Tag: Political

Categories
Politics

The Political Calculations Behind DeSantis’s Migrant Flights North

The Political Calculations Behind DeSantis’s Migrant Flights North

Ron DeSantis, Florida’s Republican governor, this week surpassed his Texas counterpart Greg Abbott by sending two planeloads of migrants to Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts — the culmination of a months-long campaign to troll essentially liberal cities and states by displacing many asylum seekers into these communities.

The airlift, a DeSantis spokeswoman said in a statement, “was part of the state’s relocation program to transport illegal immigrants to places of refuge.”

She added, “States like Massachusetts, New York and California will better facilitate the care of these individuals whom they have invited to our country by encouraging illegal immigration through their designation as ‘protected states’ and supporting the policies of the create an open border for the Biden administration.”

Of course, there is no such “open border”. Many of these migrants apply US asylum laws, which give them the opportunity for a court hearing to determine whether they are eligible to remain in the United States, as thousands did during the Trump administration and the Obama administration before that. And in most cases, they were arrested by federal law enforcement officers or turned themselves in so DeSantis was able to put them on planes in the first place.

“Playing politics with people’s lives is what governors like George Wallace did during segregation,” said Rep. Seth Moulton, a Massachusetts Democrat. “Ron DeSantis is trying to earn George Wallace’s legacy.” Moulton was referring to the “Reverse Freedom Rides” of 1962, when segregationists made false promises of jobs and housing to entice black Southerners to move north. Moulton, who briefly ran for president in 2020, generally accused Republicans of using immigration as “political football.”

The deeper problem is this: Congress has spent decades failing to revise the country’s immigration laws, which both parties recognize are utterly inconsistent with what is happening along the US-Mexico border. They differ greatly only in the proposed remedies.

But the political calculations for DeSantis and Abbott are pretty straightforward. Immigration is a powerful motivational issue for Republican-based voters, nationally, and particularly in border states like Arizona and Texas.

My colleague Astead Herndon discusses this topic on the latest episode of his podcast, The Run-Up. It’s a deep dive on the 10th anniversary of the so-called Republican autopsy of the 2012 election, in which GOP insiders called for a complete rethink of their party’s strategy on immigration and Latino voters.

As DeSantis surely knows — and he’s by all accounts a shrewd politician who tuned his ear to the GOP base’s id — Donald Trump basically did the opposite of what that autopsy recommended. During his 2016 presidential bid and long after, he made frequent and aggressive political use of Latino migrants, labeling many of them “criminals” and “rapists” during his presidential announcement at Trump Tower.

And DeSantis, who is likely to roll for re-election in the fall, is busy amassing an impressive war chest for purposes that remain both obscure and obvious. For months he’s been quietly courting Trump donors on the pretense of including her in his campaign for governor, while making sure never to stick his head too far over the parapet — lest Trump tries to steal him from his proverbial ones to slap shoulders.

Rick Tyler, a former adviser to Senator Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign, said the DeSantis flights to Martha’s Vineyard were “maybe” smart politics in the context of a Republican primary, but he added, “I find it cynical to use real people as political.” Stunt figures for positioning in a presidential chess game.”

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre slammed the Texas and Florida governors for deliberately trying to create “chaos and confusion” in a way that was “disrespectful of humanity.” She said Fox News was notified in advance, but the White House was not.

“It’s a political ploy,” she said. “That’s what we’re seeing from governors, especially Republican governors. It’s a cruel, inhumane way of treating people who are fleeing Communism, people who are – and we’re not just talking about people, we’re talking about children, we’re talking about families.”

A report in The Vineyard Gazette, a local newspaper, reports how the migrants arrived on the island and were greeted by “a coalition of emergency management officials, faith groups, nonprofit organizations and county and city officials” who organized food and shelter for the new arrivals.

Other Democrat-run enclaves like Washington, DC and New York City have asked the federal government for help processing and housing the thousands of migrants that DeSantis and Abbott have theatrically foisted on them. Last week, Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser declared a state of emergency for the nearly 10,000 migrants busted there from Texas. Eric Adams, her counterpart in New York, said Wednesday that the city’s emergency shelter system “is nearing breaking point.”

On Thursday morning, two buses dropped off a group of 101 migrants outside Vice President Kamala Harris’ home – a poisoned political chalice sent by Abbott, who tweeted, “We’re sending migrants into their backyard to ask the Biden administration to do its job.” & secure the border.”

How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times employees are allowed to vote, they are not allowed to endorse candidates or campaign for political causes. This includes attending marches or rallies in support of a movement, or donating or raising funds for political candidates or electoral causes.

As an indicator of how strongly Republicans believe this issue is among their constituents, even Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, a relatively dovish man who has taken a stand against Trump over his bogus stolen election claims in 2020, is now chiming in. Ducey, who rejected strong pressure from Senator Mitch McConnell, the minority leader, to run for the Senate, is said to harbor presidential ambitions of his own.

The Massachusetts press described DeSantis’ move as a challenge to Governor Charlie Baker, a Republican whose future plans remain in flux. Baker, a moderate Northeast in the mold of previous Bay State GOP governors like Mitt Romney and Bill Weld, would have little hope of a presidential primary against DeSantis or, for that matter, Trump.

Trolling is a novel political tactic. But the general phenomenon of migrant distribution around the country is not entirely new, as my colleague Zolan Kanno-Youngs has written. As the Obama administration faced a tide of unaccompanied minors flooding facilities along the border in places like McAllen, Texas, the Department of Health and Human Services housed thousands of the children in cities across the country.

And after the protest movement in Syria turned into a vicious civil war in 2011, many Republican governors began opposing the housing of refugees in their states.

Trump also seized on this issue, calling for “a total and complete ban on the entry of Muslims into the United States until our country’s officials can figure out what’s going on” — and then attempted to implement that policy in one of his first steps as president .

Gil Kerlikowske, a former Customs and Border Protection Commissioner in the Obama administration, woke up Thursday morning to find border officials following him to his home on Martha’s Vineyard.

Kerlikowske learned that migrants had been dropped off on the island when he went to the barber’s on Thursday morning and overheard people asking why the United States was unable to secure the Southwest border.

He reminded other customers that even during the George W. Bush administration, thousands of migrants crossed the border.

“It just shows the ignorance of DeSantis,” Kerlikowske said, advising the governor to pressure members of Florida’s congressional delegation to pass new immigration laws instead. “If he wanted to highlight where the problem is, he should have sent her home to Marco Rubio and Rick Scott.”

President Biden has been pushed back from his left because some stakeholders say he is continuing Trump’s immigration policies. On Wednesday, the American Civil Liberties Union criticized Biden after a Reuters report revealed the government had asked Mexico to take in more migrants from Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela as part of a policy introduced during the coronavirus pandemic.

Christina Pushaw, a DeSantis campaign spokeswoman, said, “The governor has spoken publicly for months about transporting illegal migrants to sanctuaries.” She pointed out that in this year’s state budget, DeSantis received $12 million from the Florida Legislature for the transfers had requested.

“But what we didn’t know in the campaign was that the goal was going to be Martha’s Vineyard or that it was going to happen yesterday,” Pushaw said. “We learned that from media reports.”

Zolan Kanno-Youngs and Peter Baker contributed coverage.

Thank you for reading On Politics and for subscribing to The New York Times. —Blake

Read past issues of the newsletter here.

If you like what you read, please consider recommending it to others. Here you can sign up. Browse all of our subscriber-only newsletters here.

Feedback? Reporting ideas? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com.

Categories
Politics

Individuals Stretch Throughout Political Divides to Welcome Afghan Refugees

Americans Stretch Across Political Divides to Welcome Afghan Refugees

Mars Adema, 40, said she tried last year to convince Church ministries to take care of immigrants, only to hear that “this is just not our focus”.

“Something has changed completely with Afghanistan,” said Ms. Adema.

In a nation polarized on issues from abortion to the coronavirus pandemic, Afghan refugees have held a special place for many Americans, especially those who worked for U.S. forces and NGOs, or otherwise supported U.S. efforts, Afghanistan to be liberated from the Taliban.

The moment contrasts with the last four years when the country, under the leadership of a president who restricted immigration and banned travel from several Muslim-majority countries, was divided on whether or not to welcome people in search of a safe haven should avoid. And with much of the electorate still deeply divided over immigration, the permanence of the current welcome mat remains unknown.

Polls show Republicans are even more reluctant than Democrats to accept Afghans, and some conservative politicians have warned that the rush to make so many resettlements will result in extremists slipping through the screening process. Influential commentators like Fox News host Tucker Carlson said the refugees diluted American culture and harmed the Republican Party. Last week he warned that the Biden government is “flooding swinging districts with refugees who they know will become loyal Democratic voters”.

But a wide range of veterans and lawmakers have long viewed Afghans who helped the United States as military partners and have long pushed for the red tape that kept them in the country under constant threat from the Taliban. Pictures of babies being lifted over barbed wire fences to meet American soldiers, people clinging to departing planes, and a deadly terrorist attack on thousands gathered at the airport to desperately leave have moved thousands of Americans to theirs Efforts to join.

“For a nation so divided, it feels good when people join a good cause,” said Mike Sullivan, director of the Welcome to America project in Phoenix. “This country has probably not seen anything like it since Vietnam”

Federal officials said this week that in the coming month at least 50,000 Afghans who have helped the US government or may be targeted by the Taliban are expected to be admitted to the United States, although the full number and timeframe of their arrival remains in place Job. More than 31,000 Afghans have already arrived, around half of which, according to internal government documents, are still being dispatched to military bases.

Categories
Politics

Abortion Arrives on the Middle of the American Political Maelstrom

Abortion Arrives at the Center of the American Political Maelstrom

WASHINGTON – Die Entscheidung des Obersten Gerichtshofs, ein texanisches Gesetz, das Abtreibungen stark einschränkt, nicht zu blockieren, hat das Thema am Donnerstag abrupt in den Vordergrund der amerikanischen Politik gerückt und die Dynamik der Wahlen in Kalifornien in diesem Monat, in Virginia im November und in den Halbzeiten nächsten Jahres neu gestaltet, die entscheiden werden Kontrolle des Kongresses und der Statehouses.

Die Republikaner begrüßten die 5-zu-4-Entscheidung des Gerichts, die in einem einteiligen Urteil mitten in der Nacht erklärt wurde, als einen enormen Sieg, der ein fast vollständiges Verbot von Abtreibungen im zweitgrößten Staat der Nation ermöglichte.

Für die Demokraten wurde ein Albtraum wahr: Ein konservativer Oberster Gerichtshof, angeführt von drei vom ehemaligen Präsidenten Donald J. alte Entscheidung, die Abtreibung als verfassungsmäßiges Recht verankerte.

Plötzlich sahen sich Befürworter des Abtreibungsrechts nicht nur mit dem politischen und politischen Versagen konfrontiert, das zu diesem Punkt geführt hatte, sondern auch mit der Aussicht, dass andere republikanisch kontrollierte Gesetzgeber schnell Nachahmergesetze erlassen könnten. Am Donnerstag versprachen die GOP-Gesetzgeber in Arkansas, Florida und South Dakota, dies in ihren nächsten Legislaturperioden zu tun.

Die Demokraten nutzten jedoch auch die Gelegenheit, ein Thema, von dem sie glauben, dass es ein politischer Gewinner für sie ist, in den Mittelpunkt der nationalen Debatte zu drängen. Nach Jahren der Verteidigung sagen die Demokraten, das texanische Gesetz werde testen, ob die Realität eines praktischen Abtreibungsverbots die Wähler dazu motivieren kann, sie zu unterstützen.

Senatorin Catherine Cortez Masto aus Nevada, eine Demokratin, die sich 2022 zur Wiederwahl stellt, sagte, die Menschen in ihrem Bundesstaat hätten für den Schutz der reproduktiven Freiheit von Frauen gekämpft und würden entsprechend abstimmen. „Wenn ein Republikaner nach Washington geht, um diese Freiheiten zurückzudrängen, werde ich es zum Thema machen“, sagte sie in einem Interview. “Ich denke, Sie sollten die Auswirkungen, die dieses Problem auf die Einwohner Nevadas hat, nicht unterschätzen.”

Die Republikaner hielten das texanische Gesetz als Vorbild für das Land. „Dieses Gesetz wird das Leben Tausender ungeborener Babys in Texas retten und zu einem nationalen Vorbild werden“, sagte Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick aus Texas. “Ich bete, dass jeder andere Staat unserem Beispiel bei der Verteidigung des Lebens folgt.”

Gouverneurin Kristi Noem aus South Dakota, die als potenzielle republikanische Präsidentschaftskandidatin im Jahr 2024 gilt, sagte, sie habe ihr Büro angewiesen, “sicherzustellen, dass wir die stärksten Pro-Life-Gesetze in den Büchern haben”.

Die Entscheidung des Gerichts, die sich nicht mit dem Inhalt des texanischen Gesetzes befasste, schafft neue Dringlichkeit für Präsident Biden und die Demokraten im Kongress, mehr zu tun, als öffentliche Erklärungen abzugeben, in denen sie die reproduktiven Rechte der Frauen verteidigen.

“Die Temperatur ist in dieser Angelegenheit gerade viel heißer geworden, und ich erwarte jetzt sicherlich, dass sich der Kongress an diesen Kämpfen beteiligt”, sagte Gouverneurin Michelle Lujan Grisham aus New Mexico, die Vorsitzende der Democratic Governors Association. “Unsere Wähler erwarten von uns allen, dass wir mehr tun.”

Die Demokraten im Senat haben jedoch nicht die Stimmen, um den Filibuster zu beseitigen, der notwendig wäre, um das Bundesabtreibungsgesetz in der gleichmäßig geteilten Kammer zu ändern.

In Washington bemühten sich die demokratischen Führer am Donnerstag pflichtbewusst darum, ihre Entschlossenheit zu zeigen, gegen die Möglichkeit einer Nachahmung des texanischen Gesetzes an anderer Stelle zu protestieren – oder zu reagieren, wenn der Oberste Gerichtshof das Abtreibungsrecht zurücknimmt, wenn er über ein Mississippi-Gesetz entscheidet, das versucht, das Gesetz zu verbieten die meisten Abtreibungen nach 15 Schwangerschaftswochen, zwei Monate früher als Roe und nachfolgende Entscheidungen erlauben.

Die Sprecherin Nancy Pelosi versprach, über das Gesetz zum Schutz der Gesundheit von Frauen abzustimmen, das das Recht auf Abtreibung in Bundesgesetzen festschreiben würde.

Und Herr Biden versprach „eine gesamtstaatliche Anstrengung“ als Reaktion auf das texanische Gesetz und wies das Gesundheitsministerium und das Justizministerium an, mögliche Bundesmaßnahmen zu ermitteln, um sicherzustellen, dass Frauen im Bundesstaat Zugang zu sicheren und legale Abtreibungen.

„Das höchste Gericht unseres Landes wird es Millionen von Frauen in Texas ermöglichen, die eine kritische reproduktive Versorgung benötigen, zu leiden, während die Gerichte die verfahrenstechnischen Komplexitäten sichten“, sagte Biden. “Die Auswirkungen der Entscheidung von gestern Abend werden unmittelbar sein und erfordern eine sofortige Reaktion.”

Vizepräsidentin Kamala Harris fügte hinzu: “Wir werden nicht zusehen und zulassen, dass unsere Nation in die Tage der Abtreibungen in den Hinterhöfen zurückkehrt.”

Die erste Wahl, die die Fähigkeit der Demokraten auf die Probe stellen könnte, die Wähler für das Recht auf Abtreibung zu motivieren, findet am 14. September in Kalifornien statt, wo die Wähler das Schicksal von Gouverneur Gavin Newsom bestimmen werden, der mit einer Rückrufaktion konfrontiert ist. Herr Newsom warnte auf Twitter, dass das Abtreibungsverbot in Texas „die Zukunft von CA sein könnte“, wenn der Rückruf erfolgreich wäre.

In Virginia haben sich am Donnerstag demokratische Kandidaten für die drei landesweiten Ämter des Bundesstaates und das Abgeordnetenhaus auf das Thema gestürzt. Der ehemalige Gouverneur Terry McAuliffe, der im November für die Rückeroberung des Amtes kandidiert, sagte, der Kampf für das Recht auf Abtreibung würde dazu beitragen, demokratische Wähler zu motivieren, die möglicherweise selbstgefällig sind, nachdem die Partei 2019 die volle Kontrolle über die Landesregierung übernommen und Herrn Biden geholfen hat, den Staat zu gewinnen letztes Jahr.

„Wir sind ein demokratischer Staat. Es gibt mehr Demokraten“, sagte McAuliffe. “Aber dies ist ein Off-Off-Jahr, und die Demokraten zu motivieren, herauszukommen, das ist immer die große Herausforderung.”

Mit Blick auf das Jahr 2022 hat der Wahlkampfarm der Demokraten im Senat signalisiert, dass er das Abtreibungsrecht als Knüppel gegen Republikaner einsetzen wird, die in Staaten wie Florida, New Hampshire, Nevada und North Carolina antreten. Demokraten, die Kampagnen für den Gouverneur im nächsten Jahr planen, bereiten sich darauf vor, sich als letzte Verteidigungslinie für das Recht auf Abtreibung zu brandmarken, insbesondere in Staaten mit republikanisch kontrollierten Gesetzgebern.

„Die Leute wachen jetzt mit der Tatsache auf, dass der Kampf jetzt in den Staaten stattfinden wird, und sie erkennen, dass das einzige, buchstäblich das einzige, was der Verabschiedung des gleichen Verbots, das Texas gerade verabschiedet hat, im Weg steht, der Veto-Stift ist unseres demokratischen Gouverneurs“, sagte Josh Shapiro, der Generalstaatsanwalt von Pennsylvania, ein Demokrat, der sagte, er erwarte, in das Rennen um die Nachfolge von Gouverneur Tom Wolf einzutreten. „Ich habe die Politiker in Washington aufgegeben. Ich glaube nicht, dass wir uns mehr auf sie verlassen können.“

Obwohl die Republikaner den Sturz von Roe seit langem zu einem zentralen politischen Ziel gemacht haben – als Kandidat im Jahr 2016 sagte Trump voraus, dass seine späteren Ernennungen des Obersten Gerichtshofs dies tun würden –, herrschte unter den Demokraten immer noch ein spürbares Gefühl der Erschütterung. Trotz der konservativen Mehrheit von 6 zu 3 des Gerichts schienen viele Demokraten auf das Urteil vom Mittwoch geistig unvorbereitet zu sein.

“Sie können ein so offensichtlich falsches oder verfassungswidriges Gerichtsurteil nicht planen”, sagte der Abgeordnete Conor Lamb aus Pennsylvania, ein Demokrat, der nächstes Jahr für den offenen Senatssitz seines Staates kandidiert.

Verstehen Sie das texanische Abtreibungsgesetz

Karte 1 von 4

Die Bürger, nicht der Staat, werden das Gesetz durchsetzen. Das Gesetz vertritt normale Bürger – auch solche außerhalb von Texas – und erlaubt ihnen, Kliniken und andere zu verklagen, die gegen das Gesetz verstoßen. Es zahlt ihnen mindestens 10.000 US-Dollar pro illegaler Abtreibung, wenn sie erfolgreich sind.

Senatorin Kirsten Gillibrand aus New York, die Frauenrechte zum Kernstück ihres Präsidentschaftswahlkampfs 2020 machte, sagte, die Demokraten könnten nicht länger zimperlich sein, wenn es um das Recht auf Abtreibung geht. “Wir müssen das Thema anheben”, sagte sie am Donnerstag. “Wir müssen dem amerikanischen Volk erklären, dass dieses texanische Gesetz und andere Gesetze, die in anderen Bundesstaaten verabschiedet werden sollen, die grundlegende Gesundheitsversorgung von Frauen auf den Kopf stellen werden.”

Im Allgemeinen beklagten progressive Befürworter das Versagen der Demokraten, mit den Republikanern mitzuhalten, die sich seit Generationen in den Hauptstädten der Bundesstaaten verschanzen und enormen Wert darauf legten, Konservative auf die Bank zu berufen – Schlüsselarenen, in denen Demokraten es versäumt haben, das Recht auf Abtreibung zu schützen.

„Wir spielen 50 Jahre Aufholjagd“, sagte Ben Jealous, ein ehemaliger NAACP-Chef und jetzt Präsident von People for the American Way, einer fortschrittlichen Organisation. „Das Gericht steht nicht im Einklang mit dem amerikanischen Volk. Und die Republikaner haben den Obersten Gerichtshof zu ihrer Mauer gegen die Demokratie gemacht.“

Selbst während sie frohlockten, machten sich die Konservativen gegen Abtreibungen Sorgen über mögliche Fallstricke. Sie erinnerten an Todd Akin, einen ehemaligen Kongressabgeordneten aus Missouri, dessen Kandidatur im Senat 2012 durch seine Aussage entgleist wurde, dass Frauen, die Opfer einer von ihm so genannten „legitimen Vergewaltigung“ sind, selten schwanger wurden. Demokraten benutzten Äußerungen wie die von Herrn Akin, um die GOP als einen „Krieg gegen die Frauen“ darzustellen, eine Taktik, die die Republikaner als sehr effektiv einräumten.

“Jeder Kandidat im Land wird jetzt nach seiner Position zur Abtreibung gefragt”, sagte Tom McClusky, der Präsident von March for Life Action, die sich für Gesetze zur Einschränkung des Abtreibungsrechts einsetzt. „Was wir vermeiden wollen, sind Vorfälle wie in der Vergangenheit.“

Demokraten glauben seit langem, dass die öffentliche Unterstützung für legale Abtreibung verhindern würde, dass sie effektiv verboten wird, wie es Texas getan hat. Sogar einige konservative Anti-Abtreibungs-Aktivisten räumen ein, dass ihre absolutistische Position nicht von einer Mehrheit der Amerikaner geteilt wird, obwohl sie glauben, dass einige Demokraten es übertrieben haben, alle gesetzlichen Beschränkungen der Abtreibung aufzuheben.

„Vielleicht stimmt nicht die Mehrheit der Leute mit mir überein, dass das Leben mit der Empfängnis beginnt, aber sie glauben nicht, dass Abtreibung zu irgendeinem Zeitpunkt legal sein sollte und alles vom Steuerzahler bezahlt werden sollte“, sagte Penny Nance, die Geschäftsführerin von Concerned Women for America, eine konservative christliche Organisation.

Die Unterstützung für das Recht auf Abtreibung war für die Demokraten kaum ein Motivationsfaktor wie für die konservativen Wähler, die gegen die Abtreibung sind. Bei den Präsidentschaftswahlen 2020 unterstützten Wähler, die sagten, Abtreibung sei das wichtigste Thema, Herrn Trump gegenüber Herrn Biden, 89 bis 9 Prozent, laut AP/Votecast-Daten.

Aber während die Republikaner seit Generationen für die Einschränkung des Abtreibungsrechts kämpfen, sind die Demokraten in dieser Frage erst vor kurzem nach links gerückt – von Bill Clintons Formulierung, dass es „sicher, legal und selten“ sein sollte, bis hin zu den Argumenten der modernen Demokraten, dass die Wahl bei der Frau liegen sollte allein. Senator Bernie Sanders aus Vermont hat sich noch 2017 mit Anti-Abtreibungskandidaten eingesetzt.

Während praktisch alle gewählten Demokraten das Recht auf Abtreibung befürworten, haben nur sehr wenige mit einem nationalen Profil eine politische Identität zu diesem Thema aufgebaut.

Eine, die es versuchte, war Wendy Davis, die ehemalige Senatorin des Bundesstaates Texas, die mehr als 11 Stunden lang bei einem gescheiterten Versuch im Jahr 2013 sprach, Gesetze zur Einschränkung des Zugangs zu Abtreibungen im Bundesstaat zu blockieren. Sie kandidierte 2014 für die Gouverneurin und 2020 für den Kongress, wurde jedoch beide Male leicht besiegt.

„Wir können dieses Thema nicht scheuen, aus Angst, dass wir als Abtreibungsaktivisten gebrandmarkt werden“, sagte Frau Davis am Donnerstag. „Ich bin stolz, so bezeichnet zu werden, denn es ist keine Schande. Abtreibungen sollten nicht stigmatisiert werden.“

Nate Cohn, Astead W. Herndon und Jeremy W. Peters trugen zur Berichterstattung bei.

Categories
Politics

Taliban Advances in Afghanistan Might Deliver Political Peril for Biden

Taliban Advances in Afghanistan Could Bring Political Peril for Biden

When President Biden announced his plan to withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan, the politics seemed relatively simple: Many polls showed that Americans supported ending the country’s nearly 20-year involvement in a war whose goals had become obscure.

But four months later, with the Taliban storming across the country much faster and more ruthlessly than expected, new political risks are coming into view for Mr. Biden, who had hoped to win credit for ending what he has called one of America’s “forever wars.”

Now U.S. officials are racing to evacuate Afghans who assisted the American military and may be targets of Taliban reprisals, and are contemplating the prospect of hastily evacuating the 4,000 Americans at the U.S. Embassy in the capital city of Kabul.

The threat of a Taliban conquest and new risks to U.S. personnel and allies in the country could cause Americans who had been paying little attention to Afghanistan for the past several years to reconsider their views, particularly if Republicans amplify a message of American failure and capitulation.

“Everybody’s worried about a repeat of the Saigon images,” said Brian Katulis, a foreign policy expert at the liberal Center for American Progress, referring to the chaotic April 1975 evacuation of the American Embassy in South Vietnam’s capital. Desperate Vietnamese clung to the struts of departing helicopters as the city was being conquered by Communist forces.

Americans remain focused on domestic matters like the coronavirus and the economy, and are unlikely to care much that the Taliban have captured unfamiliar cities like Kunduz, said Mr. Katulis, who has studied public opinion about foreign policy.

“But this could change,” he added. “If you have a parade of horribles continue to unfold in Afghanistan, it could seep into the public consciousness the way Iraq did in 2013 and 2014” when the Islamic State stormed across that country after American troops withdrew.

Speaking to reporters at the White House on Tuesday, Mr. Biden said he did “not regret” his decision, noting that the United States continued to support Afghanistan’s government and security forces but adding, “They’ve got to fight for themselves.”

Officials in the Biden administration have repeatedly expressed hope that negotiations between the Taliban and the Afghan government might produce a peaceful resolution short of a Kabul-based Taliban emirate, but prospects for successful talks are swiftly fading.

Fortunately for Mr. Biden, many Republicans in Congress have turned against foreign military adventures and supported a full exit from Afghanistan, to which President Donald J. Trump first committed last year when he struck a deal with the Taliban. Under the agreement, the group halted its attacks on U.S. forces and began peace talks with the Afghan government.

Understand the Infrastructure Bill

    • One trillion dollar package passed. The Senate passed a sweeping bipartisan infrastructure package on Aug. 10, capping weeks of intense negotiations and debate over the largest federal investment in the nation’s aging public works system in more than a decade.
    • The final vote. The final tally in the Senate was 69 in favor to 30 against. The legislation, which still must pass the House, would touch nearly every facet of the American economy and fortify the nation’s response to the warming of the planet.
    • Main areas of spending. Overall, the bipartisan plan focuses spending on transportation, utilities and pollution cleanup.
    • Transportation. About $110 billion would go to roads, bridges and other transportation projects; $25 billion for airports; and $66 billion for railways, giving Amtrak the most funding it has received since it was founded in 1971.
    • Utilities. Senators have also included $65 billion meant to connect hard-to-reach rural communities to high-speed internet and help sign up low-income city dwellers who cannot afford it, and $8 billion for Western water infrastructure.
    • Pollution cleanup: Roughly $21 billion would go to cleaning up abandoned wells and mines, and Superfund sites.

Both Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden were in sync with public opinion. Polls have shown for years that a plurality of Americans support withdrawing from Afghanistan, with a majority supporting either a full exit or a smaller U.S. presence.

But as the U.S.-backed Afghan government in Kabul appears more imperiled, some prominent Republicans are increasing their criticism of Mr. Biden.

“Reality was clear to everyone but the very top of the Biden administration,” Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the minority leader, said in remarks on Monday on the Senate floor, as he noted prior warnings that the Taliban might quickly overwhelm the Afghan government’s security forces. “From their bizarre choice of a symbolic Sept. 11th deadline to the absence of any concrete plan, the administration’s decision appears to have rested on wishful thinking and not much else.”

“No one should pretend they’re surprised the Taliban is winning now that we abandoned our Afghan partners,” Senator Ben Sasse, Republican of Nebraska, said in a statement on Tuesday.

But Mr. Sasse also nodded to the complicated political dynamic in which Mr. Biden is delivering on a promise made by Mr. Trump.

“Our troops served America and our allies admirably, but the last administration and the present administration chose to give up the fight,” Mr. Sasse said.

Updated 

Aug. 11, 2021, 9:06 p.m. ET

It may be a consolation to Biden administration officials that Mr. Trump is unlikely to join in the attacks. The former president, who made U.S. troop withdrawals a key campaign theme in the 2020 election, pressed his generals in vain to accelerate the American exit.

And Mr. Trump reiterated his support for leaving Afghanistan as recently as April, when he attacked Representative Liz Cheney, Republican of Wyoming, in a statement as a “warmongering fool” who “wants to stay in the Middle East and Afghanistan for another 19 years, but doesn’t consider the big picture — Russia and China!”

“If Trump is the Republican nominee again, I think it would be hard for him to criticize Biden for executing a plan that Trump put into motion,” said Richard Fontaine, the chief executive of the Center for a New American Security and a former foreign policy adviser to the hawkish Republican senator John McCain.

“Trump didn’t just open the door” to a withdrawal, Mr. Fontaine added. “What he did was force the issue in a way that it hadn’t been forced before.”

But Mr. Fontaine, who opposes the American troop withdrawal, said that major political and security risks remained for Mr. Biden. He argued that domestic support for leaving Afghanistan had never been intense, coming nowhere near the mass demonstrations opposing the Vietnam and Iraq wars.

And he said that the possibility of a Taliban takeover followed by a return to the country of the group’s longtime Qaeda allies would be a huge liability for Mr. Biden.

“Polls show that a majority of Americans want to leave Afghanistan,” Mr. Fontaine said. “But they also show that if you ask Americans about their foreign policy or national security objectives, they will almost always rank preventing terrorist attacks on the United States as No. 1 or 2, and they will rank extracting America from military operations overseas far below that.”

Mr. Trump’s top lieutenants, who frequently lead political attacks on Mr. Biden, are similarly constrained in their ability to turn events in Afghanistan against him.

Mike Pompeo, who as secretary of state attended the signing ceremony in Qatar of Mr. Trump’s deal with Taliban leaders, has repeatedly attacked the Biden administration as weak on foreign policy.

In an appearance this week on Fox News, however, Mr. Pompeo — who is contemplating a 2024 presidential bid — called the troop withdrawal “the right thing to do.”

In language that closely echoed Mr. Biden’s recent remarks, he added: “This is now the Afghans’ fight.”

Some prominent supporters of a military withdrawal from Afghanistan say that Mr. Biden has little to worry about in political terms, noting that his decision enjoyed broad bipartisan support, including from politically diverse veterans’ groups.

“I think that the American public is much more likely to see what’s happening right now, as tragic and worrisome as it is, as ultimately the failure of two decades of war and occupation in Afghanistan,” said Kate Kizer, the policy director of the anti-interventionist group Win Without War.

“It’s important to remember that the reason the public supports a military withdrawal from Afghanistan, as well as from Iraq, is that they think these wars themselves are a mistake and failure,” she added.

Ms. Kizer said she worried that some “members of the foreign policy establishment in Washington took the lesson from Iraq that chaos ensues when the U.S. withdraws” and would be quick to press for renewed American intervention.

Mr. Katulis said he could imagine pressure for an American return to Afghanistan, years after President Barack Obama reluctantly sent troops back to Iraq after the Islamic State began to capture and execute American hostages.

Such a scenario would likely require worst-case outcomes, he said, like the killings of Americans or senior Afghan government officials. (After the Taliban first conquered Kabul in 1996, militants captured the country’s president, Mohammad Najibullah, shot him in the head and hung his beaten body from a tower.)

For now, Mr. Katulis said, “people care more about their bridges and roads getting fixed. Afghanistan right now is out of sight, out of mind.”

Categories
Politics

Biden hosts police chiefs as Democrats attempt to comprise political fallout

Biden hosts police chiefs as Democrats try to contain political fallout

United States President Joe Biden, center, speaks during a meeting in the Roosevelt Room of the White House in Washington, DC, the United States, on Monday, July 12, 2021.

Sarah Silberner | UPI | Bloomberg | Getty Images

President Joe Biden met with U.S. police chiefs and elected officials at the White House on Monday to discuss his plan to combat a sustained nationwide surge in gun violence.

“We recognize that we must come together for the first responsibility of democracy: to protect one another,” said Biden before the meeting. “And that’s what the American people are looking for when it comes to reducing violent crime and gun violence.”

Biden was accompanied to the White House by US Attorney General Merrick Garland, New York City Democratic candidate for mayoral, Eric Adams, head of community intervention, and several mayors and police chiefs from large and medium-sized US cities to develop his gun crime prevention strategy to discuss. which was unveiled last month.

The meeting takes place amid an epidemic of gun violence in several of the country’s largest cities, a growing political issue for Democrats and the central theme of Republican efforts to take over the House of Representatives and the Senate next year.

The Biden administration faces a major hurdle to reconcile the fight against gun violence with continued pressure on police reform in the US following the assassination of George Floyd last year, especially as the president tried to break away from Defund to remove the Police “of the Democrats. Messaging.

During the meeting, Biden encouraged communities to use $ 350 billion from the American Rescue Plan, a $ 1.9 trillion pandemic relief plan passed by Congress in March, to help improve public safety. This includes strengthening law enforcement and developing community services that prevent crime.

A memo sent out by the administration on Monday provided examples of how cities are using the funds.

New York City, for example, suggested using more than $ 44 million to expand community violence intervention models and reinstall an additional 200 police services to perform on-site administrative tasks.

Other cities listed in the memo include Washington, which proposed using $ 59 million to provide seats for police cadets, community services, and financial aid that would help citizens involved in gun violence, again return to the church.

“The American bailouts, which go directly to local governments like ours, allow us not only to have the officials we need, but also the local violence interrupters we need to fund pilot programs that help returning citizens … that Ecosystem to make cities safer, “Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser said in an interview with MSNBC.

The American rescue plan, however, is only part of Biden’s overall strategy to curb violent crime.

The strategy also strengthens federal gun law enforcement by introducing a new “zero tolerance” policy for gun dealers who violate federal gun sales laws, and delegates new powers to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to revoke dealer licenses revoke at first violations.

Other federal efforts the strategy brought with it included the establishment of five new federal strike forces, led by the ATF, to monitor and intercept arms smuggling along several major corridors for the arms trade between major cities.

Federal statistics show a significant increase in homicides nationwide, with an increase of 30% in 2020 compared to the previous year.

Across the country, mayors and police chiefs are struggling to explain what is behind the rise in mass shootings, murders and other violent crimes.

Experts point to a perfect storm of factors that collided during the pandemic. These include a surge in private arms sales, widespread unemployment, and Covid jobs that stay at home, leaving people trapped and with little to do.

At the same time, protests against police killing of blacks may have diverted police resources from traditional policing and undermined public confidence in the prosecution.

However, many of the factors believed to have contributed to the rise in violent crime are difficult to quantify.

And since policing is typically highly localized in America, Biden’s options at the federal level are limited.

– CNBC’s Christina Wilkie contributed to this report.

Categories
Politics

Some Republicans Discover Failure to Grapple With Local weather Change a ‘Political Legal responsibility’

Some Republicans Find Failure to Grapple With Climate Change a ‘Political Liability’

That same week, a group of young Republicans with signs saying “This is what an environmentalist sees” held an initial rally for “conservative” climate action in Miami.

On Capitol Hill, House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy plans to set up a Republican task force on climate change, his staff confirmed. Mr. McCarthy declined an interview request.

And on Wednesday, Mr Curtis plans to announce the formation of the Conservative Climate Committee, which aims to educate his party about global warming and develop policies to counter what the committee calls “radical progressive climate proposals”. So far, 38 members of the Republican House of Representatives have joined, its employees said.

“I hope that any Republican member of this group, when asked about the climate in a community meeting, will be very comfortable talking about it,” said Curtis, adding, “I fear that too often Republicans simply have said “what you don’t like without adding ‘but here are our ideas’.”

These ideas include limited government, market-based policies to curb greenhouse gas emissions as formulated by new conservative think tanks. One of them is C3 Solutions, jointly run by a former advisor to the late Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn, who called global warming “crap”. The organization also recently recruited an energy policy expert from the Heritage Foundation, a conservative group that until recently promoted vocal critics of climate change.

A package of bills presented by Mr. McCarthy on Earth Day advocated carbon capture, an emerging and expensive technology that captures and stores carbon emissions generated by power plants or factories before they are released into the atmosphere. It also encouraged tree planting and the expansion of nuclear power, a carbon-free energy source that many Republicans prefer to wind or solar power.

These measures would do little to reduce fossil fuel emissions, which raise average global temperatures and cause more extreme heat, drought and forest fires; stronger storms; and rapid extinction of plant and animal species. Republicans have not offered any specific emissions reduction targets.

Categories
Politics

James Murdoch spent $100 million to fund political causes throughout 2020 election

James Murdoch spent $100 million to fund political causes during 2020 election

James Murdoch, co-chief operating officer of 21st Century Fox Inc.

Christophe Morin | Bloomberg | Getty Images

James Murdoch, one of billionaire media mogul Rupert Murdoch’s sons, quietly invested $100 million into his nonprofit foundation, which then used a large chunk of the money to fund political groups during the 2020 election cycle.

CNBC found the enormous contribution from James Murdoch and his spouse, Kathryn Murdoch, after reviewing the 501c3 group’s 990 tax return from 2019, which the foundation provided. The Murdochs launched the foundation, called Quadrivium, in 2014.

The $100 million donation marks the couple’s largest known contribution to their foundation or any political effort. It came as James and Kathryn Murdoch were building their own political operation. They have largely backed nonpartisan and Democratic-leaning causes. Kathryn Murdoch has previously criticized former President Donald Trump for his handling of the coronavirus pandemic.

The Murdoch family, headed by Rupert Murdoch, is worth over $22 billion, according to Forbes. The family controls Fox Corp. and News Corp. James’ brother Lachlan Murdoch is the CEO of Fox, which has multiple assets including the conservative Fox News cable network.

It was previously known that James and Kathryn Murdoch backed President Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign. But it was unknown until now just how much they were spending behind the scenes to impact the election. Combined with the millions they gave to campaigns and political action committees, the $100 million donation would make the couple one of the top donors in the last election cycle.

The 2019 tax document shows that of the $100 million given to the foundation, over $25 million went toward grants, including for several political causes. The $25 million also represents the most the Murdoch couple has spent through their foundation on political causes such as fighting climate change and helping people vote.

Yet, according to a person close to the family, that $25 million two years ago was only part of massive Murdoch investments through the 2020 election cycle. This person declined to be named in order to speak freely about the situation.

Since 2019, Quadrivium directed over $43 million to climate-related groups. Over $38 million, including $14 million in Quadrivium donations and $24 million in individual contributions from the couple, went toward election organizations, including those dedicated to protecting voting rights.

The Murdoch couple also donated over $20 million to both Biden’s campaign, groups supporting him and opposing Trump, and organizations dedicated to disrupting online threats and extremism. They also donated to groups dedicated to getting out the vote during the Georgia Senate runoff elections in January. Democrats won both of those seats.

A spokeswoman for James and Kathryn Murdoch declined to comment.

According to the 2019 tax document, the Quadrivium foundation had more than $100 million on hand going into 2020, just as the primary and caucus season was beginning.

The Murdochs’ $100 million donation came the same year James was the CEO of 21s Century Fox before Disney bought the bulk of the company for $71 billion. He was also on the board of the family-owned News Corp. at the time.

CNBC Politics

Read more of CNBC’s politics coverage:

The $100 million contribution to the foundation came in the form of Disney stock, and it was made the same day that the Fox-Disney deal was completed. James Murdoch made a reported $2.1 billion from the transaction.

Murdoch would later step down from the News Corp. board citing “disagreements over certain editorial content published by the Company’s news outlets and certain other strategic decisions.” News Corp. includes The New York Post and Dow Jones, which publishes The Wall Street Journal. Both newspapers have conservative opinion sections.

The Murdochs’ foundation in 2019 donated to several organizations it had supported in the past, although nonprofits received significantly more funds that year than other groups. Quadrivium supports issue-based groups that fight against climate change and try to improve access to voting.

The Murdochs’ support for voting rights groups comes as Republicans in states such as Georgia and Texas are passing laws that critics say restrict people ability to vote. James Murdoch was one of hundreds of executives and corporations that signed a public statement opposing “any discriminatory legislation or measures that restrict or prevent any eligible voter from having an equal and fair opportunity to cast a ballot.”

Democracy Works Inc., a nonprofit that promotes itself as having tools to help people register to vote, received $2.5 million from the Murdoch-run foundation.

The education fund for Represent.Us, which claims to be nonpartisan and says it works to “pass powerful state and local laws that fix our broken elections and stop political bribery,” saw $2 million from the Murdochs in 2019. The group includes a cultural council of celebrities, including J.J. Abrams, Michael Douglas and Jennifer Lawrence. The Represent.Us fund, according to its website, “made grants to Represent.Us to support public education activities and dedicated cross-partisan outreach activities.”

The Brennan Center for Justice, which also calls itself nonpartisan, saw $1 million from the Murdochs two years ago. The Brennan Center has become a resource for voters and reporters to keep up on various bills that the organization deems restrictive. The group’s website notes that state legislatures have introduced over 380 bills in 48 states that are considered restrictive.

As for fighting climate change, Kathryn Murdoch has been a trustee at the Environmental Defense Fund for years. That organization saw $11 million in 2019 from Quadrivium.

Categories
Politics

Klobuchar to Suggest Ban on Prechecked Containers in Political Donations

Klobuchar to Propose Ban on Prechecked Boxes in Political Donations

Senate committee chairman Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota will enact legislation Monday banning political campaigns from routing online donors to recurring donations by default. This practice has attracted criticism for tricking backers into giving inadvertent gifts, sometimes in the thousands of dollars in total.

The planned introduction of the law follows a non-partisan recommendation by the Bundestag Electoral Commission that Congress should restrict the practice of pre-checking boxes that automatically encourage donors to make repeated donations. The FEC unanimously voted 6-0 in favor of recommending the change after a New York Times investigation found that contributors’ refunds and fraud claims against former President Donald J. Trump rose.

Ms. Klobuchar, who heads the rule committee that oversees the administration of the federal elections, calls the draft law the RECUR law to “save every participant from unwanted repetitions”. She currently has only Democratic co-sponsors, including Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, who is the second-largest Democrat in the Senate leadership and chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

But Ms. Klobuchar said she was confident she could attract Republican co-sponsors after the FEC’s three Republican commissioners joined the Democrats in recommending the ban on the practice – a rare moment of agreement at an agency, often driven by a party-political deadlock is defined.

“We have to make sure that we encourage people who can only make small contributions so that their voices are heard but not exploited,” said Ms. Klobuchar in an interview.

In a statement, Mr Durbin said he was “proud” to introduce the bill with Ms. Klobuchar. “In a bipartisan recommendation, the Bundestag Electoral Commission called on Congress to take action to stop the fundraising practices that were outrageously used by the Trump campaign and that led contributors to recurring payments,” he said.

The Times investigation found that Mr. Trump’s cash shortage political operation had his online employees become unintentional repeat donors by checking a box to withdraw additional donations every week last fall. Their inquiries also included a second pre-checked box labeled a “money bomb”. Over time, the campaign added text, sometimes in bold or capital letters, that obscured the opt-out language. Soon banks and credit card companies saw a flurry of fraud complaints.

Overall, the Trump operation with the Republican Party reimbursed donors who donated through the online processing site WinRed $ 122.7 million – more than 10 percent of each dollar raised. In contrast, the online reimbursement rate for President Biden’s campaign with the party at ActBlue, the corresponding Democratic processing agency, was 2.2 percent.

While the practice of pre-checking boxes is now far more common among Republicans, Democrats have previously used the tactic as well. Some prominent Democratic Party committees continue to use it. And Mr Trump continued the practice in his post-presidency period.

Ms. Klobuchar’s legislation would require all political committees to be given “consent” to receive donations, and it specifically states that pre-checked boxes do not meet this requirement.

“If you have experience and look at this, you know that it is just pure fraud,” said Ms. Klobuchar of the pre-examination practice, “and it is not something that should be allowed in the future.”

Ms. Klobuchar said the FEC’s unanimous vote was “very helpful” in providing impetus for their legislation. This is a stand-alone bilateral bill, but it could be incorporated into other election-related laws. The Democrats are pushing for legislation that would result in a major overhaul of the elections, but the bill’s prospects remain bleak.

Categories
Health

Political ideology is actual cause folks stay unvaccinated, says Dr. Peter Hotez

Pfizer and BioNTech begin the process of seeking full U.S. approval for their Covid vaccine

Dr. Peter Hotez argued that the real reason some Americans don’t get vaccinated is because of their political ideology.

“They unfortunately tie their political loyalty to the political right. And we see this in the bottom ten states in terms of vaccination rates,” which is half the coverage in the top ten states, said Hotez, co-director of the Center for Vaccine Development at Texas Children’s Hospital.

The ten states with the highest rate of residents receiving at least one dose of Covid-19 vaccine also voted for President Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election. Polls show that more than 40% of Republicans don’t plan to be vaccinated.

Hotez told CNBC’s The News with Shepard Smith that regional summer flare-ups in states with lower vaccination rates could lead the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to urge Americans to wear masks again.

The CDC on Thursday relaxed mask guidelines for the US, saying that fully vaccinated people no longer need to wear a face mask or stay 6 feet away from others in most environments, whether outdoors or indoors.

The updated guidelines have received widespread criticism, but Hotez said this was because the new guidelines arrived earlier than expected.

“I was expecting it sometime in June, so it’s a couple of weeks early,” said Hoetz. “I think it will be fine. But I think the shops, the corporations and the universities need a little time to get information and have internal discussions.”

Categories
Politics

Biden pressured to launch political appointees’ ethics agreements

Biden pressured to release political appointees' ethics agreements

U.S. President Joe Biden speaks on April 21, 2021 in the South Court Auditorium of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington, DC, on the COVID-19 response and vaccination status.

Alex Wong | Getty Images

Several watchdog and activist groups are pressuring President Joe Biden to publicly publish ethics agreements signed by political officials in his administration that are not subject to Senate endorsement.

In a letter to Biden sent exclusively to CNBC on Thursday, over a dozen organizations asked the administration to publish the agreements reached by its political advisers and others.

The groups sent the letter the day after CNBC reported that Jeff Ricchetti, the brother of Steve Ricchetti, White House adviser in Biden, hired the White House on behalf of health companies this year.

These political officers are not required to make their ethics agreements public. This may also include references to rejection of certain political matters that may affect previous customers or business relationships.

“You have an opportunity to remedy this lack of transparency immediately by demanding that every White House employee, in addition to other high-level political figures across the executive branch, agree to have their ethical documents made public. We, the undersigned, demand On you to make this commitment immediately, “the letter said.

Groups that have signed the letter include the Revolving Door Project, the Government Accountability Project, and the Jacobs Institute of Women’s Health.

The letter comes after several reports that show that many of Biden’s non-Senate advisors have been paid millions in their previous jobs and that some have connections with Wall Street and Big Tech.