC contributed to this report.

Categories
Politics

Texas Democrats Stymie GOP Voting Invoice, for Now

Texas Democrats Stymie GOP Voting Bill, for Now

During debate late Sunday, State Representative Travis Clardy, a Republican, acknowledged that advancing the bill through the conference committee had proved to be a lengthy process, but he defended the panel’s methods.

“A lot of this was done late, I don’t get to control the clock,” Mr. Clardy said. “But I can assure you that the members of the committee did their absolute best, dead-level best, to make sure we’ve provided information to all members, including representative rows. And then we did everything that we could to make sure this was transparent.”

The effort in Texas, a major state with a booming population, represents the apex of the national Republican push to install tall new barriers to voting after President Donald J. Trump’s loss last year to Joseph R. Biden Jr., with expansive restrictions already becoming law in Iowa, Georgia and Florida in 2021. Fueled by Mr. Trump’s false claims of widespread fraud in the election, Republicans have passed the bills almost entirely along partisan lines, brushing off the protestations of Democrats, civil rights groups, voting rights groups, major corporations and faith leaders.

But the party’s setback in Texas is unlikely to calm Democratic pressure in Washington to pass new federal voting laws. President Biden and key Democrats in Congress are confronting rising calls from their party to do whatever is needed — including abolishing the Senate filibuster, which moderate senators have resisted — to push through a major voting rights and elections overhaul that would counteract the wave of Republican laws.

After the Texas bill became public on Saturday, Mr. Biden denounced it, along with similar measures in Georgia and Florida, as “an assault on democracy,” blasting the moves in a statement as “disproportionately targeting Black and Brown Americans.”

The Battle Over Voting Rights

Amid months of false claims by former President Donald J. Trump that the 2020 election was stolen from him, Republican lawmakers in many states are marching ahead to pass laws making it harder to vote and changing 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 a central issue in American politics. The Brennan Center for Justice, a liberal-leaning law and justice institute at New York University, counts 361 bills in 47 states that seek to tighten voting rules. At the same time, 843 bills have been introduced with provisions to improve access to voting.
    • 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 Electoral College and judicial election rules, 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. Republicans have remained united against the proposal and even if the bill became law, it would 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: The next big move could happen here, where Republicans in the legislature are brushing aside objections from corporate titans and moving on a vast election bill that would be among the most severe in the nation. It would impose new restrictions on early voting, ban drive-through voting, threaten election officials with harsher penalties and greatly empower partisan poll watchers.
    • 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. Iowa has also imposed new limits, including reducing the period for early voting and in-person voting hours on Election Day. And bills to restrict voting have been moving through the Republican-led Legislature in Michigan.

He urged Congress to pass Democrats’ voting bills, the most ambitious of which, the For the People Act, would expand access to the ballot, reduce the role of money in politics, strengthen enforcement of existing election laws and limit gerrymandering. Another measure, the narrower John Lewis Voting Rights Act, would restore crucial parts of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that were struck down by the Supreme Court in 2013, including the requirement that some states receive federal approval before changing their election laws.

Categories
Politics

Schumer says Senate Democrats will work on invoice in June

Schumer says Senate Democrats will work on bill in June

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) touts Senate Democrats legislative accomplishments as he holds a news conference at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, March 25, 2021.

Jonathan Ernst | Pool | Reuters

Senate Democrats plan to forge ahead with crafting a massive infrastructure package next month — regardless of whether Republicans get on board — as they push to pass a bill this summer.

Senators will be out of Washington next week for the Memorial Day holiday. When lawmakers return, Democrats aim to write an infrastructure plan that touches on everything from transportation to broadband, utilities and job training.

“As the President continues to discuss infrastructure legislation with Senate Republicans, the committees will hold hearings and continue their work on the Build Back Better agenda — with or without the support of Republican Senators,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote in a letter to Democrats on Friday. “We must pass comprehensive jobs and infrastructure legislation this summer.”

President Joe Biden has worked with Senate Republicans to see if they can strike a bipartisan deal to revamp American infrastructure. After the latest back-and-forth in their talks, the sides appear far from an agreement on what should go into a bill and how the government should pay for it.

CNBC Politics

Read more of CNBC’s politics coverage:

As the White House and Republicans struggle to reach a consensus, some Democrats have called on their party to try to pass a bill without GOP support. Democrats can do so through the budget reconciliation process, which requires a simple majority vote in the evenly split Senate.

Republicans on Thursday sent Biden a $928 billion infrastructure counteroffer. It came in at roughly half of the $1.7 trillion proposal the White House last sent the GOP. The Biden administration first put forward a $2.3 trillion infrastructure plan.

Responding to the offer, White House press secretary Jen Psaki praised “constructive” additions to road, bridge and rail spending. She said the White House “remains concerned” about Republicans’ proposed spending on modernizing railways and transitioning to clean energy, along with the party’s calls to pay for infrastructure with previously passed coronavirus relief funds.

The White House has said it expects nearly all of the aid money to be spent. Redirecting the funds could jeopardize support for small businesses and hospitals, Psaki said.

Despite the lingering differences, the sides expect to continue talks. Biden could meet again with Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, the West Virginia Republican leading negotiations with the White House, as soon as next week.

The parties will have to work through two huge disagreements to strike a deal. First, they have disparate visions of what counts as infrastructure.

The White House wants to include programs such as care for elderly and disabled Americans, which it calls vital for putting Americans back to work and boosting the economy. Republicans want to limit the legislation to areas including transportation, broadband and water.

Biden and Republicans could also struggle to find a compromise on how to pay for the infrastructure plan. The president wants to hike the corporate tax rate to at least 25% — and crack down on corporate tax avoidance overseas and individual tax underpayment at home — to offset the spending.

The GOP has said it will not support changes to its 2017 tax cuts as part of an infrastructure bill. The party slashed the corporate rate to 21% from 35%.

It is unclear how much longer talks will go on if Democrats and Republicans cannot strike a deal. On Thursday, Capito said Republicans “continue to negotiate in good faith.”

In his letter, Schumer noted that he was “encouraged” by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee advancing a roughly $300 billion bipartisan surface transportation bill this week.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican who previously said he would work to fight Biden’s broader economic agenda, said Thursday that his party would continue to engage with the president.

“We’d like to get an outcome on a significant infrastructure package,” he told CNBC.

Democrats passed Biden’s first big-ticket bill, a $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief plan, without a Republican vote in March.

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

Categories
Politics

Broad Coalition of Democrats Presses Biden to Broaden Medicare

Broad Coalition of Democrats Presses Biden to Expand Medicare

WASHINGTON – A broad coalition of Democrats from across the ideological spectrum plans on Thursday to begin what it promises to be a loud and sustained campaign to pressure President Biden to add a major Medicare addition to his infrastructure package.

More than 150 House Democrats – including Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington, chairman of the progressive wing of the House, and Representative Jared Golden of Maine, one of the chamber’s most centrist Democrats – have teamed up in what is far from certain to draw Republican opposition but contains suggestions that are popular with a broad segment of the electorate.

Disappointed that Mr Biden has not yet responded to an election promise to expand Medicare benefits, members of the group, which together represent nearly 70 percent of House Democrats, have signed a letter starting their print campaign. The organizers say it will contain opinion pieces and press events. Representatives Conor Lamb from Pennsylvania and Joe Neguse from Colorado are also leading the push.

“It is really unusual for a health proposition to reach this intensity,” Ms. Jayapal said in an interview.

At the heart of the plan is to call for the Medicare Eligibility Age to be lowered from 65 to 60 and to enroll approximately 23 million Americans on the federal senior health program, which will cost $ 200 billion over 10 years. Lawmakers are also pushing for Medicare benefits to be extended to include teeth, eyesight and hearing, which would cost approximately $ 350 billion over 10 years.

Legislators say the third element of their package more than offsets the cost: Medicare’s power to negotiate drug prices. Ms. Jayapal said change – one that Democrats have been unsuccessful in promoting for years – could generate as much as $ 650 billion in a decade, although the Congressional budget bureau has estimated the savings at about $ 450 billion over that period.

Mr Golden, who has historically opposed some large-ticket spending, including the nearly $ 1.9 trillion stimulus bill, said the Department of Veterans Affairs, which has the power to negotiate drug prices for veterans, is paying far less for prescription drugs than the rest of the government.

The Government Accountability Office found that the prescription drug division paid an average of 54 percent less than Medicare in 2017.

Lawmakers have made Zoom calls with White House officials over the proposal, which they hope Mr Biden will include in a large spending package that can lead the Senate through accelerated budget reconciliation this year.

It is not clear whether Mr Biden and other Democrats in Congress will accept the move, as Democratic leaders have focused on competing efforts to achieve a permanent increase in health subsidies under the Affordable Care Act in the Boom Act. There is widespread support for this proposal, including from hospitals who want to get the higher private insurance rates and insurers who want more people to buy their products. Any attempt to expand Medicare is likely to encounter opposition from the same groups.

Updated

May 26, 2021, 9:17 p.m. ET

However, Ms. Jayapal argued that the two health care proposals were compatible. She said negotiating lower drug prices could generate enough money to pay for the changes to the Affordable Care Act as well. If not, “there are many sources of income that are possible and necessary,” she said.

The Medicare proposals have proven popular with so-called Front Democrats – those who represent conservative districts. More than a dozen have joined the effort, underscoring its bipartisan appeal.

After meeting with White House officials on the matter, Neguse argued that Democrats could go further and lower the Medicare Eligibility Age to 55 to cover more than 40 million additional people.

“Many seniors in our nation cannot treat their illnesses because Medicare benefits are not as comprehensive as they should be,” he said.

Democrats say that at least 75 percent of Medicare beneficiaries who require a hearing aid do not have a hearing aid, and much of the country has low rates for dental visits or eye exams.

Mr. Golden said when speaking to voters he had heard repeatedly that the change would help the residents of his district.

“How crazy is it that we have been paying into Medicare all our professional lives, and at the time when your dental care is likely to be the most important, Medicare doesn’t even cover it?” he said. “I know seniors get frustrated with this.”

Nearly 20 Senators, led by Senator Bernie Sanders, the independent Vermonter, have joined forces on a similar call for White House action on the matter.

Categories
Politics

Democrats Quieter About Migrant Kids Detention

Democrats Quieter About Migrant Children Detention

“The good news is that they listened,” Representative Sylvia R. Garcia, Democrat of Texas, said of officials at Health and Human Services. Ms. Garcia, a former social worker, said she saw red flags at the Houston shelter, a repurposed warehouse, before it even opened. The plan was to house about 500 girls between the ages of 13 and 17. Ms. Garcia said the facility did not have enough bathrooms and there was no clear space for the children to eat or for recreation.

“They were concerned about the kids. They were concerned about their care — every single one of them,” Ms. Garcia said of the officials she spoke with. The shelter opened on April 1 and closed on April 17. “They were not going to put children at risk.”

Ms. Escobar, whose district includes the largest emergency shelter in the Health and Human Services network, at Fort Bliss, said she raised concerns about conditions early on. And on a visit there on Friday, she said she saw significant improvements over six weeks ago.

But, she said, “there are still things that are not acceptable to me.”

For one, the staff could not answer some of Ms. Escobar’s questions, such as how long children were staying there. She said children told her they had been there for 48 days. “That’s unacceptable,” she said.

Ms. Escobar also said the shelter was too big and should be broken into multiple shelters on the Fort Bliss campus. She said she raised this concern about “mega-sites” with Xavier Becerra, the secretary of health and human services, on a recent call with members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

Mr. Castro said he shared Ms. Escobar’s concerns, though he dismissed worries about the size of the shelter and said, during a call with reporters on Monday, there had to be a plan for how to house these children when they arrive at the border.

He also said that the conditions at the emergency facilities were not only better than those at the border facilities, “but it’s better than what these kids were experiencing before they were in the hands” of border agents.

Categories
Politics

Democrats, Rising Extra Skeptical of Israel, Strain Biden

Democrats, Growing More Skeptical of Israel, Pressure Biden

WASHINGTON – President Biden’s carefully worded statement Monday in support of a ceasefire between Israelis and Palestinians came under mounting pressure from his own party to make the United States more skeptical of one of its closest allies.

Mr Biden’s urging to end the fighting – hidden at the end of a round-up of an appeal with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – followed a drumbeat of calls from democratic lawmakers from across the ideological spectrum for his government to speak out strongly against the escalation of violence . It reflected a tone different from that expressed by members of Congress in previous clashes in the region, when most Democrats repeated their strong support for Israel’s right to defend itself and called for peace without its actions openly to critisize.

The strongest pressure is from the energetic progressive wing of the party, whose representatives in the House of Representatives, such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez from New York, have drawn attention in recent days for accusing Israel of gross human rights violations against Palestinians and for practicing “apartheid” State. “But its intensity has masked a calmer, more concerted shift between more mainstream Democrats that could ultimately be more consistent.

While not intending to end the United States’ close alliance with Israel, a growing number of Washington Democrats are saying they are no longer willing to pass the country for its harsh treatment of the Palestinians and the spasms of violence they define to give up the conflict for years.

Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Gregory W. Meeks of New York underscored how skepticism about the Gaza campaign had spread to some of Israel’s strongest defenders in Congress and told Democrats on Monday in the panel that he would Biden asked government to move to Israel a $ 735 million tranche of precision-guided weapons that had been approved before tensions in the Middle East broke out.

Mr. Meeks, a fixture at the annual conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, the most powerful pro-Israel lobby group, convened an emergency meeting of the Foreign Affairs Committee Democrats Monday evening to discuss the delay of the arms package to someone familiar with the meeting Person who insisted on anonymity to discuss internal discussions. It came after a number of Democrats raised concerns about sending American-made weapons to Israel at a time when civilians were being bombed, as well as a building that housed press offices, including The Associated Press, an American news agency.

A day earlier, 28 Democratic senators – more than half of the party congress – published a letter publicly calling for a ceasefire. The effort was led by Senator Jon Ossoff, Democrat of Georgia and, at 34, the face of a younger generation of American Jews in Congress. When Republicans pumped out statements accusing Hamas militants, the Democratic plea was a duty on both sides to lay down their arms – and Mr Biden to complain in order to demand it.

Another sign of development came over the weekend from Senator Bob Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey and chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. Mr. Menendez is known as one of Israel’s most staunch allies in the Democratic Party. He has refused to reject President Barack Obama’s 2015 nuclear deal with Iran on the basis of the Israeli opposition.

However, on Saturday, as the death toll rose in Gaza and southern Israel, Mr. Menendez made a stern statement saying he was “deeply concerned” about Israeli strikes that killed Palestinian civilians and about the tower, housing news media. He urged both sides to “comply with the rules and laws of war” and find a peaceful end to the fighting, in which more than 200 Palestinians and 10 Israelis were killed.

“In response to thousands of Hamas rocket attacks against civilians, Israel has every right to self-defense against terrorists who want to cross them off the face of the map,” Menendez said. “But no matter how dangerous and real this threat may be, I have always believed that the strength of US-Israel relations flourishes when they are based on shared values ​​of democracy, freedom, pluralism and respect for human rights and US rule is right. “

The Democrats, who had been the loudest critic of the Israeli government, said they wanted to send the president a message while he pondered how to deal with escalating tensions: Finding the old playbook Mr Biden used as a senator and vice president no longer the same support in his party.

“That didn’t work,” Representative Mark Pocan, a progressive Democrat from Wisconsin, told a top advisor to Mr Biden late last week, he said in an interview on Monday. “We’re going to work for peace in ways that you may not traditionally have heard.”

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Updated

May 19, 2021, 4:02 p.m. ET

Republicans and AIPAC have been quick to warn of a perceived weakening of United States commitment to Israel. When New York representative Jerrold Nadler, who represents the country’s most Jewish district, led a group of 12 Jewish House Democrats in a letter to Israel on Friday, he also said that the Palestinians “should know that the American people value their lives as We live in Israel, ”AIPAC worked quietly behind the scenes to keep lawmakers from signing it.

Republicans have also seen a political advantage in using the most extreme statements of progressive Democrats to try to pull Jewish voters away from the party.

Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader and a supporter of Israel, condemned Ms. Ocasio-Cortez on Monday for describing Israel as an “apartheid state” and urged the president to “leave no doubt about where America stands”.

“The United States must stand square behind our ally,” said McConnell, “and President Biden must stand strong against the growing voices within his own party that create a false equivalence between terrorists and a responsible state that defends itself.”

Few Democrats in Congress have gone that far. But in recent years many in the party have changed their approach.

Much of the postponement can be traced back to the Iranian nuclear deal debate when Mr. Netanyahu, Israel’s right-wing leader, made concerted efforts to get involved in American domestic politics and kill the pact that Mr. Obama worked out. He portrayed support for the deal as a betrayal of Israel and sought to drive a wedge between Republicans and Democrats on the matter. Mr. Netanyahu’s close alliance with Mr. Obama’s successor Donald J. Trump only widened this party-political divide.

But the difference in tone also reflects a wider shift within the Democratic Party over the past decade. As democratic voters and liberals have become more self-consciously organized around concepts such as justice and systemic discrimination, their pursuit of more liberal policies on immigration, policing and domestic armed violence has changed many people’s view of the conflict in the Middle East and Middle East violence it produced.

Reflexive support for Israel’s right to defend itself, or the call by Israel and the Palestinian authorities to return to the negotiating table, is now seen by many on the left as the “linguistic equivalent” of our thoughts and prayers to the victims of the recent mass shootings “Said Jeremy Ben-Ami, the president of J Street, a liberal pro-Israel advocacy group that has worked for years to shift the debate to counterbalance AIPAC.

“That is no longer good enough,” he said in an interview. “What the United States is doing is essentially international immunity to Israel.”

The momentum was seen last week after Ms. Ocasio-Cortez pounced on Andrew Yang, the leading candidate in the New York Mayor’s Race, for making a statement last week to “stand with the people of Israel”.

“It is extremely embarrassing for Yang to try to report to an oath event after making a breast-beating statement of support for a 9-child strike,” wrote Ms. Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter. (Mr. Yang later released a new statement saying his first was “too simplistic” and “did not acknowledge the pain and suffering on either side”.)

This has left some of Israel’s most vocal traditional allies in the party in an uncomfortable position.

Senator Chuck Schumer from New York, the majority leader, has remained largely silent since the fighting broke out in view of the countercurrents in his party and his home state, where he will have to be re-elected next year. Like Mr. Menendez, Mr. Schumer voted against the Iranian nuclear deal and represents the largest Jewish population in the country, from secular progressives to politically conservative Orthodox communities.

In response to a question asked by a reporter in the Capitol on Monday, Mr. Schumer said, “I want a ceasefire to be reached quickly and mourn the loss of life.”

Categories
World News

Biden raises refugee cap to 62,500 after criticism from Democrats

Biden raises refugee cap to 62,500 after criticism from Democrats

United States President Joe Biden speaks about America’s employment plan after touring Tidewater Community College in Norfolk, Virginia on May 3, 2021.

Almond Ngan | AFP | Getty Images

President Joe Biden will raise the annual US refugee cap for the fiscal year to 62,500 attendees, revising the much lower number set under the Trump administration, which “did not reflect American values,” Biden said Monday.

“It is important to take these measures today to remove all doubts in the minds of refugees around the world who have suffered so much and are eagerly awaiting the start of their new lives,” the president said in a statement.

The Biden administration has faced immense pressure from Democrats and activists to quickly raise the refugee ceiling from the historic low of 15,000 set under former President Donald Trump.

CNBC policy

Read more about CNBC’s political coverage:

Categories
Politics

Swiss Billionaire Quietly Turns into Influential Pressure Amongst Democrats

Swiss Billionaire Quietly Becomes Influential Force Among Democrats

These types of spending – which are usually handled through nonprofit groups that don’t need to disclose much information about their finances, including their donors – have been welcomed by conservatives after regulatory changes and court rulings, particularly those of the Supreme Court, eased campaign spending restrictions were made in 2010 in the Citizens United case.

While progressives and election guards denounced the developments as too powerful for wealthy interests, democratic donors and activists increasingly used dark money. During the 2020 election cycle, Democratic-affiliated groups spent more than $ 514 million on such funds, compared to approximately $ 200 million spent by Republican-affiliated groups, according to an analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics.

Some of the groups funded by the Mr. Wyss Foundations played a key role in this shift, although the relatively limited disclosure requirements for these types of groups make it impossible to definitively determine how they spent funds from the Wyss Foundations.

Mr. Wyss and his advisors have developed a “strategic, evidence-based, metric-driven and results-oriented approach to building a political infrastructure,” said Rob Stein, a democratic strategist.

Mr. Stein, who founded the influential Democracy Alliance Club of Big Liberal Donors in 2005 and recruited Mr. Wyss to join, added that “unlike most affluent political donors right and left,” Mr. Wyss and his team “know how is going to achieve measurable, sustainable effects. “

85-year-old Wyss was born in Bern, visited the USA for the first time in 1958 as an exchange student and was enthusiastic about the American national parks and public areas. After getting rich and running the Swiss-based medical device manufacturer Synthes, he began donating his fortune through a network of foundations to promote nature conservation, environmental protection and other issues.

The foundations gradually increased their donations for other Democrat-backed causes, including abortion rights and minimum wage increases, and eventually for groups more directly involved in partisan debates, especially after the election of Mr Trump.