Katie Britt votes to fund government and avert a government shutdown
The Senate voted 87 to 11 on Wednesday for legislation that would keep the government funded to the middle of January, avoiding a devastating government shutdown ahead of the Thanksgiving holiday. U.S. Senator Katie Britt voted for the package. The passage of the bipartisan continuing resolution (CR) spearheaded by new Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) keeps the government funded at current levels, putting off addressing out-of-control federal spending or the border situation until next year. Only 10 Republicans and one Democrat, Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colorado), opposed the legislation. “Today, I joined my Senate colleagues in passing a commonsense Continuing Resolution that will prevent a Christmas season omnibus and ensure our men and women in uniform continue to be paid,” said Sen. Britt on X. “This measure, which was drafted by House Republicans, will ensure that Americans don’t see an interruption in critical government services – and our troops, border patrol agents, ICE officers, and Capitol Police will continue to be paid,” Britt continued. “Growing up outside the gates of Fort Rucker in the Wiregrass, I saw firsthand the tremendous sacrifices made by our men and women in uniform and the sacrifice made by their families. Those who give so much in service to our nation should not have to spend Thanksgiving being worried about whether or not their next paycheck will be here or their Christmas season wondering how they’ll put presents under the tree. This Continuing Resolution gives Congress the time to keep working to move all 12 appropriations bills in a transparent, accountable, and responsible manner. Let’s do our job and complete the critical work on behalf of the American people.” Senate and House conservatives pledged to do everything possible to avoid considering another omnibus spending package right before Christmas and New Year’s, which has become a Washington tradition. An amendment by U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) that would have decreased government spending across the board by one percent was rejected in a 32 to 65 vote. Johnson’s CR passed the House with bipartisan support 336 to 95: 209 Democrats and 127 Republicans voting yes. Ninety-three Republicans and two Democrats voted no. The legislation would fund military construction, the Departments of Veterans Affairs, Agriculture, Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and energy and water programs until January 19. It funds all other programs, including the Department of Defense and many non-defense social programs, until February 2. It also extends the current Farm Bill through September. It does not provide the President’s requested emergency funding for the war in Ukraine, support for Israel, or enhanced border funding. “I have good news for the American people. This Friday night, there will be no government shutdown,” said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York). “I am pleased that Speaker Johnson realized he needed Democratic votes to avoid a shutdown. If the Speaker is willing to work with Democrats and resist the siren song of the hard right in the House, then we can avoid shutdowns in the future.” The President has indicated that he will sign the bipartisan measure. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Alabama Legislators react to Space Command decision, denouncing it as a ‘political move’
On Monday, President Joe Biden formalized what most political observers already knew when he announced that he was going to block Space Command from coming to Alabama. To Alabama legislators, the decision seems to have been made for political reasons, as the President needs Colorado’s electoral college votes to have any realistic chance of surviving next year’s presidential election. No Democrat has carried the state of Alabama in a presidential race since 1976, and Biden has no chance of being competitive in conservative Alabama. Biden said that U.S. officials believe that keeping the command in Colorado Springs will avoid a disruption in readiness that moving would cause. U.S. officials told The Associated Press that Biden was convinced by the head of Space Command, Gen. James Dickinson, who argued that moving his headquarters now would jeopardize military readiness. A number of Alabama leaders noted their displeasure at Biden’s decision to keep Space Command in Colorado Springs. Colorado Springs was fourth behind Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Nebraska, and San Antonio, Texas. Space Command was formed in 2019. The command was temporarily based in Colorado, and Air Force and Space Force leaders initially recommended it stay there. In the final days of his presidency, Donald Trump decided it should be based in Huntsville. Congressman Robert Aderholt (R-AL04) said, “Not only is it outrageous, but also unfortunate for the American people to hear that the Secretary of the Air Force allowed politics to circumvent his, and the Department of Defense’s, own basing selection process that determined Huntsville, Alabama as the preferred location of SPACECOM.” “Over and over again, the legitimate process proved that Alabama was the right choice for SPACECOM HQ,” said Rep. Aderholt. “Unfortunately for this nation this decision is the latest chapter in the long saga of the Biden Administration’s failing national security record, and I know the majority of the American people feel the same way. As a nation, we must do better.” Congresswoman Terri Sewell (D-AL07) said, “The Administration’s decision to keep Space Command in Colorado bows to the whims of politics over merit. Huntsville won this selection process fair and square based on the merits. In three separate reports, Huntsville reigned victorious, whereas Colorado did not come in second or even third. This reversal is as shameful as it is disappointing.” “I expected more from the Biden Administration,” said Sewell. “A decision of this magnitude should not be about red states versus blue states, but rather what is in the best interest of our national security. To be clear, the Alabama Congressional Delegation stands united in opposition to this decision.” Congressman Gary Palmer (R-AL06) said, “This decision made by the Biden Administration is unacceptable,” said Rep. Palmer. “When making decisions, the administration has continuously put politics over what is best for the nation. The Department of Defense determined that Huntsville, Alabama, was the best location for Space Command long ago. Instead, they are picking Colorado, the fifth best option by their very own report. Not only is this decision another broken promise and the result of political gamesmanship, but it jeopardizes our nation’s national security and sets a dangerous precedent for future decisions made solely based on political preference.” “Over two and a half years ago, the Air Force chose Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville for the headquarters of Space Command over 59 other cities on the basis of 21 different criteria,” explained U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-Alabama). “As soon as Joe Biden took office, he paused movement on that decision and inserted politics into what had been a fair and objective competition—not because the facts had changed, but because the political party of the sitting President had changed.” “The Biden Administration has been talking a lot about readiness over the past few months, but no Administration has done more to damage our military readiness in my lifetime,” Sen. Tuberville said. “They’ve politicized our military, destroyed our recruiting, misused our tax dollars for their extremist social agenda, and now they are putting Space Command headquarters in a location that didn’t even make the top three. They are doing this at a time when space is only becoming more important for national security.” Congressman Mike Rogers (R-AL03) said, “Huntsville, Alabama was chosen to be the headquarters of U.S. Space Command because it was the strongest location and investigations by the DoD IG and GAO have upheld this decision. Yet, the Biden administration decided to make Colorado Springs, Colorado, which came in fifth in the Selection Phase, the location of the headquarters for U.S. Space Command. It’s clear that far-left politics, not national security, was the driving force behind this decision.” Both Houses of Congress had just passed their versions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), with the Senate only finishing their version late on Thursday. Congress then left for its August recess. “It is also shameful that the Administration waited until Congress had gone into recess and already passed next year’s defense budget before announcing this decision,” Tuberville said. “The top three choices for Space Command headquarters were all in red states—Alabama, Nebraska, and Texas. Colorado didn’t even come close. This decision to bypass the three most qualified sites looks like blatant patronage politics, and it sets a dangerous precedent that military bases are now to be used as rewards for political supporters rather than for our security.” U.S. Senator Katie Britt (R-Alabama) said, “President Biden has irresponsibly decided to yank a military decision out of the Air Force’s hands in the name of partisan politics. Huntsville finished first in both the Air Force’s Evaluation Phase and Selection Phase, leaving no doubt that the Air Force’s decision to choose Redstone as the preferred basing location was correct purely on the merits. That decision should have remained in the Air Force’s purview. Instead, President Biden is now trying to hand the Gold Medal to the fifth-place finisher. The President’s blatant prioritization of partisan political considerations at the expense of our national security, military modernization, and force readiness is a disservice and a dishonor to his oath of office as our nation’s Commander-in-Chief. Locating the permanent Space Command Headquarters on Redstone Arsenal
Joe Biden decides to keep Space Command in Colorado, rejecting move to Alabama
President Joe Biden has decided to keep U.S. Space Command headquarters in Colorado, overturning a last-ditch decision by the Trump administration to move it to Alabama. The choice ended months of thorny deliberations, but an Alabama lawmaker vowed to fight on. U.S. officials told The Associated Press on Monday that Biden was convinced by the head of Space Command, Gen. James Dickinson, who argued that moving his headquarters now would jeopardize military readiness. Dickinson’s view, however, was in contrast to Air Force leadership, who studied the issue at length and determined that relocating to Huntsville, Alabama, was the right move. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to provide details of Biden’s rationale for the decision. In announcing the plans, Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder, Pentagon press secretary, said the decision was based on an “objective and deliberate process informed by data and analysis.” He said Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin supported the president’s decision. Reaction to the decision came fast and was sharply divided, as Colorado lawmakers praised it and Alabama officials slammed it as a political maneuver. “This fight is far from over,” warned Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Ala., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Biden, said the U.S. officials, believes that keeping the command in Colorado Springs would avoid a disruption in readiness that the move would cause, particularly as the U.S. races to compete with China in space. And they said Biden firmly believes that maintaining stability will help the military be better able to respond in space over the next decade. Those factors, they said, outweighed what the president believed would be any minor benefits of moving to Alabama. Biden’s decision enraged Alabama lawmakers and is sure to fuel accusations that abortion politics played a role in the choice. The location debate has become entangled in the ongoing battle between Alabama Republican Sen. Tommy Tuberville and the Defense Department over the move to provide travel for troops seeking reproductive health care. Tuberville opposed the policy is blocking hundreds of military promotions in protest. The U.S. officials said the abortion issue had no effect at all on Biden’s decision. And they said the president fully expected there would be different views on the matter within the Defense Department. Tuberville, in a statement, said the top three choices for Space Command headquarters were all in Republican-leaning states — Alabama, Nebraska, and Texas — and bypassing them “looks like blatant patronage politics.” Formally created in August 2019, the command was temporarily based in Colorado, and Air Force and Space Force leaders initially recommended it stay there. In the final days of his presidency, Donald Trump decided it should be based in Huntsville. The change triggered a number of reviews. Proponents of keeping the command in Colorado have argued that moving it to Huntsville and creating a new headquarters would set back its progress at a time it needs to move quickly to be positioned to match China’s military space rise. And Colorado Springs is also home to the Air Force Academy, which now graduates Space Force guardians, and more than 24 military space missions, including three Space Force bases. Officials also argued that any new headquarters in Alabama would not be completed until sometime after 2030, forcing a lengthy transition. Huntsville, however, scored higher than Colorado Springs in a Government Accountability Office assessment of potential locations and has long been a home to some of the earliest missiles used in the nation’s space programs, including the Saturn V rocket. It is home to the Army’s Space and Missile Defense Command. According to officials, Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall, who ordered his own review of the matter, leaned toward Huntsville, while Dickinson was staunchly in favor of staying put. The officials said Austin presented both options to Biden. In a statement Monday, Kendall said the service will work to quickly implement Biden’s decision, adding that keeping the command in Colorado will “avoid any disruption to its operational capability.” The decision was hailed as a victory in Colorado lawmakers and condemned in Alabama. “For two and a half years, we’ve known any objective analysis of this basing decision would reach the same conclusion we did, that Peterson Space Force Base is the best home for Space Command,” Sen. John Hickenlooper, D-Colo., said in a statement. “Most importantly, this decision firmly rejects the idea that politics — instead of national security — should determine basing decisions central to our national security.” Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., said the decision “restores integrity to the Pentagon’s basing process and sends a strong message that national security and the readiness of our Armed Forces drive our military decisions.” Rogers, meanwhile, vowed that his committee will continue an investigation into the matter, calling it a “deliberate taxpayer-funded manipulation of the selection process.” He added, “It’s clear that far-left politics, not national security, was the driving force behind this decision.” Republican Alabama Sen. Katie Britt echoed his sentiment, saying it was irresponsible for Biden to “yank a military decision out of the Air Force’s hands in the name of partisan politics.” She said an Air Force evaluation of the potential locations ranked Huntsville first, adding that the decision ”should have remained in the Air Force’s purview.” Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
Rep. Robert Aderholt secures Space Command spending language in House appropriations bill
On Tuesday, Congressman Robert Aderholt (R-AL04) announced that he has been able to secure language halting the development of the U.S. Space Command (SPACECOM) in Colorado until an official basing decision has been made. “Now more than ever, the establishment of a permanent Space Command Headquarters remains vital to our national security,” said Rep. Aderholt. “The language incentivizes the Secretary of the Air Force to determine the permanent headquarters location as quickly as possible.” “In this matter, timeliness remains of the utmost importance,” Aderholt continued. “I urge the Department to move the headquarters to its preferred permanent location as quickly as possible; however, if the Administration continues to delay, I am relieved that General (James H.) Dickinson, the SPACECOM Commander, last week assured the Alabama Delegation that he had no national security concerns about moving the headquarters.” The bipartisan language is included in the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans Affairs fiscal year 2024 spending bill, following a review and approval by the United States Air Force. During the Trump administration, the Air Force held a national search for a permanent home for Space Command. Dozens of sites across the country were considered for a multitude of factors. Two different evaluations found that Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville was the best possible site. Nebraska came in second, followed by San Antonio, Texas. Colorado, where Space Command is presently, came in fourth. A review by the inspector general found that the decision to locate SPACECOM in Huntsville was the correct decision and was not tainted by politics. “The fact is, Air Force already made the correct decision well over two years ago,” said Congressman Mike Rogers (R-AL03). That decision was affirmed by the GAO and the DoD Inspector General over a year ago. This decision was based on multiple factors, and Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama, was the clear winner in the Evaluation and Selection phase. I am deeply concerned that the continued delays in making this move final are politically motivated and damaging to our national security.” Over 24 months later, no action has been taken to relocate SPACECOM. A recent report by NBC News claims that the White House may halt plans to move Space Command. The report cites Alabama’s restrictive abortion law. Alabama’s congressional delegation, however, points to the fact that Colorado voted for President Joe Biden while Alabama voted to keep President Donald Trump. The SPACECOM basing decision remains a responsibility of the Secretary of the Air Force, Frank Kendall, a decision delegated by the President of the United States and the Secretary of Defense. “As we take this step, I would like to thank the Alabama delegation for their commitment to this fight,” said Aderholt. “We all know that Space Command belongs in the Rocket City.” According to a June 2022 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, the decision-making process that the Air Force used to decide to move Space Command headquarters from Colorado Springs to Alabama had “significant shortfalls in its transparency and credibility.” “Over the past year, we’ve repeatedly raised concerns that the previous administration used a flawed, untested, and inconsistent process to select a location for U.S. Space Command. The reports from the Government Accountability Office and the Department of Defense Inspector General both confirm that the basing process lacked integrity and neglected key national security considerations,” Sens. Michael Bennet and John Hickenlooper and Reps. Doug Lamborn and Jason Crow said in a joint statement. Additionally, legislators from Colorado argue that the decision to move Space Command was politically motivated, arguing that former President Trump indicated that he would decide the 2020 election. AL.com reported in 2021 that during an interview on the Rick & Bubba show, Trump stated, “Space force – I sent to Alabama. I hope you know that. (They) said they were looking for a home, and I single-handedly said, ‘Let’s go to Alabama.’ They wanted it. I said let’s go to Alabama. I love Alabama.” Robert Aderholt is in his 14th term representing Alabama’s Fourth Congressional District. He is an attorney and was formerly counsel for Alabama Governor Fob James. He is a native of Haleyville. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Tommy Tuberville criticized over hold on Defense Nominees
U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville has been heavily criticized for holding defense nominees up by refusing to give unanimous consent to senior-level military and Department of Defense civilian promotions over his unhappiness with Defense Department efforts to thwart state laws limiting or banning abortions. Tuberville pushed back in a Senate floor speech on Wednesday. Tuberville pointed out that a simple vote of the full Senate in regular order would override Tuberville’s hold. It would require Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to bring the promotions before the Senate in regular order. “Every single one of these nominees can receive a vote in the Senate if Senator Schumer wants it,” Tuberville said. “It’s not too much to ask of the United States Senate to do its job — to vote.” Senate Democrats and the White House are saying that national security is being threatened by Tuberville refusing to approve batches of the promotions by unanimous consent as is the standard practice of the Senate. John Kirby is the National Security Council (NSC) Coordinator for Strategic Communications. “So, I think you all know he’s blocking Defense Department nominations, including the promotions of over 160 senior military leaders — admirals and generals — and nominees for top acquisition and sustainment positions, civilian positions at DOD right at a time when the budget has gone forward, and you got the top leaders of the Defense Department testifying on this budget — biggest budget ever for DOD — and at a time when we are still trying to support Ukraine while we’re still facing challenges in the Indo-Pacific — a wide range of challenges; it’s not just all about China,” Kirby told reporters in a White House press briefing Wednesday. “I mean, look at what North Korea has done in recent days.” “And when you hold these promotions up, you — there is, as Secretary Austin said, a real ripple effect downstream because now people can’t move on to the next job, and they can’t leave the one that they’re in, and they can’t assume these new jobs of responsibility,” Kirby continued. “And it absolutely — if it goes on too long, it could absolutely have an effect on U.S. military readiness around the world. We noticed that there were some Senate Republicans yesterday who urged Senator Tuberville to drop these blocks themselves, and we certainly welcome that and agree with them.” Schumer has repeatedly blasted Tuberville for his refusal to give unanimous consent to the promotions. “It’s not very often that the majority leader of the Senate attacks a single senator by name three days in a row,” Tuberville said. “Now, in my former profession, I’ve been called everything. It doesn’t really bother me too much. But the majority leader has also tweeted about me. That’s good. So, let’s get the record straight as we speak. Right now, I want to talk about what I have done and what I am doing.” “First of all, I’m not blocking anyone from being confirmed. Every single one of these nominees can receive a vote if Senator Schumer wants it,” Tuberville said. “In fact, one of the civilian nominees is getting a vote this week. If Democrats are so worried about these nominations, let’s vote. If we’re not going to vote on taxpayer-funded abortion, then let’s vote on these nominees. Voting is our job. It’s not too much to ask of the United States Senate to do its job — to vote.” “Senator Schumer and some of the other senators have claimed that my hold on these nominees is unprecedented,” Tuberville continued. “Well, it’s not. My hold is far from unprecedented. In fact, Senator [Michael] Bennet himself threatened to do the exact same thing just a few months ago. Why? Because the Air Force’s planned to move Space Command from Colorado to Huntsville, Alabama…Two years ago, we had a senator from Illinois put a hold on 1,000 nominees over the promotion of one single officer. So far, my hold has affected 184 nominations.” “I am not going to be intimidated by a campaign of selective outrage,” Tuberville said. Tuberville is following through on his pledge to hold the confirmation of DoD nominees if the Pentagon moved forward with its new pro-abortion policy of funding travel and paid time off for service members and their dependents seeking an elective abortion. “We’re talking about taxpayers’ funding for travel and extra paid time to get elective abortions,” Tuberville said. “This policy includes spouses and dependents. We’re talking about taxpayer funding for somebody’s kids to go get an abortion in another state. This has never been in the policy until now.” The Alabama Republican Party announced on Facebook that they are joining a Family Research Council petition drive supporting Tuberville’s stance. “Join us as we stand with Senator Tommy Tuberville in his fight against the Department of Defense’s new abortion policy. Help Coach defend the unborn, preserve congressional authority, and prevent our military from becoming an abortion business. Add your name to the Family Research Council’s petition.” Tommy Tuberville has represented Alabama in the U.S. Senate since his election in 2020. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Katies Britt joins bipartisan group of colleagues questioning Federal Reserve’s actions in Silicon Valley Bank crisis
On Monday, U.S. Senator Katie Britt joined Senators Kyrsten Sinema, Thom Tillis, and a bipartisan group of Senators questioning the Federal Reserve its’ oversight of troubled Silicon Valley Bank before the bank’s failure. The Sens. claim that the Federal Reserve missed clear warning signs – including bank leadership’s failure to appropriately manage customer deposits. That it missed as part of its responsibilities to conduct oversight and examinations ahead of Silicon Valley Bank’s collapse. “SVB is a clear case of regulators refusing to do their job despite the fact that all of the red flags were there,” said Sen. Britt. “The Fed failed to use the tools in their toolbox to prevent what we saw in recent weeks, and I want to know why. Alabamians don’t just want answers, they deserve answers. And I, for one, will not stop until we get them.” “It is gravely concerning that retail participants, utilizing only publicly available information, were able to identify clear and compelling examples of financial mismanagement and asset over-concentration at SVB, while the Fed, which can draw even deeper from non-public supervisory information, was unable to ascertain a similar conclusion,” the Sens. wrote in their letter. “The fact that the San Francisco Fed, among other regulatory agencies, found no reason to take appropriate regulatory action or even investigate SVB further in the months, weeks, and days prior to the bank’s collapse must be addressed in a manner that restores public confidence in Fed supervision.” “Safety and soundness is the cornerstone regulatory principle of the U.S. banking system, and it is important we assess what went wrong at SVB to ensure future stability in the U.S. financial services sector. Specifically, we support any efforts that will provide further information on all relevant risks, actions, and inactions – taken by SVB and by regulators, supervisors, and examiners – that contributed to this failure,” the Sens. wrote. “It is gravely concerning that retail participants, utilizing only publicly available information, were able to identify clear and compelling examples of financial mismanagement and asset over-concentration at SVB, while the Fed, which can draw even deeper from non-public supervisory information, was unable to ascertain a similar conclusion. The fact that the San Francisco Fed, among other regulatory agencies, found no reason to take appropriate regulatory action or even investigate SVB further in the months, weeks, and days prior to the bank’s collapse must be addressed in a manner that restores public confidence in Fed supervision. We look forward to evaluating the results of your review, particularly with respect to the robustness of Fed supervision and examination of SVB.” Britt joined Sinema and Tillis in cosigning the letter. Also cosigning were Sens. John Hickenlooper (D-Colorado), Kevin Cramer (R-North Dakota), Chris Murphy (D-Connecticut), Mike Rounds (R-South Dakota), Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyoming), Bill Hagerty (R-Tennessee), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nevada), J.D. Vance (R-Ohio), and Michael Bennet (D-Colorado). There are media reports that federal regulators knew about the problems at SVB for more than a year, and yet they hesitated to act. The Wall Street Journal reported that federal bank regulators knew Silicon Valley Bank was a troubled bank as early as 2019. In 2021, the Federal Reserve cautioned the bank about significant vulnerabilities in the bank’s containment of risk. SVB had a uniquely concentrated customer base of venture capital funds, venture investors, and start-ups, many of whom have or have had financial relationships or business partnerships with one another. That customer base includes a significant level of financial interdependency that potentially increased risk. The Fed identified the risks to the bank, yet SVB did nothing to mitigate any of the risks. The Federal Reserve has already announced an internal investigation into its regulatory oversight, supervision, and examination of Silicon Valley Bank. The Senators urged that as part of this investigation, the Fed should focus on the role of concentration risk in the bank examination process and review the financial arrangements between Silicon Valley Bank and its customers to determine their impact on the bank’s collapse. Katie Britt is a member of the Financial Institutions and Consumer Protection Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
U.S. Senate is focus of politicos across the country
In Alabama, with hours left in the 2022 election cycle, the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate, Katie Britt, appears to be a prohibitive favorite over Democratic nominee Dr. Will Boyd and Libertarian nominee John Sophocleus for the open U.S. Senate seat, currently held by the retiring Richard Shelby. Nationally, though, there is intense speculation over what could happen on election day on Tuesday and which party will control the next Congress. Polling shows Republicans with growing momentum, and it appears almost a certainty that the GOP will take control of the U.S. House of Representatives after four years of Nancy Pelosi’s leadership, and it does not appear to even be close. Real Clear Politics does not see any of Alabama’s Seven Congressional Districts as even being in play in this election. With the House effectively lost to them, Democrats have focused their efforts on maintaining their narrow control of the U.S. Senate, which for the past two years has been tied 50 to 50; but Vice President Kamala Harris gives the Democrats control of the body. Democrats had staked their hopes on the Select Committee on January 6, and the abortion issue to energize their base. That has not happened. Instead, Republicans are running on inflation, crime, the border, and economic issues, and that strategy appears to be playing well with voters. It is too close to call who will control the Senate before the votes are counted, but clearly, the trend has been moving in favor of the GOP in the last three weeks. The best opportunity for a Republican pickup appears to be Nevada. There, the Republican challenger, former state Attorney General Adam Laxalt, is leading Democratic incumbent Sen. Catharine Masto in recent polling. The latest Real Clear Politics rolling poll average has Laxalt leading Masto by 1.9 points. The best opportunity for a Democratic pickup appears to be Pennsylvania, where Republican incumbent Sen. Pat Toomey is retiring even though he is only 60 years old. Toomey’s controversial vote in 2021 to convict former President Donald Trump of inciting the January 6 insurrection made his ability to win a Republican primary unlikely. Democratic lieutenant Governor John Fetterman had appeared to have an insurmountable lead over Republican nominee television host Dr. Mehmet Oz, but that lead has evaporated. The race is now a tossup, but Oz has the momentum after clearly besting Fetterman in the debate. Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden are both campaigning hard for Fetterman, and Trump is campaigning for Oz. Both parties recognize that there is little chance of the Democrats holding on to the Senate if Pennsylvania falls to the GOP. Georgia is a tossup between Democratic incumbent Sen. Raphael Warnock and college football star Republican challenger Hershel Walker, but Walker clearly has the momentum in this race. Due to Georgia’s election rules, however, this race will likely go to a December runoff. Warnock is being dragged down in the general election by the terrible performance of Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams. Brian Kemp is sure to best Abrams on Tuesday. If Walker faces Warnock again on December 6, however, will those Kemp voters come out to help the Republicans lift Walker over Warnock? The trifecta of Pennsylvania, Nevada, and Georgia likely decide the Senate, but there are other races where Democratic incumbents are fighting for their political lives. In New Hampshire, Democratic incumbent Sen. Maggie Hassan is leading Republican challenger Dan Bolduc, but this race is much closer at this point than politicos expected this summer. If there really is a Republican “red wave” where GOP voters come out to the polls on Tuesday with more enthusiasm than Democrats, then the Granite state could easily swing to the GOP. According to the latest Real Clear Politics rolling poll average, Hassan has a lead of just .8 – well inside the margin of error and trending in the wrong direction for Hassan. Another state where a “red wave” could unseat a Democratic incumbent is Arizona. This summer, it appeared that incumbent former astronaut and the husband of former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, Sen. Mark Kelly, would win easy reelection by more than ten points. Now this race is much closer than even the most enthusiastic GOP supporters thought possible. Republican nominee Blake Masters has won over a lot of voters. If the GOP candidate for Governor wins and wins big, Arizona could be a surprise U.S. Senate pickup for the GOP. This race has been a tie in two of the last 5 polls, with Kelly’s best performance being plus three in a Marist poll. Both Remington and Fox News have Kelly leading by just one point. If Republicans flip Arizona, there is little likelihood of the Democrats holding on to the Senate. In the summer, the Democrats believed that Republican incumbent Ron Johnson in Wisconsin was very vulnerable. Those hopes are fading fast as Johnson is surging in the polls over Democratic challenger Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes. Senate colleague Bernie Sanders is on the ground campaigning for Barnes this weekend. Johnson leads Barnes by 3.2 points in the most recent Real Clear Politics rolling average. If there is no GOP wave, this could be closer than the polls indicate, and a Barnes upset win is still not outside the realm of possibility. In Washington state, even Republicans were expecting incumbent Sen. Patty Murray to coast to another easy re-election. That race is now much closer than anyone had previously thought possible. Republican challenger Tiffany Smiley has pushed Murray far harder than anyone could have anticipated in this blue state. Murray was consistently polling nine points or more in September, but recent polling has shown her lead shrink to just 1 to 4 points. The Real Clear Politics still has Murray up by 3.0 points in their most recent polling average, but that has dropped from 9 points just four weeks ago. This would still be an unlikely pickup for Republicans in a state that Biden won by 19.2 points just two years ago. That said, a Smiley victory is now within the margin of error in some recent polling. Murray holding on to her seat remains the most likely outcome, but that is now far from certain. In North Carolina, Republican incumbent Sen. Richard Burr is retiring. This seemed to be an opportunity for Democrats to flip this red seat blue, and Civitas/Cygnal had the race between Republican Ted Budd and Democratic nominee Cheri Beasley tied as recently as September 26, but Budd appears to
Lindsey Graham unveils nationwide abortion ban after 15 weeks
Upending the political debate, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham introduced a nationwide abortion ban Tuesday, sending shockwaves through both parties and igniting fresh debate on a fraught issue weeks before the midterm elections that will determine control of Congress. Graham’s own Republican Party leaders did not immediately embrace his abortion ban bill, which would prohibit the procedure after 15 weeks of pregnancy with rare exceptions, and has almost no chance of becoming law in the Democratic-held Congress. Democrats torched it as an alarming signal of where “MAGA” Republicans are headed if they win control of the House and Senate in November. “America’s got to make some decisions,” Graham said at a news conference at the Capitol. The South Carolina Republican said that rather than shying away from the Supreme Court’s ruling this summer overturning Roe v. Wade’s nearly 50-year right to abortion access, Republicans are preparing to fight to make a nationwide abortion ban federal law. “Oh, no, no, no, no, no, no, we’re going nowhere,” the senator said while flanked by female advocates from the anti-abortion movement. “We welcome the debate. We welcome the vote in the United States Senate as to what America should look like in 2022.” Reaction was swift, fierce, and unwavering from Democrats who viewed Graham’s legislation as an extreme example of the far-right’s hold on the GOP and as a political gift of self-inflicted pain for Republican candidates now having to answer questions about an abortion ban heading toward the midterm elections. “A nationwide abortion ban — that’s the contrast between the two parties, plain and simple,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said. Sen. Patty Murray, a Democrat from Washington who is in her own fight for reelection, said Republicans “want to force” women to stay pregnant and deliver babies. “To anyone who thought they were safe, here is the painful reality,” she said. “Republicans are coming for your rights.” The sudden turn of events comes in a razor-tight election season as Republicans hoping to win control of Congress are struggling to recapture momentum, particularly after the Supreme Court’s landmark decision sparked deep concerns among some voters, with signs of female voters peeling away from the GOP. In a midterm election where the party out of the White House traditionally holds an advantage, even more so this year with President Joe Biden’s lackluster approval ratings, the Democrats have regained their own momentum pushing back the GOP candidates in House and Senate races. Tuesday’s announcement set up an immediate split screen with Biden and Democrats poised to celebrate their accomplishments in a ceremony at the White House after passage of the Inflation Reduction Act and Republicans forced to answer for Graham’s proposed abortion ban. “This bill is wildly out of step with what Americans believe,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement. “While President Biden and Vice President [Kamala] Harris are focused on the historic passage of the Inflation Reduction Act to reduce the cost of prescription drugs, health care, and energy – and to take unprecedented action to address climate change — Republicans in Congress are focused on taking rights away from millions of women,” Jean-Pierre said. Graham’s legislation has almost zero chance of becoming law, but it elevates the abortion issue at a time when other Republicans would prefer to focus on inflation, border security, and Biden’s leadership. The Republican bill would ban abortions nationwide after 15 weeks of pregnancy, except in cases of rape, incest, or risk to the physical health of the mother. Graham said it would put the U.S. on par with many countries in Europe and around the world. In particular, Graham’s bill would leave in place state laws that are more restrictive. That provision is notable because many Republicans have argued that the Supreme Court’s ruling leaves the abortion issue for the states to decide. But the legislation from the Republicans makes it clear states are only allowed to decide the issue if their abortion bans are more stringent. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who is one seat away from majority control, declined to embrace Graham’s legislation. “I think every Republican senator running this year in these contested races has an answer as to how they feel about the issue,” McConnell said. He said most GOP senators prefer having the issue dealt with by the states rather than at the federal level. “So I leave it up to our candidates who are quite capable of handling this issue to determine for them what their response is.” The Democratic senators most at risk this fall and other Democratic candidates running for Congress appeared eager to fight against Graham’s proposed nationwide abortion ban. Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, a Nevada Democrat, tweeted that Graham “and every other anti-choice extremist can take a hike.” Her Republican opponent, Adam Laxalt, has during his campaign insisted that abortion is protected in the state constitution, which it may no longer be under this bill. In Colorado, another Democrat up for reelection, Sen. Michael Bennet, tweeted: “A nationwide abortion ban is outrageous. ” Bennet pledged “to defend a woman’s right to make her own health care decisions, no matter what ZIP code she lives in. We cannot afford to let the Republicans take back the Senate.” His opponent in Colorado, Republican Joe O’Dea, who supports putting abortion access that had been guaranteed under Roe v. Wade into law, agreed, in part: “A Republican ban is as reckless and tone deaf as is Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer’s hostility to considering any compromise on late-term abortion, parental notification or conscience protections for religious hospitals.” The races for control of Congress are tight in the split 50-50 Senate, where one seat determines majority control, and in the House, where Speaker Nancy Pelosi can afford to lose only a few seats. Pelosi called Graham’s bill the “clearest signal of extreme MAGA Republicans’ intent to criminalize women’s health freedom in all 50 states and arrest doctors for providing basic care. Make no mistake: if Republicans get the chance, they will work to pass laws even more
Child tax credit starts hitting U.S. families’ bank accounts
The child tax credit had always been an empty gesture to millions of parents like Tamika Daniel. That changed Thursday when the first payment of $1,000 hit Daniel’s bank account — and dollars started flowing into the pockets of more than 35 million families around the country. Daniel, a 35-year-old mother of four, didn’t even know the tax credit existed until President Joe Biden expanded it for one year as part of the $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package that passed in March. Previously, only people who earned enough money to owe income taxes could qualify for the credit. Daniel went nearly a decade without a job because her eldest son is autistic and needed her. So she got by on Social Security payments. And she had to live at Fairfield Court, a public housing project that dead-ends at Interstate 64 as the highway cuts through the Virginia capital of Richmond. But the extra $1,000 a month for the next year could be a life-changer for Daniel, who now works as a community organizer for a Richmond nonprofit. It will help provide a security deposit on a new apartment. “It’s actually coming right on time,” she said. “We have a lot going on. This definitely helps to take a load off.” Biden has held out the new monthly payments, which will average $423 per family, as the key to halving child poverty rates. But he is also setting up a broader philosophical battle about the role of government and the responsibilities of parents. Democrats see this as a landmark program along the same lines as Social Security, saying it will lead to better outcomes in adulthood that will help economic growth. But many Republicans warn that the payments will discourage parents from working and ultimately feed into long-term poverty. Some 15 million households will now receive full credit. The monthly payments amount to $300 for each child who is 5 and younger and $250 for those between 5 and 17. The payments are set to lapse after a year, but Biden is pushing to extend them through at least 2025. The president ultimately would like to make the payments permanent — and that makes this first round of payments a test as to whether the government can improve the lives of families. Biden invited beneficiaries to the White House to mark the first round of payments, saying in a Thursday speech that the day carried a historic resonance because of the boost it will give families across the nation. “This would be the largest ever one-year decrease in child poverty in the history of the United States of America,” the president said. “Millions of children and their families, starting today, their lives are about to change for the better. And our country would be better off for it as well.” Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio, who successfully championed increasing the credit in 2017, said that the Democrats’ plans will turn the benefits into an “anti-work welfare check” because almost every family can now qualify for the payment regardless of whether the parents have a job. “Not only does Biden’s plan abandon incentives for marriage and requirements for work, but it will also destroy the child-support enforcement system as we know it by sending cash payments to single parents without ensuring child-support orders are established,” Rubio said in a statement Wednesday. The administration disputed those claims. Treasury Department estimates indicate that 97% of recipients of the tax credit have wages or self-employment income, while the other 3% are grandparents or have health issues. The credit also starts to phase out at $150,000 for joint filers, so there is no disincentive for the poor to work because a job would just give them more income. Colorado Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet said the problem is one of inequality. He said that economic growth has benefited the top 10% of earners in recent decades, while families are struggling with the rising costs of housing, child care, and health care. He said his voters back in Colorado are concerned that their children will be poorer than previous generations, and that requires the expansion of the child tax credit. “It’s the most progressive change to America’s tax code ever,” Bennet told reporters. Parenthood is an expensive undertaking. The Agriculture Department estimated in 2017, the last year it published such a report, that a typical family spends $233,610 to raise a child from birth to the age of 17. But wealthier children get far more invested in their education and upbringing, while poorer children face a constant disadvantage. Families in the top third of incomes spend about $10,000 more annually per child than families in the lower third. The child tax credit was created in 1997 to be a source of relief, yet it also became a driver of economic and racial inequality as only parents who owed the federal government taxes could qualify for its full payment. Academic research in 2020 found that about three-quarters of white and Asian children were eligible for the full credit, but only about half of Black and Hispanic children qualified. In the census tract where Daniel lives in Richmond, the median household income is $14,725 —almost five times lower than the national median. Three out of every 4 children live in poverty. For a typical parent with two children in that part of Richmond, the expanded tax credit would raise income by almost 41%. The tax credit is as much about keeping people in the middle class as it is about lifting up the poor. Katie Strelka of Brookfield, Wisconsin, was laid off from her job as a beauty and hair care products buyer for the Kohl’s department store chain in September as the pandemic tightened its grip on the country. She and her sons, 3-year-old Oliver and 7-year-old Robert, were left to depend on her husband’s income as a consultant for retirement services. The family was already struggling to pay for her husband’s kidney transplant five years earlier and his ongoing therapies before she
Tommy Tuberville joins other leaders to change sexual assault investigations in the military
U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville has joined a bipartisan group of senators to support a bill that will change the way the military conducts sexual assault investigations and prosecutions. Tuberville, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee Subcommittee on Personnel, joined U.S. Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Joni Ernst (R-IA), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), and 28 other Senators to introduce the Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act. According to the press release, the legislation “keeps the prosecution of sexual assault crimes within the military but moves the decision to prosecute to independent, trained, professional military prosecutors, and provides for several new prevention provisions such as better training for commanders and increased physical security measures, while ensuring that commanders still have the ability to provide strong leadership and ensure a successful command climate.” Tuberville stated, “Our men and women in uniform sacrifice every day to keep us safe, often working in some pretty unsafe places around the world. The last thing they should be worrying about is whether they’re unsafe within their ranks, and they certainly shouldn’t have to fear retaliation if they report a sexual assault. This bill is what happens when a bipartisan group of senators come together to get something done. I’m thankful that Senator Gillibrand and Senator Ernst have led the charge, and I’m glad to join my colleagues in support of this bill that will help improve the way the military handles sexual assaults so survivors can get the justice they deserve.” The bill was introduced in 2019, but did not receive a vote. Specifically, the legislation would: Move the decision on whether to prosecute serious crimes to independent, trained, and professional military prosecutors, while leaving misdemeanors and uniquely military crimes within the chain of command. Ensure the Department of Defense supports criminal investigators and military prosecutors through the development of unique skills needed to properly handle investigations and cases related to sexual assault and domestic violence. Require the Secretary of Defense to survey and improve the physical security of military installations– including locks, security cameras, and other passive security measures – to increase safety in lodging and living spaces for service members. Increase, and improve training and education on military sexual assault throughout our armed services. Kirsten Gillibrand stated on Twitter, “Here’s a bipartisan mission we can all support: Survivors of military sexual assault deserve justice. I’m proud to have @JoniErnst join me this week to introduce our new, improved bill to reform the military justice system and invest in prevention.” Here’s a bipartisan mission we can all support: Survivors of military sexual assault deserve justice. I’m proud to have @joniernst join me this week to introduce our new, improved bill to reform the military justice system and invest in prevention. https://t.co/pYYUL6IRyA — Kirsten Gillibrand (@SenGillibrand) April 27, 2021 The legislation is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Joni Ernst (R-IA), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Angus King (I-ME), Michael Braun (R-IN), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Rand Paul (R-KY), Chris Coons (D-DE), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Bob Casey Jr. (D-PA), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Patrick Leahy (D-VT),Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Gary C. Peters (D-MI), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Tina Smith (D-MN), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), and Martin Heinrich (D-NM).
Colorado’s Aerospace Alley prepares for Space Command move
When Kathy Boe heard the news in January that President Donald Trump was moving the headquarters of U.S. Space Command from Colorado Springs to Huntsville, Alabama, she understood why Trump was making the move — even though she expected Colorado Springs to be the frontrunner in the race. “We kind of knew they were our biggest competitor all along,” said Boe, the founder and CEO of Colorado Springs-based aerospace company Boecore. Boe started her company in her Colorado Springs basement 21 years ago. The business, which designs software for military space and missile defense projects, now employs 275 people in the city.Since that time, Boe’s business has also expanded to other locations, including Huntsville. The Boecore office there opened 12 years ago, and Boe said there has been plenty of private and public sector military work going on between the two cities for decades. Boe has even advocated for the Colorado Springs Airport to add a direct flight to Huntsville. The Army’s Redstone Arsenal, near Huntsville, is host to a number of federal military installations, including the Missile Defense Agency, NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center and Army Space and Missile Defense Command. After Trump’s decision, Alabama Governor Kay Ivey called the region “the most natural choice” for U.S. Space Command. Yet, Colorado’s top elected representatives, including the state’s entire congressional delegation, cried foul. They argued the Defense Department’s space assets in Colorado focused on operating military satellites are a far more logical fit for the work done through the Space Command mission. Plus, they pointed out, Peterson Air Force base has already been effectively hosting the command since it was re-established in 2019 and moving it would lead to a costly duplication of resources. Colorado’s political leaders saw Trump’s move as an overtly partisan one, meant to pacify two Republican senators ahead of a heated vote on whether to convict the former President on impeachment charges. In February, the Defense Department — operating under new President Joe Biden — announced it would investigate the circumstances behind Trump’s Space Command decision. News of the investigation left Colorado politicians cheering. Governor Jared Polis said the investigation could help “restore integrity” to the flawed and “fiscally irresponsible” decision. Senators Michael Bennet And John Hickenlooper put out a joint statement that said moving the command to Alabama would jeopardize national security. Gov. Ivey in Alabama quickly welcomed the official review of the Huntsville selection, saying the location was “chosen based on merit.” Journalist Lee Roop covers Alabama’s aerospace industry for the statewide news service AL.com. He said despite Colorado’s enthusiasm in the wake of the investigation, people in Huntsville are largely convinced the decision will stand. “Our (University of Alabama) football coach down here, Nick Saban, he always says ‘Trust the process and you’ll get where you want to go,’” Roop said. “So, there’s a process and they felt confident about the process.” The earliest Redstone Arsenal would take over hosting Space Command from Colorado Springs would be in 2026. That time would allow Redstone to build the necessary facilities to house the Command. Rep. Doug Lamborn said in a commentary for Defense News that the Department of Defense has spent over $350 million in the last 15 years on “space-specific infrastructure” in Colorado. He said building the infrastructure for a new headquarters in Alabama would be “expensive” and that building similar headquarters around the country have cost the federal government hundreds of millions of dollars. Roop said he expects the newly announced investigation into the decision will delay the timing of Space Command’s move to Alabama even further. More than 18 months ago, the Wings Over The Rockies Air and Space Museum started a campaign to popularize the term “Aerospace Alley” in reference to Colorado’s burgeoning aerospace industry. The campaign touts Colorado’s concentration of a private aerospace workforce, which they say is the highest in the nation: 500 aerospace companies. The majority of those companies employ 10 or fewer people, according to retired Air Force Maj. Gen. John Barry, the President and CEO of Wings Over The Rockies. “It kind of reminds me of what Silicon Valley must have been like when the industry started out back there with small companies and people working in garages and things like that,” Barry said. The Aerospace Alley campaign is largely focused on workforce development — to attract and educate young aerospace talent. Barry said that even if U.S. Space Command does ultimately move to Alabama, much of the command’s operations will still be run from the Centennial State. “Will it hurt? Yeah, it’ll be a little bit of a stigma,” Barry said. “But, will it be able to prevent us from being able to continue with the aspect of trying to put Colorado as maybe the number one aerospace state in the nation? I don’t think so.” That’s also the case for Alabama. Roop said the rest of the country doesn’t often realize how much aerospace work is already done in the state. “People here really want the command to come, and we’re very excited about it. But, you know, it’ll be OK. It’ll be OK any way it turns out,” Roop said. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Inspector general reviews Donald Trump’s relocation of Space Command
The Department of Defense’s inspector general announced Friday that it was reviewing the Trump administration’s last-minute decision to relocate U.S. Space Command from Colorado to Alabama. The decision on Jan. 13, one week before Trump left office, blindsided Colorado officials and raised questions of political retaliation. Donald Trump had hinted at a Colorado Springs rally in 2020 that the command would stay at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs. But the man with whom Trump held that rally, Republican Sen. Cory Gardner, lost his reelection bid in November, and Colorado, unlike Alabama, voted decisively against Trump. The Air Force’s last-minute relocation of command headquarters to Huntsville, Alabama — home of the U.S. Army’s Redstone Arsenal — blindsided Colorado officials of both parties, who have urged the Biden administration to reconsider the decision. On Friday, the inspector general’s office announced it was investigating whether the relocation complied with Air Force and Pentagon policy and was based on proper evaluations of competing locations. Colorado officials of both parties were thrilled. “It is imperative that we thoroughly review what I believe will prove to be a fundamentally flawed process that focused on bean-counting rather than American space dominance,” said Rep. Doug Lamborn, a Republican whose district includes Space Command. The state’s two Democratic U.S. senators, Michael Bennet and John Hickenlooper, also hailed the probe. “Moving Space Command will disrupt the mission while risking our national security and economic vitality,” the senators said in a joint statement. “Politics have no role to play in our national security. We fully support the investigation.” Among other duties, the Space Command enables satellite-based navigation and troop communication and provides warning of missile launches. Also based at Peterson are the North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, and the U.S. Northern Command. The Space Command differs from the U.S. Space Force, launched in December 2019 as the first new military service since the Air Force was created in 1947. The Space Command is not an individual military service but a central command for military wide space operations. It operated at Peterson from 1985 until it was dissolved in 2002, and it was revived in 2019. The Air Force accepted bids from locations for the command when it was revived and was considering six finalists, including Huntsville, when Trump hinted it’d stay in Colorado Springs. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
