Categories
Politics

Black Lives Matter leaders met with Biden White Home officers on police reform

Protesters gather near the White House before a group attempted to tear down the statue of Andrew Jackson in Lafayette Square on June 22, 2020 in Washington, DC.

Drew Angerer | Getty Images

Black Lives Matter leaders met with members of President Joe Biden’s team as the White House and lawmakers negotiated the details of a possible police reform deal.

In a statement first broadcast to CNBC, Black Lives Matter said the leaders recently met with White House officials to discuss their agenda. The activist group is not satisfied with what has happened since the discussion, namely with proposals to give police departments more money.

“Black Lives Matter executives met with White House officials earlier this year to discuss our policy agenda, and while we appreciate the opportunity to speak with them, we are surprised by their lack of progress on issues that are black-minded People, the same communities, matter. ” who supported Biden-Harris so much in last year’s election, “the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation told CNBC in an email on Tuesday.

It is unclear when the meeting took place or which officials from both sides attended the meeting. Politico reported in May that the BLM had yet to meet with the Biden White House. The Washington Post reported late last year that Patrisse Cullors, a co-founder of Black Lives Matter, wrote a letter to Biden and Kamala Harris about a possible meeting.

Black Lives Matter press representatives responded to requests for additional comments. The White House has not responded to requests for comment.

Rep. Karen Bass, D-Calif., One of the lawmakers working on police reform, told NBC News that the negotiations had encountered some obstacles due to power struggles between law enforcement groups.

“I worry that it might prevent us from coming to an agreement. And you know what a really sad statement I think about the profession that they would actually prevent reforms and refuse to modernize,” she said.

The meeting and its aftermath suggest that Black Lives Matter and the Biden team are heading for a stalemate. It’s also a sign that Black Lives Matter may not have as much impact at the Biden White House as the group hoped.

Black Lives Matter, created after George Zimmerman was acquitted in 2013 in the murder of the unarmed black teen Trayvon Martin, is calling for a reduction in police spending. For years the group has inspired and organized large protests against brutality against blacks.

Last year, Black Lives Matter’s group and motto gained popularity and relevance after police murdered George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and other black Americans as protests erupted across the country.

Biden won the 2020 election with the overwhelming support of black voters.

The president recently said that states could raise $ 350 billion in stimulus funds to bolster police forces. Biden has also announced a series of measures his government is taking to curb the rise in crime and gun violence.

This didn’t go well with Black Lives Matter or activists calling for the defunding of police departments.

“And now we see the president arguing for increased spending on the police force instead of investing in housing, education, climate protection and health care,” Black Lives Matter said in a statement to CNBC. “This is no time to go back to the dangerous scare days of the 1990s when more police officers were deployed in our neighborhoods rather than services that improve lives and keep black communities safe.”

Categories
World News

G7 nations attain historic deal on world tax reform

British Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak (from left), US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva and Canada’s Treasury Secretary Chrystia Freeland chatting on the first day of the Seven Treasury Ministers’ meeting at Lancaster House in London on June 4, 2021.

Stefan Rousseau | AFP | Getty Images

LONDON – Treasury ministers of the most advanced economies, known as the Group of Seven, have backed a US proposal requiring companies around the world to pay at least 15% corporate income tax.

“Today, after years of discussion, the finance ministers of the G-7 reached a historic agreement to reform the global tax system, make it fit for the global digital age – and above all to ensure that it is fair to the right companies paying the right taxes in the right places, “said UK Treasury Secretary Rishi Sunak in a video statement on Saturday.

When completed, it would represent a major development in global taxation. The G-7 members, which include Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK and the US, will meet for a summit next week in Cornwall, UK.

“We are committed to finding an equitable solution to the allocation of tax rights, with market countries being granted tax rights on at least 20% of profits that exceed a 10% margin for the largest and most profitable multinational corporations,” said one Statement by the G -7 finance ministers.

“We will ensure adequate coordination between the application of the new international tax rules and the elimination of all taxes on digital services and other relevant similar measures for all businesses,” it said.

US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, who is in London for the face-to-face meeting, hailed the move as significant and unprecedented.

“This global minimum tax would end the race to the bottom in corporate taxation and ensure fairness for the middle class and working population in the US and around the world,” she tweeted.

President Joe Biden and his administration originally proposed a minimum global tax rate of 21% to end a race to the bottom between different countries in attracting international businesses. However, after tough negotiations, a compromise was reached to set the bar at 15%.

A global deal in this area would be good news for countries on budget struggling to rebuild their economies after the coronavirus crisis.

But Biden’s idea was not received with the same enthusiasm around the world. Britain, for example, did not immediately support the proposal.

US President Joe Biden speaks at a meeting with a bipartisan group of Congressmen.

Swimming pool | Getty Images News | Getty Images

The issue can also be controversial within the European Union, where different member states levy different corporate tax rates and thereby attract well-known companies. Ireland’s tax rate, for example, is 12.5%, while France’s can be up to 31%.

In an April speech, Irish Treasury Secretary Paschal Donohoe said smaller nations should have lower tax rates because they don’t have the same scalability as larger economies, the Guardian reported.

The world’s most powerful economies have been arguing over taxation for some time, especially amid plans to tax digital giants more heavily.

Under former President Donald Trump, the United States vehemently opposed digital tax initiatives in various countries and threatened to impose trade tariffs on countries that were planning to tax US technology companies.

Some large companies around the world responded positively to the agreement on Saturday. Nick Clegg, Facebook’s vice president of global affairs, tweeted that the company welcomed the G-7 tax regime.

“We want the international tax reform process to be successful, and we recognize that this could mean Facebook pays more taxes in other places,” Clegg wrote.

Google spokesman Jose Castaneda told CNBC in a statement that the company supports efforts to update international tax rules. “We hope that countries will continue to work together to ensure that a balanced and lasting deal is reached soon,” he said.

Categories
Politics

Congress to carry police reform laws discuss as George Floyd Act stalls

Representative Karen Bass, a California Democrat and Chair of the Democratic Black Caucus, speaks during an event with members of the Democratic Caucus on the steps of the Eastern Front of the U.S. Capitol prior to a vote on the George Floyd Justice in the Policing Act of 2020 in Washington, DC, on Thursday June 25, 2020.

Stefani Reynolds | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Legislators from both parties took part in police reform talks Thursday as Congress attempted to draft a bill that can get through a tightly-knit Capitol.

Eight senators and officials discussed changes in policing, a congressional assistant confirmed to CNBC. Negotiations continued for weeks, with Sens. Tim Scott, RS.C., Cory Booker, DN.J., and Rep. Karen Bass, D-Calif., Along with members of the non-partisan House Problem Solvers Caucus, another Congress, involved adjutant who is familiar with the matter said.

Bass is the lead author of the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, which the Democratic House passed for the second time last year and in March. The Republicans reject the bill, which has stalled in a Senate split between the party between 50 and 50.

Scott led a Republican proposal that the Democrats blocked in the Senate last year, at the time it was controlled by the GOP. Since bills require 60 votes to overcome a filibuster, the legislation needs to have at least some support from both parties in the chamber.

CNBC policy

Read more about CNBC’s political coverage:

It’s unclear what could win support from Democrats and Republicans, who have different views on how far the federal government should go to root out violence against black Americans and abuse of police power. When asked Thursday when the House can vote on a police bill, spokeswoman Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. Said, “We will bring it to the ground when we are ready.”

“And we’ll be ready when we have a good, strong bipartisan bill,” she told reporters. “And that’s up to the Senate and then we’ll have it in the house. Because it’ll be a different bill.”

Scott, Booker and Bass were due to join the talks Thursday afternoon, NBC News reported. Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Lindsey Graham, RS.C., and Representatives Josh Gottheimer, DN.J., Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., And Pete Stauber, R-Minn., Were also set to attend , according to NBC.

Civil rights attorney Benjamin Crump, George Floyd’s brother Philonise, and other family members of victims of police violence met separately with Scott and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, DN.Y.

George Floyd, a black man, died in May after former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin kneeled on his neck for about nine minutes. Chauvin was convicted of second degree murder, third degree murder, and second degree manslaughter earlier this month.

Floyd’s death, along with the police shots of Breonna Taylor, a black woman in Louisville, Kentucky, last year sparked the biggest racial justice and police reform outcry in the United States in decades. During his first joint address to Congress on Wednesday night, President Joe Biden urged lawmakers to pass a police bill by the first anniversary of Floyd’s death next month.

“The country supports this reform and Congress should act,” said the president. He supported the legislation passed by the House.

The Democrat-approved bill aims to ban chokeholds, carotid holds, and no-knock warrants at the federal level, and tie state and local police funding to those departments that preclude the practices. The aim is to weaken the so-called qualified immunity, which protects civil servants from many civil lawsuits, and to make it easier for the police to prosecute.

Scott’s plan last year included limited bans on chokeholds and no-knock warrants. His then party resisted efforts to change the rules on qualified immunity. Democrats called his bill insufficient.

In the past few weeks, the senator has reportedly reached a compromise that would make departments, not individual officials, the subject of civil lawsuits.

Neither the Democratic nor the Republican proposals would cut police funding. Activists and many progressive lawmakers have been calling for some money to be diverted from law enforcement to social services since Floyd’s death.

Many large US cities have either reformed police practices or cut police resources over the past year.

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

Categories
Politics

Activists Query Whether or not Police Reform Payments Are Sufficient

In February, Illinois enacted a law that rewrote many of the state’s rules of policing, and mandated that officers wear body cameras. In March, New York City moved to make it easier for citizens to sue officers. This month, the Maryland legislature — which decades ago became the first to adopt a Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights — became the first to do away with it.

In recent months, state and city lawmakers across the country have seized on a push for reform prompted by outrage at the killing of George Floyd last May, passing legislation that has stripped the police of some hard-fought protections won over the past half-century.

“Police unions in the United States are pretty much playing defense at the moment,” said Brian Marvel, a San Diego officer and the president of California’s largest law enforcement labor organization. “You have groups of people that are looking for change — and some groups are looking for radical change.”

Over 30 states have passed more than 140 new police oversight and reform laws, according to a New York Times analysis of data from the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Amber Widgery, a policy expert at the organization, said many of the laws — restricting the use of force, overhauling disciplinary systems, installing more civilian oversight and requiring transparency around misconduct cases — give states far more influence over policing practices that have typically been left to local jurisdictions.

“We’re seeing the creation of really strong, centralized state guidance that sets a baseline for police accountability, behavior and standards” for all departments, she said.

It’s a remarkable, nationwide and in some places bipartisan movement that flies directly counter to years of deference to the police and their powerful unions. But the laws, and new rules adopted by police departments across the country, are not enough to satisfy demands by Black Lives Matter and other activists who are pushing for wholesale reforms, cultural shifts and cutbacks at law enforcement agencies.

“The focus has been so heavily on what do we do after harm has already been committed — after the police have already engaged in misconduct — and far less focused on how do we stop this from the beginning,” said Paige Fernandez, an advocate at the American Civil Liberties Union.

While Derek Chauvin, the Minneapolis officer accused of murdering Mr. Floyd, was on trial last week, episodes in Virginia, Minnesota and Illinois — which have all enacted reforms — underscored how the new laws would not always prevent traumatic outcomes.

A police officer in Virginia was seen on video pointing a gun at a Black Army lieutenant and pepper-spraying him during a traffic stop. A veteran officer in Minnesota fatally shot 20-year-old Daunte Wright, a Black man, after pulling him over. And video recordings showed a Chicago officer chasing and fatally firing at 13-year-old Adam Toledo, a Latino, after he appeared to toss aside a gun while obeying commands to raise his hands. The events ignited fresh protests and more questions about why police interventions escalated into deaths of people of color.

“People aren’t necessarily happy with the change they’re seeing, because the same thing keeps happening,” said Stevante Clark, whose brother Stephon was killed by the Sacramento police in 2018. California enacted a law named after his brother that raised the standard for using lethal force, but Mr. Clark sees a need for the federal government to impose national regulations.

House Democrats recently passed a sweeping police bill designed to address racial discrimination and excessive use of force, but it lacks the Republican support needed in the Senate. President Biden has also fallen short on a campaign promise to establish an oversight commission during his first 100 days in office.

Nearly 1,000 people have been shot and killed by the police annually in recent years, according to data from The Washington Post, which also shows that officers fatally shot Black and Hispanic people at a much higher rate by population than whites.

Some activists have cheered new laws that could curb police misconduct, mainly in states and cities controlled by Democrats. But they also fear that those changes could be offset in Republican jurisdictions that are proposing to expand police protections or impose harsher penalties for protest-related activities like blocking highways and defacing public property.

Police unions, along with many Republican lawmakers, have resisted some of the reform efforts, arguing that they will imperil public safety. But there have been some signs of bipartisanship.

In Colorado, Republicans joined with Democrats, who control the statehouse, to pass a sweeping bill less than a month after Mr. Floyd’s death. The law banned chokeholds, required officers to intervene if they witnessed excessive force and mandated body cameras statewide within three years, among other provisions. The Colorado legislature became the first to eliminate immunity from civil rights accusations, allowing officers to face claims in state court.

John Cooke, a Republican state senator and former Colorado county sheriff, worked with Democrats to revise their proposals. Officials, he said, realized that “we need to do something and we need to do it now.”

Republican-led states including Iowa and Utah have implemented changes, too, banning or restricting chokeholds, among other measures. But Iowa’s Republican-controlled House recently passed a “Back the Blue” bill that Black lawmakers said could unfairly affect peaceful protesters and amounted to “retaliation” against Democrats.

In Maryland, the Democratic-controlled legislature overrode a veto by the state’s Republican governor to pass a sweeping reform package. Outlining his objections, Gov. Larry Hogan said the laws would be damaging to “police recruitment and retention, posing significant risks to public safety.”

Importantly, the package erases the Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights in the state, a landmark achievement for police unions in the 1970s. Decades ago, similar protections spread across the country in union contracts and local laws, but its passage in Maryland gave broad protections to every department at once.

Critics said the policing bill of rights reduced accountability: Officers could wait days before being questioned about an allegation; only fellow officers could conduct interrogations; some complaints could be expunged from an officer’s file after a few years.

“It is fitting that Maryland is the first state to repeal it as they opened this Pandora’s box in the first place,” said Caylin Young, public policy director at the A.C.L.U. of Maryland.

Maryland’s new laws contain a range of provisions to rein in policing: a body-camera requirement for officers regularly interacting with the public, prison sentences of up to 10 years for violations of the state’s use-of-force policy, and restrictions on so-called no-knock warrants. (Those warrants drew national attention last year when the police in Louisville, Ky., fatally shot Breonna Taylor, an unarmed emergency medical technician, after smashing through her apartment door during a botched drug raid. Louisville banned the warrants last summer, and state lawmakers limited their use this month).

Another Maryland law, named after Anton Black, requires disclosure of information about police misconduct investigations. The 19-year-old died in 2018 after officers pinned him to the ground following a struggle. (Prosecutors did not pursue charges, but his family has sued in federal court.) La Toya Holley, Mr. Black’s sister, said that the new laws would help but that a broader shift in policing was needed.

“That culture — that mentality — has to do a complete 180 if we want to enact change,” she said. “And it has to start in-house with the police departments, the captains, the chiefs and also the boards that are actually certifying these officers.”

Maryland’s new standards follow a decision by the Baltimore state’s attorney, Marilyn Mosby, to stop prosecuting minor crimes like prostitution and drug possession. “When we criminalize these minor offenses that have nothing to do with public safety, we expose people to needless interaction with law enforcement that, for Black people in this country, can often lead to a death sentence,” Ms. Mosby told the Baltimore City Council last week.

Other proposals to reduce police interventions have caught on elsewhere. In February, Berkeley, Calif., barred officers from pulling over motorists for not wearing a seatbelt, misuse of high-beam headlights or expired registrations. The moves were in part based on research showing that Black motorists in the city were about six times more likely to be pulled over than white motorists were, although the police union raised concerns that the reforms created “significant safety consequences for citizens and officers.”

In Virginia, a law went into effect last month limiting the minor traffic violations for which officers should stop vehicles. It also prohibits officers from conducting searches solely based on smelling marijuana.

“As a Black woman who understands there’s been a disproportionate abuse of Black and brown people by police officers, we had to do something to prevent these injuries and killings of people of color,” said L. Louise Lucas, a Democratic state senator from Virginia, who proposed the bill and spoke of her own mistreatment by law enforcement. “This is an age-old story for Black people,” she added.

Many of the new rules adopted by states and cities have similarities, focusing on the use of force or accountability after the fact. Two of the country’s largest states, California and New York, have been at the forefront of that push — and some cities have taken more dramatic steps.

Los Angeles, Oakland and San Francisco, for example, last year cut their police department budgets. Activists have called for reducing police funding and diverting some of that money to mental health initiatives and social services. But those demands have often met with resistance, not only from law enforcement but also from Black residents and officials who fear that crime would surge.

In fact, in Oakland, some of those cuts were reversed after a spike in murders and attacks on Asian-Americans.

“I understand the conversation about defunding and reimagining the police, but these are real people dying,” said Sgt. Barry Donelan, the head of the Oakland police union. The city has had over 40 homicides so far this year compared with 13 at the same time last year.

Immediately after Mr. Floyd’s death, the Minneapolis City Council voted to disband its police force, only to be overruled by a city charter commission.

Last year, Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York ordered nearly 500 local jurisdictions, including New York City, to devise plans to “reinvent and modernize” policing in their communities, threatening to withhold funding if they failed to do so.

The governor has spoken of the need to “resolve the tension” between police and communities. “You don’t have the option of ending the police, and you don’t have the option of continuing with distrust of the police,” he said on Wednesday to reporters. “So the relationship has to be repaired.”

DeRay Mckesson, an activist and podcast host who helped found Campaign Zero, an initiative to end police violence, said that he saw progress on state and local legislation, especially around the use of force, but that there was plenty of unfinished business around accountability and how the police operate. “These issues will have to be things that we work on every year until we finish,” he said.

Mr. Mckesson, whose organization tracks legislative activity and works with local leaders on policy, said that unions had maintained their robust lobbying presence but that key lawmakers had become less deferential to them in places like Maryland.

“They were like, ‘We know what’s right and we won’t be swayed by the police just saying it’s going to cause fear,’” he said.

The police remain eager to be heard. “Most of our members across the country are finding that you have state legislatures that are including law enforcement in on the discussion,” said Patrick Yoes, the national president of the Fraternal Order of Police, which represents hundreds of thousands of officers. “Then you have those that are pretty much freezing them out and have already made up their mind about the direction they’re going — because they believe that this reform somehow is going to save the day.”

Police advocates point to statistics showing increases in violent crimes as evidence that early reforms are backfiring. Nationally, murder rates increased significantly last year, according to preliminary F.B.I. data released last month, though experts have cited a number of possible factors that could be at work, including the pandemic. Excluding law enforcement from the discussions is leading to bad policy, the advocates say.

“They’ve been largely shut out of this conversation, which I don’t think is a good thing because they have experience and knowledge,” said Rafael A. Mangual, a senior fellow at the conservative-leaning Manhattan Institute. “And I think part of that is just a reflection of the moment that we’re in.”

For Carmen Best, who recently retired as police chief in Seattle, cultural changes in policing will come with clear standards and consequences for misconduct. “People will think twice because they know there are repercussions,” she said.

To get there, she said, there needs to be frank discussion about why “horrific things” sometimes happen to minorities when they interact with the police, including Adam Toledo, whose killing by a Chicago police officer is under investigation.

“At the end of the day, we all watched a 13-year-old die,” she said. “That’s hard on everybody.”

Reporting was contributed by Luis Ferré-Sadurní, Thomas Fuller, Jesus Jiménez, Christina Morales and Katie Rogers.

Categories
Politics

Biden calls on Congress to reform gun legal guidelines on anniversary of Parkland capturing

President Joe Biden speaks as he meets with senators from both parties at the White House on February 11, 2021.

Doug Mills-Pool / Getty Images

President Joe Biden on Sunday called on Congress to tighten gun laws on the third anniversary of the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

“Today as we mourn with the Parkland community, we mourn all those who lost loved ones to gun violence,” Biden said in a statement released by the White House.

The president called for several provisions, including background checks of all arms sales, a ban on offensive weapons and high-capacity magazines, and the lifting of immunity from arms manufacturers.

“This government will not wait for the next mass shootings to respond to this call. We will take steps to end our gun violence epidemic and make our schools and communities safer,” said Biden. “We owe it to everyone we have lost and everyone who has been left behind to grieve in order to change something.”

Fourteen students and three staff were killed in the Parkland shootings. The student survivors started the March for Our life movement in support of the gun legislation.

Spokeswoman Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Said in a statement on Sunday that Congress would work with the Biden administration to pass two background check laws. The House passed the bipartisan background check law and the extended background check law during the last Congress.

“On this solemn remembrance, Democrats join the American people in renewing our commitment to our unfinished work and to ensure that no family or community is forced to endure the pain of gun violence,” Pelosi said. “We will not rest until all Americans, in schools, at work, in places of worship, and in our communities are safe once and for all.”

Susan Rice, chair of the White House Home Affairs Council, and Cedric Richmond, a senior adviser to Biden, hosted a virtual meeting with leaders of gun violence prevention advocacy groups last week to discuss how gun violence can be reduced.

Categories
Politics

Lindsey Graham, Dick Durbin unveil newest immigration reform invoice

Protesters hold illuminated signs during a rally supporting the DACA or the Dream Act outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC on January 18, 2018.

Zach Gibson | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., And Lindsey Graham, RS.C., unveiled the latest version of the Dream Act Thursday, which is part of a new push to reform immigration.

The proposed legislation, first introduced in 2001, would give some young undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children the opportunity to pursue an avenue of American citizenship.

The reintroduction comes as President Joe Biden begins rolling out his immigration reform agenda, aiming to reverse many of President Donald Trump’s immigration policies.

In 2012, President Barack Obama created the Deferred Action on the Arrivals of Children program after the Dream Bill was not passed in Congress on several occasions.

DACA protects young undocumented immigrants who would be affected by the dream law from deportation. Politics does not offer a route to citizenship.

Trump tried to end the DACA during his presidency, but the Supreme Court blocked his administration’s attempt in June. On January 20, Biden signed an ordinance to maintain the DACA.

“It is clear that only laws passed by Congress can give dreamers the chance to earn their way to American citizenship,” Durbin said in a statement Thursday.

The Dream Act would give some young undocumented immigrants legal permanent residence and eventually American citizenship if they meet certain criteria, including completing high school or earning a GED. Higher education, work or military service, and passing background checks.

The 2021 Dream Act is identical to the versions Durbin and Graham introduced in the last two sessions of Congress, the Senators say.

Graham said in a statement Thursday that he would like to pass the Dream Bill as part of a comprehensive immigration package rather than as a standalone bill.

“I believe it will be a starting point for us to find bipartisan breakthroughs that will bring relief to dreamers and also fix a broken immigration system,” said Graham.

In the last 15 years, Congress has not passed a comprehensive immigration law.

According to a survey by the June Pew Research Center, about three-quarters of Americans support the granting of permanent legal status to undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as children.