Lawsuit challenges new Alabama congressional districts
Two lawsuits are challenging Alabama’s newly approved congressional map, arguing it unlawfully dilutes the voting strength of African Americans with one majority-minority district out of seven. An organization announced a lawsuit Thursday on the same day that Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey signed the new congressional, legislative, and school board districts into law. A previously filed lawsuit by two state senators and several voters was also updated Thursday to challenge the new map. Alabama lawmakers this week approved a congressional map expected to maintain the current partisan balance: the seven-member congressional delegation with six Republicans elected from heavily white districts and one Democrat elected from the only majority-white district. Alabama has a population that is about 26% Black. A lawsuit backed by an organization aligned with a Democratic group says the plan violates the Voting Rights Act “because it strategically cracks and packs Alabama’s Black communities, diluting Black voting strength and confining Black voting power to one majority-Black district.” The lawsuit was supported by the National Redistricting Foundation, a nonprofit affiliate of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, which is led by Eric Holder, who was attorney general under President Barack Obama. It is the second lawsuit filed over the issue. A pending lawsuit filed by two lawmakers and four voters argues the state should have two districts, where Black voters might have an opportunity “to elect candidates of their choice.” “Today, the Voting Rights Act no longer requires maintenance of a majority-black Congressional District in Alabama. To the contrary, the state cannot rely on the Voting Rights Act to justify splitting county boundaries when Districts drawn without racial gerrymandering provide Black voters constituting less than a majority, combined with reliably supportive white voters, an opportunity to elect candidates of their choice,” lawyers wrote in an amended complaint. During the recent special session, Republicans voted down Democratic efforts to create one swing congressional district with a significant centered in Birmingham that would be competitive between Republicans and Democrats. The swing district would have a population that is 40% Black. Republicans have maintained the approved maps comply with the Voting Rights Act and related court rulings. “I’m ready to defend these maps in court,” said Republican Sen. Jim McClendon, the co-chairman of the redistricting committee. McClendon argued the maps could not be drawn with two majority Black districts Republican Rep. Chris Pringle, the other co-chair of the redistricting committee, argued that having two districts — where African Americans were a significant portion of the population but under 50% — could do the opposite of what Democrats want by making them more competitive for Republicans. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Colin Powell, exemplary general stained by Iraq claims, dies
Colin Powell, who served Democratic and Republican presidents in war and peace but whose sterling reputation was forever stained when he went before the U.N. and made faulty claims to justify the U.S. war in Iraq, has died of COVID-19 complications. He was 84. A veteran of the Vietnam War, Powell rose to the rank of four-star general and in 1989 became the first Black chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In that role, he oversaw the U.S. invasion of Panama and later the U.S. invasion of Kuwait to oust the Iraqi army in 1991. But his legacy was marred when, in 2003, he went before the U.N. Security Council as secretary of state and made the case for the U.S. war against Iraq at a moment of great international skepticism. He cited faulty information claiming Saddam Hussein had secretly stashed away weapons of mass destruction. Iraq’s claims that it had no such weapons represented “a web of lies,” he told the world body. In announcing his death on social media, Powell’s family said he had been fully vaccinated. “We have lost a remarkable and loving husband, father and grandfather, and a great American,” the family said. Powell had been treated at Walter Reed National Medical Center in Bethesda, Maryland. Powell was the first American official to publicly lay the blame for the 9/11 terrorist attacks on Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaida network and made a lightning trip to Pakistan in October 2001 to demand that then-Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf cooperate with the United States in going after the Afghanistan-based group, which also had a presence in Pakistan, where bin Laden was later killed. As President George W. Bush’s first secretary of state, Powell led a State Department that was dubious of the military and intelligence communities’ conviction that Saddam Hussein possessed or was developing weapons of mass destruction. And yet, despite his reservations, he presented the administration’s case that Saddam indeed posed a major regional and global threat in a speech to the U.N. Security Council in the run-up to the war. That speech, replete with his display of a vial of what he said could have been a biological weapon, was later derided as a low-point in Powell’s career, although he had removed some elements that he deemed to have been based on poor intelligence assessments. Bush said Monday that he and former first lady Laura Bush were “deeply saddened” by Powell’s death. “He was a great public servant” and “widely respected at home and abroad,” Bush said. “And most important, Colin was a family man and a friend. Laura and I send Alma and their children our sincere condolences as they remember the life of a great man.” Powell rose to national prominence under Republican presidents and considered a presidential bid of his own but ultimately moved away from the party. He endorsed Democrats in the last four presidential elections, starting with former President Barack Obama. He emerged as a vocal Donald Trump critic in recent years, describing Trump as “a national disgrace” who should have been removed from office through impeachment. Following the Jan. 6 storming of the U.S. Capitol, Powell said he no longer considered himself a Republican. Powell rose from a childhood in a fraying New York neighborhood to become the nation’s chief diplomat. “Mine is the story of a black kid of no early promise from an immigrant family of limited means who was raised in the South Bronx,” he wrote in his 1995 autobiography “My American Journey.” At City College, Powell discovered the ROTC. When he put on his first uniform, “I liked what I saw,” he wrote. He joined the Army, and in 1962 he was one of more than 16,000 military advisers sent to South Vietnam by President John F. Kennedy. A series of promotions led to the Pentagon and assignment as a military assistant to Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger, who became his unofficial sponsor. He later became commander of the Army’s 5th Corps in Germany and later was national security assistant to President Ronald Reagan. During his term as Joint Chiefs chairman, his approach to war became known as the Powell Doctrine, which held that the United States should only commit forces in a conflict if it has clear and achievable objectives with public support, sufficient firepower, and a strategy for ending the war. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, a retired Army general, said the news of Powell’s death left “a hole in my heart.” “The world lost one of the greatest leaders that we have ever witnessed,” Austin said while traveling in Europe. “Alma lost a great husband, and the family lost a tremendous father, and I lost a tremendous personal friend and mentor. He has been my mentor for a number of years. He always made time for me, and I can always go to him with tough issues; he always had great counsel.” Powell’s appearances at the United Nations as secretary of state, including his Iraq speech, were often accompanied by fond reminiscing of his childhood in the city, where he grew up the child of Jamaican immigrants who got one of his first jobs at the Pepsi-Cola bottling plant directly across the East River from the U.N. headquarters. A fan of calypso music, Powell was the subject of criticism from, among others, singing legend Harry Belafonte, who likened Powell to a “house slave” for going along with the decision to invade Iraq. Powell declined to get into a public spat with Belafonte but made it known that he was not a fan and much preferred the Trinidadian calypso star, the “Mighty Sparrow.” Powell maintained, in a 2012 interview with The Associated Press, that on balance, U.S. succeeded in Iraq. “I think we had a lot of successes,” Powell said. “Iraq’s terrible dictator is gone.” Saddam was captured by U.S. forces while hiding out in northern Iraq in December 2003 and later executed by the Iraqi government. But the insurgency grew, and the war dragged on far
House sends debt limit hike to Joe Biden, staving off default
The House has approved a short-term increase to the nation’s debt limit, ensuring the federal government can continue fully paying its bills into December and temporarily averting an unprecedented default that would have decimated the economy. The $480 billion increase in the country’s borrowing ceiling cleared the Senate last week on a party-line vote. The House approved it Tuesday so President Joe Biden can sign it into law this week. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen had warned that steps to stave off a default on the country’s debts would be exhausted by Monday, and from that point, the department would soon be unable to fully meet the government’s financial obligations. A default would have immense fallout on global financial markets built upon the bedrock safety of U.S. government debt. Routine government payments to Social Security beneficiaries, disabled veterans, and active-duty military personnel would also be called into question. The relief provided by passage of the legislation will only be temporary, though, forcing Congress to revisit the issue in December — a time when lawmakers will also be laboring to complete federal spending bills and avoid a damaging government shutdown. The yearend backlog raises risks for both parties and threatens a tumultuous close to Biden’s first year in office. “I’m glad that this at least allows us to prevent a totally self-made and utterly preventable economic catastrophe as we work on a longer-term plan,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass. Republicans signaled the next debt limit debate won’t be any easier and warned Democrats not to expect their help. “Unless and until Democrats give up on their dream of a big-government, socialist America, Republicans cannot and will not support raising the debt limit and help them pave the superhighway to a great entitlement society,” said Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla. Procedurally, the House took a single vote Tuesday that had the effect of passing the Senate bill. The measure passed by a party-line vote of 219-206. The present standoff over the debt ceiling eased when Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., agreed to help pass the short-term increase. But he insists he won’t do so again. In a letter sent Friday to Biden, McConnell said Democrats will have to handle the next debt-limit increase on their own using the same process they have tried to use to pass Biden’s massive social spending and environment plan. Reconciliation allows legislation to pass the Senate with 51 votes rather than the 60 that’s typically required. In the 50-50 split Senate, Vice President Kamala Harris gives Democrats the majority with her tiebreaking vote. Lawmakers from both parties have used the debt ceiling votes as leverage for other priorities. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi threatened to vote against raising the debt ceiling when President Donald Trump was in office, saying she had no intention of supporting lifting the debt ceiling to enable Republicans to give another tax break to the rich. And Republicans in 2011 managed to coerce President Barack Obama into accepting about $2 trillion in deficit cuts as a condition for increasing the debt limit — though lawmakers later rolled back some of those cuts. Pelosi told reporters Tuesday that over the years, Republicans and Democrats have voted against lifting the debt ceiling, “but never to the extent of jeopardizing it.” Pelosi offered her hope that Congress would lift the debt ceiling in a bipartisan way this December because of the stakes involved. But she also floated a bill sponsored by Rep. Brendan Boyle, D-Pa., that would transfer the duty of raising the debt limit away from Congress and vest it with the Treasury secretary, saying, “I think it has merit.” In his focus on the debt limit, McConnell has tried to link Biden’s big federal government spending boost with the nation’s rising debt load, even though they are separate and the debt ceiling will have to be increased or suspended regardless of whether Biden’s $3.5 trillion plan makes it into law. “Your lieutenants on Capitol Hill now have the time they claimed they lacked to address the debt ceiling through standalone reconciliation and all the tools to do it,” McConnell said in a letter to the president. “They cannot invent another crisis and ask for my help.” McConnell was one of 11 Republicans who sided with Democrats to advance the debt ceiling reprieve to a final vote. Subsequently, McConnell and his GOP colleagues voted against final passage. The debate over the debt ceiling has at times gotten personal. McConnell last week suggested that Democrats were playing “Russian roulette” with the economy because they had not dealt with the debt ceiling through the process he had insisted upon. He called out Pelosi for traveling to Europe last week. “I can only presume she hopes the full faith and credit of the United States will get sorted out,” McConnell said. Pelosi did not let the shot pass. “Russian roulette from Moscow Mitch. Interesting,” she said. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said Tuesday’s vote marked the 50th time dating back to President Ronald Reagan that he has voted on extending the debt limit. “Nobody has clean hands when it comes to the debt limit,” he said. Because the Senate bill only allowed for a stopgap extension, Hoyer called it a “lousy deal.” “And then we’re going to play this game one more time, a despicable and irresponsible act for adults who know better,” Hoyer said. Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, said he wanted to “thank” Hoyer for sharing that he had previously voted for raising the debt ceiling 49 times. “When he came into this body, the debt was about a trillion dollars,” Roy said. “Thank you, I guess, on behalf of the people of America who are staring at 28-and-a-half trillion dollars of debt.” The current debt ceiling is $28.4 trillion. Both parties have contributed to that load with decisions that have left the government rarely operating in the black. The calamitous ramifications of default are why lawmakers have been able to reach a compromise to lift or suspend the debt cap some 18 times since 2002, often after frequent rounds of brinkmanship. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Equal pay efforts reviving in Mississippi in 2022
Mississippi is the only state without a law requiring equal pay for equal work by women and men after Alabama enacted one in 2019. Efforts have fallen short in Mississippi in recent years, but Senate Labor Committee Chairman John Hohrn, a Democrat from Jackson, promises to make another push for equal pay legislation in 2022. Opponents have said there’s no need for a Mississippi law because of two federal laws — the Equal Pay Act of 1963 signed by President John F. Kennedy and the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 signed by President Barack Obama. Some also say they don’t want the state to put new regulations on businesses. A 2017 report by the Mississippi University Research Center showed women earned 27% less than men for fulltime work in Mississippi, compared to a 19% wage gap nationwide. The study said some of the gap could be explained by factors such as types of jobs women and men were working, but the unexplained wage gap remained about 18% in Mississippi and about 15% nationwide. The report said a portion of the unexplained gap in Mississippi “may be due to discrimination,” but other factors such as the choice of college majors or decisions about work-life balance may be in play. “If women are willing to take lower pay so that they can work hours more suitable to their family’s needs, then discrimination is not at play,” the report said. “However, if employers assume all women are willing to take lower pay for more flexible hours and therefore do not offer women other options, discrimination could exist.” Cassandra Welchlin, executive director of the Mississippi Black Women’s Roundtable, told the Senate Labor Committee on Wednesday that women comprise 49% of the Mississippi workforce but 67% of the minimum-wage workers. She said that over a 40-year career, a Black woman in Mississippi stands to lose more than $849,000 because of the wage gap. “It’s time for Mississippi women to share in the protection that women in other states experience,” Welchlin said. Welchlin said Mississippi needs an equal pay law that does not require people applying for jobs to disclose their salary history because such disclosure often ensures that women remain on track for lower earnings. Senators on Wednesday also heard from Ledbetter, whose legal battle over equal pay went to the U.S. Supreme Court. Ledbetter worked 19 years at a Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. in Gadsden, Alabama, and sued in 1998 after learning she had been paid significantly less than male colleagues in the same job. A jury awarded her $3.8 million, but the Supreme Court reversed the decision in 2007. Justices said she waited too long to sue, and did not rule on whether discrimination occurred. Speaking to Mississippi lawmakers by videoconference, Ledbetter said earning less money for equal work affects the type of houses people live in, the kind of food they eat and the kind of retirement they will have. “I know what it’s like to dig and scratch out a living,” Ledbetter said, noting that many in Alabama and Mississippi are in the same position. “And it’s time that women can stand up with dignity for their education and their training and earn a good living.” Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch, the first woman elected to that job, is among supporters of equal pay legislation. A deputy attorney general, Whitney Lipscomb, spoke to the Labor Committee on behalf of Republican Fitch, saying it’s a bipartisan issue that affects everyone. “Equal pay is an opportunity for the state to break the intergenerational cycle of poverty and strengthen our economy,” Lipscomb said. She said a law should require equal pay for “equal work in the same job that requires equal skills, effort, education, experience, responsibilities, and performance under similar working conditions.” She also said it should provide exceptions based on seniority systems or merit systems that are based on quantity or quality of production or differentials based on factors other than sex. “Passing a state equal pay law will not impose any new obligations on employers,” Lipscomb said. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Steve Flowers: We now have a very youthful federal judiciary in Alabama
Our senior senator, Richard Shelby, has left an indelible legacy and imprint on our state. Every corner of the state has been the recipient of his prowess at bringing home the bacon to the Heart of Dixie. Every university has enjoyed a largesse of federal dollars. He has made the Huntsville Redstone Arsenal one of the most renowned high technology regions in the nation, not to mention placing the FBI’s second home in Huntsville. Shelby’s accomplishments for Alabama would take a book to enumerate. However, what is not universally known is that Senator Richard Shelby has transformed the federal judiciary in Alabama for years to come. During the entire eight-year presidency of Barack Obama, by nature, we had some attrition in our federal judiciary in all three regions, Northern, Middle, and Southern Districts. Even though President Obama sought to appoint Democratic judges throughout the state, Senator Shelby and Senator Jeff Sessions thwarted all Democratic appointees and held these cherished and powerful judgeships vacant. Shelby and Sessions were hopeful that one day there would be a Republican president coupled with a Republican Senate majority, and they would be able to appoint Republican jurists to the federal bench in Alabama. That happened when Donald Trump became president. Senator Sessions had parted with his senate seat to become attorney general, so that left Senator Shelby to select and get confirmed a host of new, young federal judges in Alabama. Shelby assigned his loyal and brilliant Chief of Staff, Katie Boyd Britt, the job of vetting potential federal judgeships. She and Shelby chose an outstanding cadre of young, well-educated, extremely qualified, moderately conservative men and women to sit on the federal bench in Alabama. This group is stellar and will be the majority of federal judges for the next 25 to 30 years. This coup of appointing young, conservative, extremely capable judges to the federal bench in Alabama may be one of Senator Richard Shelby’s greatest legacies. Shelby had Andrew Brasher first appointed to the Middle District of Alabama. However, soon thereafter, an opening occurred on the Eleventh Circuit, and so Shelby had President Trump appoint Brasher to the higher appeals court. Prior to Brasher’s appointment to the Middle District, he practiced law with Bradley Arant in Birmingham. He was solicitor general and a law clerk for Judge Bill Pryor. Judge Brasher is a graduate of Samford University and Harvard Law School. Senator Shelby had President Trump appoint Anna Manasco as a federal judge in the Northern District of Alabama. Judge Manasco, like Judge Brasher, practiced law in Birmingham with Bradley Arant prior to her federal appointment. She graduated with honors from Emory University before earning her law degree from Yale Law School. Shelby aligned with President Trump to appoint Corey Maze for a seat on the federal bench in the Northern District. Judge Maze was a prosecutor for the State of Alabama Attorney General’s office. He is a summa cum laude graduate of Auburn University and a graduate of Georgetown Law. Senator Shelby had President Trump appoint Liles Burke to a federal judgeship in the Northern District. Burke was an Associate Judge of the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals before his federal appointment. He obtained his undergraduate and law degrees from the University of Alabama. Annemarie Axon is another Trump and Shelby anointed appointee for the Northern District of Alabama. Judge Axon practiced law in Birmingham before her appointment. She, like all of the other Northern District appointees, is extremely well qualified. Axon also obtained her undergraduate and law degrees from the University of Alabama. Austin Huffaker, Jr. of Montgomery, was chosen by Shelby and Trump for a federal judgeship in the Middle District. He practiced law in Montgomery prior to his appointment. He has an engineering degree from Vanderbilt and earned his law degree from the University of Alabama School of Law. Also appointed by Shelby and Trump to the Middle District is Emily Marks of Montgomery. Judge Marks practiced law in Montgomery prior to her appointment. She is a graduate of Spring Hill College in Mobile and the University of Alabama School of Law. Jeffrey Beaverstock was appointed to a federal judgeship in the Southern District. He practiced law in Mobile and is a graduate of the Citadel and the University of Alabama School of Law. Terry Moorer was appointed by President Trump and confirmed by the senate for the Southern District. He was previously an assistant U.S. Attorney and is a graduate of Huntington College and the University of Alabama School of Law. This host of federal jurists in Alabama will be one of Senator Richard Shelby’s lasting legacies. See you next week. Steve Flowers is Alabama’s leading political columnist. His weekly column appears in over 60 Alabama newspapers. He served 16 years in the state legislature. Steve may be reached at www.steveflowers.us.
Alabama sues Joe Biden administration over school, work LGBT protections
Attorneys general from 20 states sued President Joe Biden’s administration Monday seeking to halt directives that extend federal sex discrimination protections to LGBTQ people, ranging from transgender girls participating in school sports to the use of school and workplace bathrooms that align with a person’s gender identity. Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Knoxville, arguing that legal interpretations by the U.S. Department of Education and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission are based on a faulty view of U.S. Supreme Court case law. The Supreme Court ruled in June 2020 that a landmark civil rights law, under a provision called Title VII, protects gay, lesbian, and transgender people from discrimination in employment. This June, the Department of Education said discrimination based on a student’s sexual orientation or gender identity will be treated as a violation of Title IX, the 1972 federal law that protects against sex discrimination in education. A legal analysis by the department concluded there is “no persuasive or well-founded basis” to treat education differently than employment. Also, in June, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission released guidance about what could constitute discrimination against LGBTQ people and advised the public about how to file a complaint. With its guidance, the Biden administration in part took a stand against laws and proposals in a growing number of states that aim to forbid transgender girls from participating in female sports teams. The state attorneys general contend that the authority over such policies “properly belongs to Congress, the States, and the people.” “The guidance purports to resolve highly controversial and localized issues such as whether employers and schools may maintain sex-separated showers and locker rooms, whether schools must allow biological males to compete on female athletic teams, and whether individuals may be compelled to use another person’s preferred pronouns,” the lawsuit states. “But the agencies have no authority to resolve those sensitive questions, let alone to do so by executive fiat without providing any opportunity for public participation.” Joining Tennessee in the lawsuit are Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and West Virginia. The lawsuit asks a judge for a number of declarations about Title IX in schools and Title VII in the workplace: that they don’t prohibit schools and employers from having showers, locker rooms, bathrooms, and other living facilities separated by “biological sex”; that they do not require employers, school employees or students to use a transgender person’s preferred pronouns; that they do not prohibit having school sports teams separated by “biological sex”; and that they do not prohibit workplace dress codes based on “biological sex.” The education policy carries the possibility of federal sanctions against schools and colleges that fail to protect gay and transgender students. The Department of Justice on Monday did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit. The education directive reversed President Donald Trump-era policies that removed civil rights protections for transgender students. In 2017, the Trump administration lifted President Barack Obama-era guidance allowing transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms that match their gender identities. At the time, then-Education Secretary Betsy DeVos said the issue was “best solved at the state and local level,” and the earlier guidance led to a spike in lawsuits seeking clarification. The new action does not reinstate the Obama-era policy but instead clarifies that the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights will investigate complaints of discrimination involving gay or transgender students. If the department finds evidence of discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity, it will pursue a resolution to “address the specific compliance concerns or violations.” The federal agencies noted that the workplace and education guidance documents do not carry the force of law. The state attorneys general argued they are at risk of the federal government enforcing the guidance, threatening their states’ sovereign authority, causing significant liability, and putting their federal education funding at risk. In June, the Department of Justice filed statements of interest in lawsuits that seek to overturn new laws in two states. In West Virginia, a law prohibits transgender athletes from competing in female sports. Arkansas became the first state to ban gender-confirming treatments or surgery for transgender youth. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Joe Biden says he stands ‘squarely behind’ Afghanistan decision
Striking a defiant tone, President Joe Biden said Monday that he stands “squarely behind” his decision to withdraw U.S. forces from Afghanistan as he acknowledged the “gut-wrenching” images coming out of the country after the swift Taliban takeover of the government. Biden said he had to choose between sticking to a previously negotiated agreement to withdraw U.S. troops this year or sending thousands more service members back into Afghanistan to fight a “third decade” of war. Biden, sounding resolute in the face of withering criticism of his handling of the situation, said he chose the first option so as not to repeat past mistakes. He reiterated that he had no regrets. “I stand squarely behind my decision,” the president told the nation in a televised address from the White House East Room after he flew back from the Camp David presidential retreat. “After 20 years, I’ve learned the hard way that there was never a good time to withdraw U.S. forces.” Many disagree with Biden’s decision, angered by the chaos the world witnessed over the weekend as the Taliban ultimately captured Kabul, the capital, and Afghanistan’s president left the country. Biden said he’d rather take the criticism over the fallout than pass the decision of how and when to withdraw to a fifth U.S. president. He said the decision to leave Afghanistan is “the right one for America” because keeping a U.S. presence, there was no longer a U.S. national security interest. Biden described the images coming out of Afghanistan — especially at the airport in Kabul, where Afghans descended in hopes of fleeing the country — as “gut-wrenching.” Video of Afghans clinging to a U.S. Air Force plane and running alongside it as prepared to take off had circulated widely on the internet. But he did not admit any U.S. fault in how the drawdown was executed. And after batting away the notion of a rapid Taliban takeover when questioned a little over a month ago, Biden acknowledged Monday that “the truth is this did unfold more quickly than we had anticipated.” He pledged that the U.S. will continue to support the Afghan people, push for regional diplomacy and speak out for the rights of Afghans. Senior U.S. military officials said the chaos at the airport in Kabul left seven people dead Monday, including some who fell from a departing American military transport jet. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss ongoing operations. Afghans rushed onto the tarmac as thousands tried to escape after the Taliban seized power. Some clung to the side of a U.S. military plane before takeoff, in a widely shared video that captured the desperation as America’s 20-year war comes to a chaotic end. Another video showed the Afghans falling as the plane gained altitude over Kabul. U.S. troops resorted to firing warning shots and using helicopters to clear a path for transport aircraft. The Pentagon confirmed Monday that U.S. forces shot and killed two individuals it said were armed, as Biden ordered another battalion of troops — about 1,000 — to secure the airfield, which was closed to arrivals and departures for hours Monday because of civilians on the runway. The speed of the Afghan government’s collapse and the ensuing chaos posed the most serious test yet of Biden as commander in chief, and he came under intense criticism from Republicans who said he had failed. Yet the president said the rapid end of the Afghan government only vindicated his decision, noting how the Afghan army surrendered to the Taliban. “American troops cannot and should not be fighting the war and dying in a war that Afghan forces are not willing to fight for themselves,” Biden said. Biden, who is viewed as an experienced foreign policy hand dating to his decades-long career in the Senate, including as chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, expressed confidence in his decision and said he was prepared to take the heat. He said he was “deeply saddened by the facts we now face, but I do not regret my decision.” Biden is the fourth U.S. president to confront challenges in Afghanistan and had insisted he wouldn’t hand America’s longest war to his successor. But he is under pressure to explain how security in Afghanistan unraveled so quickly, especially since he and others in the administration had insisted it wouldn’t happen. “The jury is still out, but the likelihood there’s going to be the Taliban overrunning everything and owning the whole country is highly unlikely,” Biden said on July 8. Just last week, though, administration officials warned privately that the military was crumbling, prompting Biden on Thursday to order thousands of American troops into the region to speed up evacuation plans. Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump also yearned to leave Afghanistan but ultimately stood down in the face of resistance from military leaders and other political concerns. Biden, on the other hand, has been steadfast in his refusal to change the Aug. 31 deadline, in part because of his belief that the American public is on his side. A late July ABC News/Ipsos poll, for instance, showed 55% of Americans approving of Biden’s handling of the troop withdrawal. Most Republicans have not pushed Biden to keep troops in Afghanistan over the long term, and they also supported Trump’s own push to exit the country. Still, some in the GOP stepped up their critique of Biden’s withdrawal strategy, and said images from Sunday of American helicopters circling the U.S. Embassy in Kabul evoked the humiliating departure of U.S. personnel from Vietnam. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell deemed the scenes of withdrawal as “the embarrassment of a superpower laid low.” Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Joe Biden says U.S. combat mission in Iraq to conclude by year end
President Joe Biden said Monday the U.S. combat mission in Iraq will conclude by the end of the year, an announcement that reflects the reality on the ground more than a major shift in U.S. policy. Even before Biden took office, the main U.S. focus has been assisting Iraqi forces, not fighting on their behalf. And Biden did not say if he planned to reduce the number of troops in Iraq, now about 2,500. The announcement comes on the heels of Biden’s decision to withdraw fully from Afghanistan nearly 20 years after the U.S. launched that war in response to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Together, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have heavily taxed the U.S. military and kept it from devoting more attention to a rising China, which the Biden administration calls the biggest long-term security challenge. For years, U.S. troops have played support roles in Iraq and neighboring Syria, which was the origin of the Islamic State group that swept across the border in 2014 and captured large swaths of Iraqi territory, prompting the U.S. to send troops back to Iraq that year. Speaking to reporters during an Oval Office session with Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi, Biden said his administration remained committed to a partnership with Iraq — a relationship that has been increasingly complicated by Iranian-backed Iraqi militia groups. The militias want all U.S. troops out of Iraq immediately and have periodically attacked bases that house American troops. Dan Caldwell, a senior adviser to Concerned Veterans for America, said U.S. troops will remain at risk. “Regardless of whether their deployment is called a combat mission, U.S. troops will remain under regular attack as long as they remain in Iraq,” Caldwell said in a statement. “An American military presence in Iraq is not necessary for our safety and only risks the loss of more American life.” Biden said the U.S. military will continue to assist Iraq in its fight against the Islamic State group, or ISIS. A joint U.S.-Iraq statement said the security relationship will be focused on training, advising, and intelligence-sharing. “Our shared fight against ISIS is critical for the stability of the region, and our counterterrorism operation will continue, even as we shift to this new phase we’re going to be talking about,” Biden said. The shift from a U.S. combat role to one focused on training and advising the Iraqi security forces was announced in April when a joint U.S.-Iraqi statement said this transition allowed for the removal from Iraq of any remaining U.S. combat forces on a timetable to be determined later. It did not specify what combat functions the U.S. was engaged in then, nor did Biden get into such specifics on Monday. “We’re not going to be, by the end of the year, in a combat mission,” he said. White House press secretary Jen Psaki declined to say how many troops would remain in Iraq by year’s end. “The numbers will be driven by what is needed for the mission over time, so it is more about moving to a more advising and training capacity from what we have had over the last several years,” she said. The U.S. troop presence had stood at about 2,500 since late last year when then-President Donald Trump ordered a reduction from 3,000. The Iraqi government in 2017 declared victory over the Islamic State group, which is now a shell of its former self. Still, it has shown it can carry out high-casualty attacks. Last week, the group claimed responsibility for a roadside bombing that killed at least 30 people and wounded dozens in a busy suburban Baghdad market. In his remarks alongside Biden, al-Kadhimi thanked the United States for its support. Back home, al-Kadhimi faces no shortage of problems. Iranian-backed militias operating inside Iraq have stepped up attacks against U.S. forces in recent months, and a series of devastating hospital fires that left dozens of people dead and soaring coronavirus infections have added fresh layers of frustration for the nation. For al-Kadhimi, the ability to offer the Iraqi public a date for the end of the U.S. combat presence could be a feather in his cap before elections scheduled for October. Biden administration officials say al-Kadhimi also deserves credit for improving Iraq’s standing in the Mideast. Last month, King Abdullah II of Jordan and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi visited Baghdad for joint meetings — the first time an Egyptian president has made an official visit since the 1990s when ties were severed after Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. The Iraqi prime minister made clear before his trip to Washington that he believes it’s time for the U.S. to wind that mission down. “There is no need for any foreign combat forces on Iraqi soil,” al-Kadhimi told The Associated Press last weekend. The U.S. mission of training and advising Iraqi forces has its most recent origins in President Barack Obama’s decision in 2014 to send troops back to Iraq. The move was made in response to the Islamic State group’s takeover of large portions of western and northern Iraq and a collapse of Iraqi security forces that appeared to threaten Baghdad. Obama had fully withdrawn U.S. forces from Iraq in 2011, eight years after the U.S. invasion. Pentagon officials for years have tried to balance what they see as a necessary military presence to support the Iraqi government’s fight against IS with domestic political sensitivities in Iraq to a foreign troop presence. The vulnerability of U.S. troops was demonstrated most dramatically in January 2020 when Iran launched a ballistic missile attack on al-Asad airbase in western Iraq. No Americans were killed, but dozens suffered traumatic brain injury from the blasts. That attack came shortly after a U.S. drone strike killed Iranian military commander Qassim Soleimani and senior Iraqi militia commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis at Baghdad International Airport. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Nearly all COVID deaths in U.S. are now among unvaccinated
Nearly all COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. now are in people who weren’t vaccinated, a staggering demonstration of how effective the shots have been and an indication that deaths per day — now down to under 300 — could be practically zero if everyone eligible got the vaccine. An Associated Press analysis of available government data from May shows that “breakthrough” infections in fully vaccinated people accounted for fewer than 1,200 of more than 853,000 COVID-19 hospitalizations. That’s about 0.1%. And only about 150 of the more than 18,000 COVID-19 deaths in May were in fully vaccinated people. That translates to about 0.8%, or five deaths per day on average. The AP analyzed figures provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC itself has not estimated what percentage of hospitalizations and deaths are in fully vaccinated people, citing limitations in the data. Among them: Only about 45 states report breakthrough infections, and some are more aggressive than others in looking for such cases. So the data probably understates such infections, CDC officials said. Still, the overall trend that emerges from the data echoes what many health care authorities are seeing around the country and what top experts are saying. Earlier this month, Andy Slavitt, a former adviser to the Biden administration on COVID-19, suggested that 98% to 99% of the Americans dying of the coronavirus are unvaccinated. And CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said on Tuesday that the vaccine is so effective that “nearly every death, especially among adults, due to COVID-19, is, at this point, entirely preventable.” She called such deaths “particularly tragic.” Deaths in the U.S. have plummeted from a peak of more than 3,400 per day on average in mid-January, one month into the vaccination drive. About 63% of all vaccine-eligible Americans — those 12 and older — have received at least one dose, and 53% are fully vaccinated, according to the CDC. While vaccine remains scarce in much of the world, the U.S. supply is so abundant, and demand has slumped so dramatically that shots sit unused. Ross Bagne, a 68-year-old small-business owner in Cheyenne, Wyoming, was eligible for the vaccine in early February but didn’t get it. He died June 4, infected and unvaccinated, after spending more than three weeks in the hospital, his lungs filling with fluid. He was unable to swallow because of a stroke. “He never went out, so he didn’t think he would catch it,” said his grieving sister, Karen McKnight. She wondered: “Why take the risk of not getting vaccinated?” The preventable deaths will continue, experts predict, with unvaccinated pockets of the nation experiencing outbreaks in the fall and winter. Ali Mokdad, a professor of health metrics sciences at the University of Washington in Seattle, said modeling suggests the nation will hit 1,000 deaths per day again next year. In Arkansas, which has one of the lowest vaccination rates in the nation, with only about 33% of the population fully protected, cases, hospitalizations, and deaths are rising. “It is sad to see someone go to the hospital or die when it can be prevented,” Gov. Asa Hutchinson tweeted as he urged people to get their shots. In Seattle’s King County, the public health department found only three deaths during a recent 60-day period in people who were fully vaccinated. The rest, some 95% of 62 deaths, had had no vaccine or just one shot. “Those are all somebody’s parents, grandparents, siblings, and friends,” said Dr. Mark Del Beccaro, who helps lead a vaccination outreach program in King County. “It’s still a lot of deaths, and they’re preventable deaths.” In the St. Louis area, more than 90% of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 have not been vaccinated, said Dr. Alex Garza, a hospital administrator who directs a metropolitan-area task force on the outbreak. “The majority of them express some regret for not being vaccinated,” Garza said. “That’s a pretty common refrain that we’re hearing from patients with COVID.” The stories of unvaccinated people dying may convince some people they should get the shots, but young adults — the group least likely to be vaccinated — may be motivated more by a desire to protect their loved ones, said David Michaels, an epidemiologist at George Washington University’s school of public health in the nation’s capital. Others need paid time off to get the shots and deal with any side effects, Michaels said. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration this month began requiring health care employers, including hospitals and nursing homes, to provide such time off. But Michaels, who headed OSHA under President Barack Obama, said the agency should have gone further and applied the rule to meat and poultry plants and other food operations as well as other places with workers at risk. Bagne, who lived alone, ran a business helping people incorporate their companies in Wyoming for the tax advantages. He was winding down the business, planning to retire, when he got sick, emailing his sister in April about an illness that had left him dizzy and disoriented. “Whatever it was. That bug took a LOT out of me,” he wrote. As his health deteriorated, a neighbor finally persuaded him to go to the hospital. “Why was the messaging in his state so unclear that he didn’t understand the importance of the vaccine? He was a very bright guy,” his sister said. “I wish he’d gotten the vaccine, and I’m sad he didn’t understand how it could prevent him from getting COVID.” Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
GOP filibuster blocks Democrats’ big voting rights bill
The Democrats’ sweeping attempt to rewrite U.S. election and voting law suffered a major setback in the Senate Tuesday, blocked by a filibuster wall of Republican opposition to what would be the largest overhaul of the electoral system in a generation. The vote leaves the Democrats with no clear path forward, though President Joe Biden declared, “This fight is far from over.” The bill, known as the For the People Act, would touch on virtually every aspect of how elections are conducted, striking down hurdles to voting that advocates view as the Civil Rights fight of the era, while also curbing the influence of money in politics and limiting partisan influence over the drawing of congressional districts. But many in the GOP say the measure represents instead a breathtaking federal infringement on states’ authority to conduct their own elections without fraud — and is meant to ultimately benefit Democrats. It failed on a 50-50 vote after Republicans, some of whom derided the bill as the “Screw the People Act,” denied Democrats the 60 votes needed to begin debate under Senate rules. Vice President Kamala Harris, the first Black woman to hold her office, presided over the chamber as the bill failed to break past that filibuster barrier. Biden praised Senate Democrats for standing together “against the ongoing assault of voter suppression that represents a Jim Crow era in the 21st Century.” In a statement from the White House, he said that in their actions, though unsuccessful on Tuesday, they “took the next step forward in this continuous struggle.” The rejection forces Democrats to reckon with what comes next for their top legislative priority in a narrowly divided Senate. They’ve touted the measure as a powerful counterweight to scores of proposals advancing in GOP-controlled statehouses making it more difficult to vote. “Once again, the Senate Republican minority has launched a partisan blockade of a pressing issue,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said from the chamber floor. He vowed that the vote was the “starting gun” and not the last time voting rights would be up for debate. Whatever Democrats decide, they will likely be confronted with the same challenge they faced Tuesday when minority Republicans used the filibuster — the same tool that Democrats employed during Donald Trump’s presidency — to block consideration of the bill. Republicans showed no sign of yielding. Republican leader Mitch McConnell called the bill a “a solution looking for a problem” and vowed to “put an end to it.” Texas Sen. Ted Cruz dismissed it as “partisan legislation, written by elected Democrats, designed to keep elected Democrats in office.” And, more graphically, Sen. Shelley Moore Capito called the bill “a despicable, disingenuous attempt to strip states of their constitutional right to administer elections” that “should never come close to reaching the president’s desk.” Pressure has been mounting on Democrats to change Senate rules or watch their priorities languish. A group of moderate Democratic senators, however, including Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, have ruled that out, denying the votes needed to make a filibuster change. Biden has vowed what the White House calls the “fight of his presidency” over ensuring Americans’ access to voting. But without changes to Senate rules, key planks of his agenda, including the voting bill, appear stalled. Sen. Raphael Warnock, a Georgia Democrat and senior pastor at the Atlanta church Martin Luther King Jr. once led, called minority Republicans’ willingness to prevent debate on the voting bill a “dereliction” of duty. “What could be more hypocritical and cynical than invoking minority rights in the Senate as a pretext for preventing debate about how to preserve minority rights in the society,” Warnock said during a floor speech Tuesday. The changes being enacted in many Republican states are decried by voting rights advocates who argue the restrictions will make it more difficult for people to cast ballots, particularly minority residents who tend to support Democrats. Republicans, cheered on by Trump, talk instead about fighting potential voting fraud and say the Democrats’ concerns are wildly overblown. As the Senate discussion churns, more changes could be coming to the bill. Democrats want to protect against intimidation at the polls in the aftermath of the 2020 election. They propose enhancing penalties for those who would threaten or intimidate election workers and creating a “buffer zone” between election workers and poll watchers, among other possible changes. They also want to limit the ability of state officials to remove local election officials. Georgia Republicans passed a law earlier this year that gives the GOP-dominated Legislature greater influence over a state board that regulates elections and empowers it to remove local election officials deemed to be underperforming. But Democrats have divisions of their own. Until Tuesday, it wasn’t even clear that they would be united on the vote to bring the bill up for debate. Manchin, a moderate from West Virginia, announced earlier this month that he couldn’t support the bill because it lacked Republican support. Manchin flipped his vote to a “yes” after Democrats agreed to consider his revised version. His proposal was endorsed by former President Barack Obama and called a “step forward” by Biden’s administration. Manchin has proposed adding provisions for a national voter ID requirement, which is anathema to many Democrats, and dropping a proposed public financing of campaigns. Those changes did little, however, to garner the bipartisan support Manchin was hoping for. Senate Republicans said they would likely reject any legislation that expands the federal government’s role in elections. McConnell dismissed Manchin’s version as “equally unacceptable.” Sen. Lisa Murkowski, a moderate Alaska Republican, said some aspects of the Democratic bill were laudable and she supports other voting rights legislation, like a reinstatement of the Voting Rights Act struck down by the Supreme Court in 2013. But, ultimately, she said the “sprawling” bill amounted to “a one-size-fits-all mandate coming out of Washington D.C.” that “in many cases doesn’t work.” Months in the making, Tuesday’s showdown had taken on fresh urgency as Trump continues to challenge
Israel swears in new coalition, ending Benjamin Netanyahu’s long rule
Israel’s parliament on Sunday narrowly approved a new coalition government, ending the historic 12-year rule of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and sending the polarizing leader into the opposition. Naftali Bennett, a former ally of Netanyahu turned rival, became prime minister after the 60-59 vote. Promising to try to heal a divided nation, Bennett will preside over a diverse and fragile coalition comprised of eight parties with deep ideological differences. But the 71-year-old Netanyahu made clear he has no intention of exiting the political stage. “If it is destined for us to be in the opposition, we will do it with our backs straight until we topple this dangerous government and return to lead the country,” he said. The vote, capping a stormy parliamentary session, ended a two-year cycle of political paralysis in which the country held four deadlocked elections. Those votes focused largely on Netanyahu’s divisive rule and his fitness to remain in office while on trial for corruption charges. To his supporters, Netanyahu is a global statesman uniquely capable of leading the country through its many security challenges. But to his critics, he has become a polarizing and autocratic leader who used divide-and-rule tactics to aggravate the many rifts in Israeli society. Those include tensions between Jews and Arabs and within the Jewish majority between his religious and nationalist base and his more secular and dovish opponents. Outside the Knesset, hundreds of protesters watching the vote on a large screen erupted into applause when the new government was approved. Thousands of people, many waving Israeli flags, celebrated in central Tel Aviv’s Rabin Square. President Joe Biden quickly congratulated the new government. “I look forward to working with Prime Minister Bennett to strengthen all aspects of the close and enduring relationship between our two nations,” he said in a statement. He said his administration is fully committed to working with the new government “to advance security, stability, and peace for Israelis, Palestinians, and people throughout the broader region.” Bennett’s office said he later spoke by phone with Biden, thanking him for his warm wishes and longstanding commitment to Israel’s security. The leaders agreed to consult closely on all matters related to regional security, including Iran, the White House said, adding that Biden said his administration intends to work closely with the Israeli government on advancing peace, security, and prosperity for Israelis and Palestinians. Much of the Israeli opposition to Netanyahu was personal. Three of the eight parties in the new government, including Bennett’s Yamina, are headed by former Netanyahu allies who share his hard-line ideology but had deep personal disputes with him. Bennett, 49, is a former chief of staff to Netanyahu whose small party is popular with religious Jews and West Bank settlers. As he addressed the raucous debate, he was repeatedly heckled and shouted down by Netanyahu’s supporters. Some were removed from the chamber. Bennett, an observant Jew, noted the Jewish people twice lost their homeland in biblical times due to bitter infighting. “This time, at the decisive moment, we have taken responsibility,” he said. “To continue on in this way — more elections, more hatred, more vitriolic posts on Facebook — is just not an option. Therefore we stopped the train a moment before it barreled into the abyss.” The new Cabinet met briefly, and Bennett recited a prayer for new beginnings and said it was time to mend rifts. “Citizens of Israel are all looking to us now, and the burden of proof is upon us,” Bennett said. The millionaire former high-tech entrepreneur faces a tough test maintaining an unwieldy coalition from the political right, left, and center. The coalition, including a small Islamist faction that is making history as the first Arab party to sit in a coalition, agree on little beyond their opposition to Netanyahu. They are likely to pursue a modest agenda that seeks to reduce tensions with the Palestinians and maintain good relations with the U.S. without launching any major initiatives. “We will forge forward on that which we agree — and there is much we agree on, transport, education and so on, and what separates us we will leave to the side,” Bennett said. He also promised a “new page” in relations with Israel’s Arab sector. Israel’s Arab citizens make up about 20% of the population but have suffered from discrimination, poverty, and lack of opportunities. Netanyahu has often tried to portray Arab politicians as terrorist sympathizers, though he also courted the same Arab party in a failed effort to remain in power after March 23 elections. Bennett, who, like Netanyahu, opposes the establishment of a Palestinian state, made little mention of the Palestinians beyond threatening a tough response to violence. He also vowed, like Netanyahu, to oppose U.S.-led efforts to restore the international nuclear accord with Iran. “Israel will not allow Iran to arm itself with nuclear weapons,” he said. “Israel is not party to the agreement and will maintain full freedom to act.” But he also thanked Biden for his support of Israel. He promised to take a different approach than Netanyahu, who has alienated much of the Democratic Party through his antagonistic relationship with then-President Barack Obama and close ties with former President Donald Trump. “My government will make an effort to deepen and nurture relations with our friends in both parties — bipartisan,” Bennett said. “If there are disputes, we will manage them with fundamental trust and mutual respect.” While Bennett’s speech was conciliatory, Netanyahu’s was confrontational. He boasted of his achievements, including diplomatic treaties with four Arab states and a successful coronavirus vaccination drive, before belittling the man who is replacing him. He accused Bennett of abandoning Israel’s right-wing electorate and joining weak “leftists” to become prime minister. He said Bennett did not have the backbone to stand up to Iran or pressure from the U.S. to make concessions to the Palestinians. “I will lead you in the daily struggle against this evil and dangerous leftist government in order to topple it,” he said. “God willing, it
GOP poised to block bipartisan probe of January 6 insurrection
Senate Republicans are poised to block the creation of a special commission to study the deadly Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, dashing hopes for a bipartisan panel amid a GOP push to put the violent insurrection by Donald Trump’s supporters behind them. Broad Republican opposition was expected in what would be the first successful Senate filibuster of the Biden presidency, even as the family of a Capitol Police officer who died that day and other officers who battled rioters went office to office asking GOP senators to support the commission. The siege was the worst attack on the Capitol in 200 years and interrupted the certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s win over Trump. Though the bill passed the House earlier this month with the support of almost three dozen Republicans, GOP senators said they believe the commission would eventually be used against them politically. And former President Trump, who still has a firm hold on the party, has called it a “Democrat trap.” The expected vote is emblematic of the profound mistrust between the two parties since the siege, which has sowed deeper divisions on Capitol Hill even though lawmakers in the two parties fled together from the rioters that day. The events of Jan. 6 have become an increasingly fraught topic among Republicans as some in the party have downplayed the violence and defended the rioters who supported Trump and his false insistence that the election was stolen from him. While initially saying he was open to the idea of the commission, which would be modeled after an investigation of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell turned firmly against it in recent days. He has said he believes the panel’s investigation would be partisan despite the even split among party members. McConnell, who once said Trump was responsible for “provoking” the mob attack on the Capitol, said of Democrats: “They’d like to continue to litigate the former president, into the future.” Biden, asked about the commission at a stop in Cleveland, said Thursday, “I can’t imagine anyone voting against” it. The Republican opposition to the bipartisan panel has revived Democratic pressure to do away with the filibuster, a time-honored Senate tradition that requires a vote by 60 of the 100 senators to cut off debate and advance a bill. With the Senate evenly split 50-50, Democrats need the support of 10 Republicans to move to the commission bill, sparking fresh debate over whether the time has come to change the rules and lower the threshold to 51 votes to take up legislation. The Republicans’ political arguments over the violent siege — which is still raw for many in the Capitol, almost five months later — have frustrated not only Democrats but also those who fought off the rioters. Michael Fanone, a Metropolitan Police Department officer who responded to the attack, said between meetings with Republican senators that a commission is “necessary for us to heal as a nation from the trauma that we all experienced that day.” Fanone has described being dragged down the Capitol steps by rioters who shocked him with a stun gun and beat him. Sandra Garza, the girlfriend of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick, who collapsed and died after battling the rioters, said of the Republican senators: “You know they are here today and with their families and comfortable because of the actions of law enforcement that day.” “So I don’t understand why they would resist getting to the bottom of what happened that day and fully understanding how to prevent it. Just boggles my mind,” she said. Video of the rioting shows two men spraying Sicknick and another officer with a chemical, but the Washington medical examiner said he suffered a stroke and died from natural causes. Garza attended the meetings with Sicknick’s mother, Gladys Sicknick. In a statement on Wednesday, Mrs. Sicknick suggested the opponents of the commission “visit my son’s grave in Arlington National Cemetery and, while there, think about what their hurtful decisions will do to those officers who will be there for them going forward.” Dozens of other police officers were injured as the rioters pushed past them, breaking through windows and doors and hunting for lawmakers. The protesters constructed a mock gallows in front of the Capitol and called for the hanging of Vice President Mike Pence, who was overseeing the certification of the presidential vote. Four protesters died, including a woman who was shot and killed by police as she tried to break into the House chamber with lawmakers still inside. More than 400 people among the protesters have been arrested. “We have a mob overtake the Capitol, and we can’t get the Republicans to join us in making historic record of that event? That is sad,” said Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Senate Democrat. “That tells you what’s wrong with the Senate and what’s wrong with the filibuster.” Many Democrats are warning that if Republicans are willing to use the filibuster to stop an arguably popular measure, it shows the limits of trying to broker compromises, particularly on bills related to election reforms or other aspects of the Democrats’ agenda. For now, though, Democrats don’t have the votes to change the rule. West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin and Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, both moderate Democrats, have said they want to preserve the filibuster. Manchin said Thursday that there is “no excuse” for Republicans to vote against the commission, but that he is “not ready to destroy our government” by doing away with the procedural tactic. The commission has received support from government officials outside of Congress, as well. On Thursday, four former secretaries of Homeland Security who served under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama — Tom Ridge, Michael Chertoff, Janet Napolitano, and Jeh Johnson — issued a statement saying a commission is necessary to “ensure the peaceful transfer of power in our country is never so threatened again.” In a last-ditch effort to convince some of her Republican colleagues to save
