Nikki Haley faces ‘high-wire act’ in 2024 bid against Donald Trump
Few have navigated the turbulent politics of the Trump era like Nikki Haley. In early 2016, the then-South Carolina governor said she was “embarrassed” by candidate Donald Trump and decried his reluctance to condemn white supremacists. Nine months later, she agreed to join his Cabinet, serving as a key validator as Trump sought to win over skeptical world leaders and voters at home. And shortly after Trump left the White House, Haley, whose resume by then included an ambassadorship to the United Nations, vowed not to step in the way if he ran for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination. Yet on Wednesday, she is poised to become the first major Republican candidate to enter the race against him. “It’s going to be quite the high-wire act,” said veteran Republican strategist Terry Sullivan. “She says she’s always been an underdog. She will be again.” The 51-year-old Haley may be the first to take on Trump, but a half-dozen or more high-profile Republicans are expected to join the GOP’s 2024 presidential nomination contest over the coming months. Some would-be competitors may be more popular than Haley, even in South Carolina, where she lives and has established a campaign headquarters. Likely rivals include Sen. Tim Scott, a fellow South Carolinian and perhaps the most celebrated elected official in a state where Trump has already locked up endorsements from the governor and its senior senator, Lindsey Graham. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and former Vice President Mike Pence could also be formidable foes should they run, as widely expected. Indeed, on the eve of this week’s announcement, there is broad agreement that Haley — the only Republican woman of color expected in the 2024 contest, a politician who loves to remind people that she has never lost an election — is about to be tested as never before. Trump, for instance, has already stepped up his attacks on Haley. But allies describe the former governor, who is the daughter of Indian immigrants, as a savvy executive uniquely positioned to lead a new generation of Republicans. They understand that the fight ahead could get ugly. “She took the bull by the horns and said, ‘That doesn’t matter to me, I’m going to run,’” said longtime supporter Gavin J. Smith. “She did that when she ran for governor, and that’s what you’re going to see when she runs for president.” Perhaps more than anyone this young presidential primary season, Haley personifies the Republican Party’s shifting views on Trump. Her reversal on whether to challenge the former president was based less on concerns about his divisive leadership or policy disagreements than the growing belief within the GOP that Trump is losing political strength. New York-based Republican donor Eric Levine says he’s convinced that another Trump Republican nomination would lead to his party’s destruction. Haley, he said, is among the three favorite Trump alternatives. “I think as a woman of color and a daughter of legal immigrants from India, she’d give the Democratic Party no reason to exist. All their woke crap goes out the window,” Levine said. “I think she’s a spectacular candidate.” Haley’s announcement will take place Wednesday in Charleston, the historic coastal city where her campaign will be based. Almost immediately, she’ll travel to meet voters in New Hampshire and Iowa. She’s entrusted her campaign to a collection of senior staff led by longtime aides. Betsy Ankney, who heads up Haley’s PAC, will manage the campaign, with the PAC’s development director, Mary Kate Johnson, as finance director, Haley’s team told The Associated Press. Longtime Haley adviser Chaney Denton and Nachama Soloveichik, who was a spokeswoman for recently retired Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey, will head up communications. Strategist Jon Lerner will serve as senior adviser, and Barney Keller of Jamestown Associates will be Haley’s media consultant. For Haley, this week’s launch marks a significant step on a long road that began in South Carolina’s “Good Old Boys Club,” she wrote in a Friday fundraising appeal. “People thought I was too brown … too female … too young … too conservative … too principled,” she wrote. Born in 1972 in rural South Carolina, Haley has long spoken of a Southern rural childhood in which she felt she didn’t fit. She was raised in the Sikh faith with a mother who wore traditional saris and a father clad in a turban. “Nikki has been regularly underestimated,” said Catherine Templeton, a Republican who served Haley in two roles, leading South Carolina’s labor and public health agencies. “But it makes her work harder.” In her first campaign in 2004, Haley, formerly an accountant, defeated the longest-serving member of South Carolina’s House. After six years in the Legislature, she was considered a longshot when she mounted her 2010 gubernatorial campaign. The GOP field was filled with more experienced politicians, and at times, she faced blatant racism. Then-state Sen. Jake Knotts appeared on a talk show and used a racial slur in reference to Haley. He apologized, saying it was meant as a joke. Still, Haley became the first woman and person of color elected South Carolina’s governor — and the nation’s youngest state executive. After winning reelection in 2014, her second term was marred by crisis. She spent weeks attending funerals of Black parishioners gunned down by a self-avowed white supremacist at a Charleston church in 2015. Later that year, she pushed for and signed legislation to remove the Confederate flag from the Statehouse grounds, where it had flown for more than 50 years. Haley’s political skills were tested in a different way in 2016, as Trump went from late-night television punchline to serious Republican presidential contender. She endorsed Florida Sen. Marco Rubio ahead of South Carolina’s high-stakes Republican primary, then backed Texas Sen. Ted Cruz once Rubio was knocked out. Then, Haley described Trump as “everything a governor doesn’t want in a president.” She also said she was “embarrassed” by his attacks against former President George W. Bush and condemned Trump’s reluctance to disavow the KKK. But shortly after Trump won the presidency, she agreed to serve as the new administration’s ambassador to the United Nations, a Cabinet-level position.
Raphael Warnock defeats Herschel Walker in Georgia Senate race
In a highly watched and competitive race for U.S. Senate in Georgia, Democratic incumbent Sen. Raphael Warnock defeated Republican retired football player Herschel Walker. The re-election of Warnock means that every incumbent Senator who ran in 2022 was re-elected. Democrats increased their majority in the Senate from 50 to 50, with the Vice President breaking the tie in favor of Democrats to a 51 to 49 Democratic edge. These numbers include two independents who caucus with the Democrats. Democrats picked up an open Senate seat in Pennsylvania, where incumbent Sen. Pat Toomey did not run for re-election in part due to a public feud with former President Donald Trump. With 98.67% of the vote in, Warnock had 1,817,465 votes (51.38% of the vote), and Herschel Walker had 1,719,868 votes (48.62% of the vote). Republicans did generally well in Georgia in statewide races. Still, the power of incumbency combined with a very negative campaign with many personal attacks was too much for Walker to overcome. In the Governor’s race last month, Republican incumbent Brian Kemp had 2,110,328 votes (53.43%) to Democratic challenger Stacey Abrams’ 1,811,471 (45.86%). Warnock, when all the final votes eventually come in, will beat Abrams’s totals by just a few thousand votes; but Walker, however, is trailing Kemp by nearly 400,000 votes. Walker’s underperformance compared to other high-profile Republicans on the statewide ballot in Georgia can be partially attributed to the many allegations levied against Walker. These include questions about his residency (he has a home in Dallas) and allegations that he (a pro-life candidate) paid for a former girlfriend’s abortion. There were additional allegations by a former girlfriend that he abused her, and many of his children claimed he was not a good father. There were also concerns that he lacked the political experience and intellect to serve effectively in the Senate. Democrats also outspent Republicans in Georgia, particularly in the last month of the race. Warnock, the Senior Pastor at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, had his own allegations, including that he tried to run over his ex-wife (he did run over her foot), as well as questions about how a pastor can be pro-abortion, but Warnock ultimately prevailed. This is the second time in two years that Warnock has won a closely contested U.S. Senate race in Georgia. Warnock beat incumbent Sen. Kelly Loeffler in the 2020 Senate race. The race has implications for the 2024 Presidential election. Former President Trump is a close friend of Walker’s. Walker played for him at the failed USFL’s New Jersey Generals in the 1980s and was Trump’s endorsed candidate in the Republican primary. Trump held several rallies in Georgia before the general election for Walker, while former President Barack Obama campaigned for Warnock. President Joe Biden avoided campaigning heavily in Georgia as there were concerns that a heavy Biden presence might get out the vote for Republicans, who otherwise did not enthusiastically embrace Walker. Trump also alienated many Georgia Republicans by endorsing Kemp’s primary opponent. The Alabama Republican Party was heavily involved in the Georgia Senate race, with the Mighty Alabama Strike Force making several trips to Georgia to campaign for Walker. 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
Early voting on the rise ahead of midterm elections
With one week until election day, new research shows more and more Americans have already voted. Gallup released new polling data that found far more Americans are voting early these midterms than the midterm elections in years past. “Four in 10 U.S. registered voters say they plan to vote before Election Day or have already voted, a higher proportion than in recent midterm elections,” Gallup said. “Significantly more voters plan to vote before Election Day this year (41%) than did in 2010 (26%), the first time Gallup asked the question in a midterm election year.” Early voting and mail-in voting has become an area of focus for both parties’ campaign efforts, along with legal challenges regarding election integrity. Late Tuesday, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled in a major elections case that mail-in ballots that have incorrect information or leave parts blank cannot be counted. Pennsylvania often has close races and was one of the states in the center of the questions surrounding the integrity of the 2020 presidential election. “Today’s Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling is a victory for the rule of law,” said Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Penn. “The law in Pennsylvania is clear: Mail-in ballot envelopes must be dated. Counting undated ballots would be in violation of the law. Not a close call.” Gallup’s polling data shows that these legal challenges become more important. While early voting is higher than in previous midterms, it doesn’t top the COVID-era voting trends, where the pandemic drastically changed voting habits. “Two years ago, 64% of U.S. registered voters planned to vote early versus 32% who planned to vote on Election Day,” the group said. “It is unclear how much pandemic concerns boosted early voting in 2020 because the practice has historically been more common in presidential than in midterm election years. “Early voting intentions this year, though more prevalent than in the last (2018) midterm election, match those from the 2016 presidential election (40%),” Gallup added. Republished with the permission of The Center Square.
Joe Guzzardi: Pro-Environment platform a mid-term winner
The latest mid-term election polling shows that Republicans and Democrats are dead even. In January, the same polling firm Statista had the GOP ahead by four points. Other polls like 538.com indicate more or less the same outcome. But if voters have learned anything since the 2016 and 2020 elections, it would be to distrust polling firm projections. Results from 2020 polls favored Democrats, with Susan Collins (R-Maine), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), and Steve Daines (R-Mont.) as likely losers. But Collins, 6.5 points behind, or so said the pre-election pollsters, won by 8.6 points. The other five candidates that the prognosticators wrote off as doomed won handily. Pollsters have an explanation to defend their theory that congressional Democrats might still retain the majority, despite record inflation, rising crime rates, a botched Afghanistan withdrawal, student debt forgiveness, billions of dollars squandered in support of what’s become an endless Russia-Ukraine war, and an open border. It is that the GOP has nominated poor candidates in key swing states. Among the races, pollsters are tracking most closely are Blake Masters in Arizona vs. incumbent Mark Kelly, Herschel Walker in Georgia vs. incumbent Raphael Warnock, Adam Laxalt in Nevada vs. incumbent Catherine Cortez Masto, and Mehmet Oz vs. John Fetterman in Pennsylvania, where incumbent Republican Pat Toomey is retiring. A state official who has no congressional voting record, Fetterman proudly notes that his wife’s family overstayed their visas, at which time their immigration status converted to unlawfully present, a clue that he favors more immigration. Fetterman’s website says he supports a “humane” immigration system, a vapid remark which confirms that he endorses Biden’s status quo. The GOP challengers, all within striking distance, may be getting short shrift from pollsters. The candidates were persuasive enough to capture primary nominations; they’re not too tongue-tied to debate. More important, going into the general election, the GOP has as much fodder – listed above – and primo debate material as any high-office challengers in history, thanks mostly to President Biden’s slipshod governance, and the incumbents’ whole-hearted endorsement of it. On the key open borders issue, Masters, Walker, and Laxalt have the benefit of launching an offensive against their opponents’ immigration voting records. Their rivals, Kelly, Warnock, and Cortez Masto are, like Fetterman and Biden, all-in on open borders. A review of the incumbents’ immigration votes found that each has consistently voted against reducing amnesty fraud, against curbing illegal immigrants’ rewards, against ending unnecessary employment visas, against stricter border enforcement, and against more rigorous interior enforcement. Stumping on reducing immigration can be problematic since such a focused campaign would trigger untruthful but potentially damaging racist allegations. A winning campaign would include linking immigration to unsustainable population growth, an indisputable fact that the Census Bureau confirms. Census Bureau data predicts that by the mid-21st century, the U.S. population will increase to more than 400 million from its current 333 million, a greater than 20 percent increase. More than half of that growth will be attributable to immigration and births to immigrants. For comparison’s sake, the Center for Immigration Studies’ researchers, based entirely on the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey and the Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplements, found that in 2017 there were 35.8 million legal and illegal immigrants living in the U.S. who arrived from 1982 to 2017. Further, these immigrants had 16.9 million U.S.-born children and grandchildren. In total, immigration added 52.7 million people to the U.S. population between 1982 and 2017, accounting for a little over 56 percent of population growth during this 35-year time period. For the nation’s population to increase by more than 65 million people, as the Census Bureau predicts, in less than 30 years, creates a grave danger that will exacerbate existing environmental problems like water shortages and land lost to urban sprawl. Opinions about immigration and its effects often differ. But sentiments about the environmental future Americans want to ensure for their children and grandchildren are consistent. Americans want open spaces and nature’s bounty to remain for future generations to enjoy, a goal that ever-more immigration makes impossible. To win and to prove the pollsters wrong again, the GOP platform must emphasize immigration’s harmful, unwanted consequences of unchecked population growth and the environmental degradation that accompanies it. Joe Guzzardi is a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist who writes about immigration and related social issues. Joe joined Progressives for Immigration Reform in 2018 as an analyst after a ten-year career directing media relations for Californians for Population Stabilization, where he also was a Senior Writing Fellow. A native Californian, Joe now lives in Pennsylvania. Contact him at jguzzardi@pfirdc.org.
Senate tees up vote on bill to aid vets exposed to burn pits
A bill enhancing health care and disability benefits for millions of veterans exposed to toxic burn pits is expected to win final approval in the Senate on Tuesday, ending a brief stalemate over the measure that had infuriated advocates and inspired some to camp outside the Capitol. President Joe Biden has pushed for the legislation, saying the measure “makes good on our sacred obligation” to care for veterans and their families. The Senate overwhelmingly approved the legislation once before, but it required a do-over for a technical fix. But the process derailed when Republicans made a late attempt to change another aspect of the bill last week and blocked it from advancing. The abrupt delay outraged veterans groups and advocates, including comedian Jon Stewart. It also placed GOP senators in the uncomfortable position of delaying the top legislative priority of service organizations this session of Congress. A group of veterans and their families have been camping out at the Capitol since that vote. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said he had good news for them, announcing a final vote for Tuesday evening. “Veterans who were exposed to the toxic fumes of burn pits will be treated by the VA like they should have been from the beginning,” Schumer said. Some Democrats have questioned whether Republicans blocked the bill for spite, after an announcement just hours earlier that key Democrats had agreed on a way forward on a health, energy, and tax bill that Republicans oppose and may be unable to stop. “Wait a minute. You’re not going to help our veterans because we want to lower the cost of prescription drugs, because we want to lower the cost of health care, because we want to protect the planet? Of course, you don’t agree with any of those things, but would you use that to vote against our veterans?” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said at a press conference last week. “It’s really immoral, almost criminal.” Republican senators rejected that charge and said the changes they seek would not affect spending for veterans in the bill. The bill contains two major components for veterans who served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Veterans who served near burn pits will get ten years — rather than five — of enhanced health care coverage through the Department of Veterans Affairs upon their separation from the military. Second, the legislation directs the VA to presume that certain respiratory illnesses and cancers were related to burn pit exposure, allowing veterans to obtain disability payments to compensate for their injury without having to prove the illness was a result of their service. Roughly 70% of disability claims related to burn pit exposure are denied by the VA due to lack of evidence, scientific data, and information from the Defense Department. The military used burn pits to dispose of such things as chemicals, cans, tires, plastics, and medical and human waste. Hundreds of thousands of Vietnam War-era veterans and survivors also stand to benefit from the legislation. The bill adds hypertension, or high blood pressure, as a presumptive disease associated with Agent Orange exposure. The Congressional Budget Office projected that about 600,000 of 1.6 million living Vietnam vets would be eligible for increased compensation, though only about half would have a severe enough diagnosis to warrant more compensation. Also, veterans who served in Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Guam, American Samoa, and Johnston Atoll will be presumed to have been exposed to Agent Orange. That’s another 50,000 veterans and survivors of deceased veterans who would get compensation for illnesses presumed to have been caused by their exposure to the herbicide, the CBO projected. The bill is projected to increase federal deficits by about $277 billion over ten years and does not include offsetting spending cuts or tax increases to help pay for it. When the CBO scored the bill, it projected that nearly $400 billion spent on VA services would take place as mandatory spending rather than discretionary spending. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonpartisan fiscal watchdog, said a reclassification to mandatory would “both reduce the pressure to keep those costs under control and make it easier for appropriators to spend more elsewhere in the budget without offsets.” Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., is seeking a vote for an amendment that he said would not change the spending slated for veterans programs but how the government accounts for that spending. However, the dynamics Toomey has spoken about also applied to the bill when the Senate voted on it in June. Senators then voted for the measure by a resounding vote of 84-14, raising questions about why Republicans voted against advancing the do-over effort last week. Advocacy groups for veterans, a key voting bloc in the upcoming midterm elections, were furious and ramped up the political pressure on lawmakers to act. At a Capitol Hill news conference the day after last week’s procedural vote, speakers used terms such as “villains” and “reprehensible” to describe the Republican senators who voted against advancing the measure last week but voted for almost the exact same bill in June. “Veterans are angry and confused at the sudden change from those they thought had their backs,” said Cory Titus of the group Military Officers Association of America. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., said the veterans camped out at the Capitol are exhausted and want to go home. “But they will not. They will not go home until the job is done,” Gillibrand said. Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
House passes gun control bill after Buffalo, Uvalde attacks
The House passed a wide-ranging gun control bill Wednesday in response to recent mass shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas, that would raise the age limit for purchasing a semi-automatic rifle and prohibit the sale of ammunition magazines with a capacity of more than 15 rounds. The legislation passed by a mostly party-line vote of 223-204. It has almost no chance of becoming law as the Senate pursues negotiations focused on improving mental health programs, bolstering school security, and enhancing background checks. But the House bill does allow Democratic lawmakers a chance to frame for voters in November where they stand on policies that polls show are widely supported. “We can’t save every life, but my God, shouldn’t we try? America, we hear you, and today in the House, we are taking the action you are demanding,” said Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas. “Take note of who is with you and who is not.” The push comes after a House committee heard wrenching testimony from recent shooting victims and family members, including from 11-year-old girl Miah Cerrillo, who covered herself with a dead classmate’s blood to avoid being shot at the Uvalde elementary school. The seemingly never-ending cycle of mass shootings in the United States has rarely stirred Congress to act. But the shooting of 19 children and two teachers in Uvalde has revived efforts in a way that has lawmakers from both parties talking about the need to respond. “It’s sickening, it’s sickening that our children are forced to live in this constant fear,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. Pelosi said the House vote would “make history by making progress.” But it’s unclear where the House measure will go after Wednesday’s vote, given that Republicans were adamant in their opposition. “The answer is not to destroy the Second Amendment, but that is exactly where the Democrats want to go,” said Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio. The work to find common ground is mostly taking place in the Senate, where support from 10 Republicans will be needed to get a bill signed into law. Nearly a dozen Democratic and Republican senators met privately for an hour Wednesday in hopes of reaching a framework for compromise legislation by week’s end. Participants said more conversations were needed about a plan that is expected to propose modest steps. In a measure of the political peril that efforts to curb guns pose for Republicans, five of the six lead Senate GOP negotiators do not face reelection until 2026. They are Sens. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Susan Collins of Maine, John Cornyn of Texas, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, and Thom Tillis of North Carolina. The sixth, Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, is retiring in January. It’s also notable that none of the six is seeking the Republican presidential nomination. While Cornyn has said the talks are serious, he has not joined the chorus of Democrats saying the outlines of a deal could be reached by the end of this week. He told reporters Wednesday that he considers having an agreement before Congress begins a recess in late June to be “an aspirational goal.” The House bill stitches together a variety of proposals Democrats had introduced before the recent shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde. The suspects in the shootings at the Uvalde elementary school and Buffalo supermarket were both just 18, authorities say, when they bought the semi-automatic weapons used in the attacks. The bill would increase the minimum age to buy such weapons to 21. “A person under 21 cannot buy a Budweiser. We should not let a person under 21 buy an AR-15 weapon of war,” said Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif. Republicans have noted that a U.S. appeals court ruling last month found California’s ban on the sale of semi-automatic weapons to adults under 21 was unconstitutional. “This is unconstitutional, and it’s immoral. Why is it immoral? Because we’re telling 18, 19, and 20-year-olds to register for the draft. You can go die for your country. We expect you to defend us, but we’re not going to give you the tools to defend yourself and your family,” said Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky. The House bill also includes incentives designed to increase the use of safe gun storage devices and creates penalties for violating safe storage requirements, providing for a fine and imprisonment of up to five years if a gun is not properly stored and is subsequently used by a minor to injure or kill themselves or another individual. It also builds on the Biden administration’s executive action banning fast-action “bump-stock” devices and “ghost guns” that are assembled without serial numbers. The House is also expected to approve a bill Thursday that would allow families, police, and others to ask federal courts to order the removal of firearms from people who are believed to be at extreme risk of harming themselves or others. Nineteen states and the District of Columbia currently have such “red flag laws.” Under the House bill, a judge could issue an order to temporarily remove and store the firearms until a hearing can be held no longer than two weeks later to determine whether the firearms should be returned or kept for a specific period. Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
Texas shooting is new test for Joe Biden’s long battle over guns
Joe Biden, then the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, surveyed the collection of black, military-style rifles on display in the middle of the room as he denounced the sale of guns whose “only real function is to kill human beings at a ferocious pace.” That was nearly three decades ago, and Congress was on the verge of passing an assault weapons ban. But the law eventually expired, and guns that were once illegal are now readily available, most recently used in the slaughter at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas. The tragedy, which came less than two weeks after another mass shooting at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York, has refocused Biden’s presidency on one of the greatest political challenges of his career — the long fight for gun control. Over the years, Biden has been intimately involved in the movement’s most notable successes, such as the 1994 assault weapons ban, and its most troubling disappointments, including the failure to pass new legislation after the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. Now his White House, which was already trying to chip away at gun violence through executive orders, is organizing calls with activists and experts to plot a path forward. “He understands the history of the issue. He understands how the politics have shifted,” said Christian Heyne, vice president of policy at Brady, the gun control advocacy organization. “He feels a sense of missed opportunities from the past, and he understands that this is his last chance to have an impact on gun violence in America.” Even for a politician known for his passion, Biden’s reaction to the latest shooting in Texas has been searing. “Where’s the backbone, where’s the courage to stand up to a very powerful lobby?“ Biden said Wednesday as he called for Congress to pass new laws. Stef Feldman, a deputy assistant to the president, said the cascade of deaths — from Buffalo to Uvalde to everyday shootings that don’t generate nationwide headlines — only increases the urgency of the administration’s efforts. “Every story that we hear about individuals lost to gun violence provides more energy, more of a drive to continue the work,” she said. “If we can save even one life by pushing a little harder on a creative policy idea, it’s worth it.” But executive action — such as Biden’s order targeting ghost guns, which are privately made firearms without serial numbers — might be the best the White House can do if Republicans in the Senate remain opposed to new restrictions and Democrats are unwilling to circumvent filibusters. More challenges could come in the courts, and even the ghost gun rules may become tied up in litigation. “We’ve got to be clear,” said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety. “This is the Senate’s job. It’s time for the Senate to actually step up and do something.” The first new try fell far short on Thursday. A measure to take up a domestic terrorism bill, which could have opened debate touching on guns, drew just 47 of the 60 votes needed to break a filibuster. It’s a far different situation than when Sen. Biden was working on gun legislation years ago. Fears about violent crime helped foster bipartisan compromises, and conservative rhetoric about gun ownership was less extreme. First, Congress passed the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act in 1993, requiring a background check when someone buys a gun from a federally licensed dealer. The measure was named for James Brady, the White House press secretary who was shot and wounded when John Hinckley Jr. attempted to assassinate President Ronald Reagan in 1981. Next, Congress approved the assault weapons ban as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act in 1994. The law outlawed specific guns, such as the AR-15 and restricted the type of military-style enhancements that firearms could have. However, the ban contained a sunset provision, and it was not renewed in 2004. Although the vast majority of shootings are committed with handguns, military-style semiautomatic rifles are staples of the country’s deadliest massacres. One of these weapons was used at Sandy Hook, where 26 people, including 20 children, were killed. The violence shocked the nation, and President Barack Obama asked Biden, then the vice president, to lead a new push for gun control. Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., crafted legislation that would have expanded background checks. In a speech less than three months after the shooting, Biden said “the excuse that it’s too politically risky to act is no longer acceptable.” He recalled successfully pushing for the assault weapons ban years earlier even though the National Rifle Association warned that he was going to be “taking your shotgun away.” “That kind of stuff doesn’t work anymore,” Biden added. But it did work, and the legislation failed in the U.S. Senate. Biden described the vote as a betrayal of families who lost children at Sandy Hook, saying, “I don’t know how anybody who looked them in the eye could have voted the way they did today.” Darrell A. H. Miller, a Duke University law professor who is an expert on the Second Amendment, said the political landscape had already changed. “It’s fair to say that the issue of guns has become even more polarized,” he said. “And the intensity of gun rights opposition to any kind of gun regulation of any description has become more inflexible.” Two years ago, guns became the leading cause of death among children and teenagers, outpacing car crashes. There are roughly 400 million guns in the country, more than one for every person. Military-style weapons are a staple of some Republican campaign advertisements. “The reality is, we’re not keeping up with the pace of the gun lobby to arm citizens,” said Fred Guttenberg, whose daughter was killed at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, in 2018. “It’s time to start asking,” Guttenberg said, “why are Republicans so diametrically opposed to doing whatever it takes to save lives?” There
Analysis: Republicans poised to do well in 2022 midterm elections
Less than a year out from the November 2022 midterm elections, Republicans are in a position to pick up more seats than previously expected after redistricting was finalized across the states and 44 members of Congress, a majority of them Democrats, are either retiring or aren’t running for reelection. Skyrocketing inflation and energy costs and President Joe Biden’s declining polling numbers could result in Democrats losing dozens of Congressional seats, political analysts indicate. As of this month, six sitting members of the U.S. Senate and 38 in the U.S. House are leaving office, according to calculations by Ballotpedia. Of the 37 leaving the U.S. House, 26 are Democrats and 12 are Republicans. The majority – 28 – are retiring. They include six senators, five of whom are Republicans, and 22 representatives, 17 of whom are Democrats. The remainder, 15, are running for another office. Eight House members are running for a U.S. Senate seat, evenly split among Republicans and Democrats, with four each. They are from Vermont, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, and Alabama. Three House members are running for governor – one Democrat and one Republican in New York, and one Democrat in Florida. Others are running for state and local offices in Texas, Maryland, California, and Georgia. They include one Republican running for secretary of state, one Republican and one Democrat running for attorney general, and one Democrat running for mayor. No U.S. Senator is running for another office; all six are retiring. They include Republicans Richard Burr of North Carolina, Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, Rob Portman of Ohio, Richard Shelby of Alabama, Roy Blunt of Missouri, and Democrat Patrick Leahy of Vermont. A Washington Post/ABC News poll found that Republicans hold a 10-point margin over Democrats in a generic congressional race. Biden’s approval rating on the economy was 39%, and his overall approval rating was 41% at the time. A December Rasmussen Reports survey also found that voters favored Republicans over Democrats by 13 points, 51%-38%, at the time. An even wider margin of 22% was found among voters who identify as Independents, who said they would choose a generic Republican over a generic Democrat by a margin of 48%-26%. Currently, Democrats hold a nine-seat majority in the U.S. House. The U.S. Senate is split, with 50 Republicans, 48 Democrats and 2 Independents, with the Independents caucusing with the Democrats, and the Democratic vice president acting as a tie breaker. This could change with West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin considering leaving the Democratic Party. “I would like to hope that there are still Democrats that feel like I do,” Manchin told a local West Virginia radio station, as reported by the Washington Post. “Now, if there’s no Democrats like that, then they’ll have to push me wherever they want me.” Manchin also told reporters last month that he’d consider leaving the Democratic Party if he were to become “an embarrassment to my Democrat colleagues,” as a “moderate centrist Democrat.” He said he’d still caucus with the Democrats, enabling them to keep the majority temporarily. Historically, since the end of World War II, the sitting president’s party has lost seats nearly every midterm election. A total of 469 seats in Congress are up for reelection in 2022, including 34 in the Senate and all 435 in the House. As a result of changing demographics reported by the 2020 Census, six states gained congressional seats, with Texas gaining two. Five states gained one seat: Colorado, Florida, Montana, North Carolina, and Oregon. Seven states lost a seat: California, Illinois, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. By Bethany Blankley | The Center Square contributor Republished with the permission of The Center Square.
Katie Britt now accepts Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency for campaign contributions
U.S. Senate candidate Katie Britt announced today that her campaign will now accept contributions via BitPay.Through the BitPay plug-in on Britt’s campaign website, eligible individuals can now contribute via various forms of cryptocurrency to her campaign. Any contributions made via BitPay must abide by all federal laws and regulations regarding political donations. The total market cap of these accepted cryptocurrencies exceeds $1.4 trillion, which accounts for nearly 70% of the global crypto market cap. “I’m excited to announce that our campaign now accepts cryptocurrency contributions, including Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Dogecoin,” said Britt. “This is merely a small token of my overall staunch support for the digital asset ecosystem, blockchain technology, proof of work, cryptocurrency, and Bitcoin in particular.” “We need fresh blood in the Senate to keep America at the forefront of innovation and technology, not the same-old ineffective career politicians who are stuck in the past,” she continued. “Supporting Bitcoin means supporting personal freedom, American competitiveness, and national security. I will be an advocate for commonsense policies that provide appropriate consumer protections while fostering innovation, entrepreneurship, and investment here at home rather than driving the digital asseteconomy overseas to places like China.” Britt supports the digital asset economy. She has advocated for Congress to fix a provision in the new infrastructure bill that uses an antiquated, anti-innovation definition of what it means to be a digital asset broker. U.S. Senators Pat Toomey, Ron Wyden, and Sen. Cynthia Lummis filed an amendment clarifying the definition of “broker” with respect to digital asset third-party reporting requirements. Britt also noted that when elected, she plans to work closely with longtime cryptocurrency advocate U.S. Sen. Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming. Britt believes Wyoming’s approach to regulating digital assets is a good roadmap for the nation to take. U.S. Senators Pat Toomey, Ron Wyden, and Cynthia Lummis filed an amendment clarifying the definition of “broker” with respect to digital asset third-party reporting requirements. “I support American innovation and entrepreneurship, including in the crypto space, and want to see the digital asset broker issue clarified in a way that ensures that the federal government is not putting their thumb on the scale,” Britt stated. “We should be encouraging competition here in America, not driving economic activity overseas.” Britt is currently endorsed by the Home Builders Association of Alabama, the Alabama Farmers Federation’s FarmPAC, and the Alabama Retail Association’s federal political action committee.
Joe Biden, GOP senators upbeat, plan more infrastructure talks
After meeting at the White House, President Joe Biden and a group of Republican senators agreed to talk again early next week as negotiations intensified Thursday over a potentially bipartisan infrastructure package that could become one piece of the administration’s ambitious $4 trillion public investment plan. The GOP senators exited the more than 90-minute meeting “encouraged” about their discussions with the president and prepared to build on the $568 billion proposal they had put forward last month as an alternative to his sweeping American jobs and families plans. “The president asked us to come back and rework an offer so that he could then react to that,” said Sen. Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, who is leading the group. “We’re very encouraged,” she told reporters outside the White House. “The attitude the president had in the Oval Office with us was very supportive and desirous of striking a deal.” Biden also emerged upbeat. “I am very optimistic that we can reach a reasonable agreement — and even if we don’t it’s been a good-faith effort,” Biden said in the Rose Garden. Biden is intent on at least trying to strike a deal with Republicans rather than simply going it alone with a Democrats-only bill, which might in some ways be a more politically viable route in a Congress held by the president’s party with only the slimmest of majorities. One strategy that appears to be coming into focus would be for Biden to negotiate a more limited, traditional infrastructure bill of roads, highways, bridges, and broadband as a bipartisan effort. Then, Democrats could try to muscle through the remainder of Biden’s priorities on climate investments and the so-called human infrastructure of child care, education, and hospitals on their own. “I’m willing to negotiate,” Biden said earlier at the White House. But the president has indicated that he’s not about to wait indefinitely for a compromise that may or may not come, and reiterated his view Thursday that “doing nothing is not an option.” The White House said the president stressed that inaction was a “red line for him.” He set a Memorial Day deadline for progress on a bipartisan deal. Those gathered included some of the top-ranking Republicans — Sens. John Barrasso of Wyoming, Roy Blunt of Missouri, Mike Crapo of Idaho, Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, and Roger Wicker of Mississippi. Joining Biden were Vice President Kamala Harris, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, and Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo. Thursday’s meeting followed a lengthy session at the White House with the congressional leadership the day before. Republican leader Mitch McConnell has said his side will accept spending as much as $800 billion, but Republicans made it clear they would refuse to embrace Biden’s broad proposals or his idea of raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy to pay for the plans. The White House outreach is part political strategy, part practical legislating. Striking a deal with Republicans would give all sides a political win — a rare bipartisan accomplishment — without fully forfeiting the president’s broader goals, which are largely shared by Democrats. It also acknowledges the “red line” that McConnell has drawn agaiTfnst GOP votes for undoing the 2017 tax law by raising taxes on corporations or those earning more than $400,000. “I want to get a bipartisan deal on as much as we can get a bipartisan deal on — and that means roads, bridges, broadband, all infrastructure,” Biden said Wednesday on MSNBC. “And then fight over what’s left and see if I can get it done without Republicans if need be.” Capito has taken the lead for Senate Republicans, keeping in close contact with both the president’s team and McConnell, she said, as she shuttles between the White House and Capitol Hill. The West Virginia senator is no stranger to the legislative process, serving more than a decade in the House and now as the ranking Republican on the Senate Energy and Public Works Committee. She ushered a $35 billion bipartisan water resources bill to passage in the Senate and is hard at work with the panel’s Democratic chairman, Tom Carper of Delaware, a Biden ally, on a big surface transportation bill. Biden personally reached out to Capito late last week after the water bill cleared the Senate. “The president he expressed on the phone with me, and has with others, that you know he’s anxious to move forward,” she said. “His desire is to define where we have common ground and I think we’ll probably spend the bulk of the time talking about that.” Biden has insisted he doesn’t want working-class Americans to bear the “burden” of paying for all the new infrastructure investments alone, resisting GOP plans for taxes and user fees, like tolls, to fund the projects. One potential new funding source could be the more than $1 trillion in unpaid taxes each year. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has mentioned tapping that potential funding source and she said Biden discussed it at their meeting Wednesday. Republicans have not resisted it. “That’s a big chunk that would go a long way,” she said Thursday. McConnell and House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy have insisted they want the infrastructure bills to go through the committee process, where lawmakers can hammer out the details and take ownership of the proposals, rather than have the package negotiated in their leadership suites. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Donald Trump trial gets go-ahead after emotional, graphic first day
House prosecutors on Tuesday wrenched senators and the nation back to the deadly attack on Congress as they opened Donald Trump’s historic second impeachment trial with graphic video of the insurrection and Trump’s own calls for a rally crowd to march to the iconic building and “fight like hell” against his reelection defeat. The detailed and emotional presentation by Democrats was followed by meandering and occasionally confrontational arguments from the Trump defense team, which insisted that his remarks were protected by the First Amendment and asserted that he cannot be convicted as a former president. Even Trump’s backers in the Senate winced, several saying his lawyers were not helpful to his case. The senators sitting as jurors, many of whom fled for safety themselves the day of the attack, watched and listened, unable to avoid the jarring video of Trump supporters battling past police to storm the halls, Trump flags waving. While many minds are made up, the senators will face their own moment to decide whether to convict or acquit Trump of the sole charge of “incitement of insurrection.” The heavy emotional weight of the trial punctuates Trump’s enduring legacy as the first president to face an impeachment trial after leaving office and the first to be twice impeached. The Jan. 6 Capitol siege stunned the world as hundreds of rioters ransacked the building to try to stop the certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s victory, a domestic attack on the nation’s seat of government unlike any in its history. Five people died. “That’s a high crime and misdemeanor,” Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., declared in opening remarks. “If that’s not an impeachable offense, then there’s no such thing.” Trump’s lawyers insist he is not guilty, his fiery words just figures of speech. In a key early test, senators rejected an effort by Trump’s allies to halt the trial, instead affirming the Senate’s authority under the Constitution to decide the case. They voted 56-44 to confirm their jurisdiction, ruling that impeaching a president after he leaves office is constitutionally permissible. Six Republicans joined the Democrats. Security remained extremely tight at the Capitol on Tuesday, a changed place after the attack, fenced off with razor wire and with armed National Guard troops on patrol. The nine House managers walked across the shuttered building to prosecute the case before the Senate. White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Biden would not be watching the trial of his predecessor. “Joe Biden is the president, he’s not a pundit, he’s not going to opine on back and forth arguments,” she said. With senators gathered as the court of impeachment, sworn to deliver impartial justice, the trial started with the Democratic House managers’ gripping recollections, as they described police officers maimed in the chaos and rioters parading in the very chamber where the trial was being held. Trump’s team countered that the Constitution doesn’t allow impeachment at this late date. Though the trial now proceeds, that’s a legal issue that could resonate with Republicans eager to acquit Trump without being seen as condoning his behavior. Lead lawyer Bruce Castor said he shifted his planned approach after hearing the prosecutors’ opening and instead spoke conversationally to the senators, saying Trump’s team would do nothing but denounce the “repugnant” attack and “in the strongest possible way denounce the rioters.” He appealed to the senators as “patriots first,” and encouraged them to be “cool-headed” as they assess the arguments. Trump attorney David Schoen turned the trial toward starkly partisan tones, saying the Democrats were fueled by a “base hatred” of the former president. Republicans made it clear that they were unhappy with Trump’s defense, many of them saying they didn’t understand where it was going — particularly Castor’s opening. Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, who voted with Democrats to move forward with the trial, said that Trump’s team did a “terrible job.” Maine Sen. Susan Collins, who also voted with Democrats, said she was “perplexed.” Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said it was a “missed opportunity” for the defense. The early defense struggles also underscored the uphill battle that Trump’s lawyers face in defending conduct that preceded an insurrection that senators themselves personally experienced. Though they will almost certainly win Trump’s acquittal — by virtue of the composition of the Senate — they nonetheless face a challenge of defanging the emotion from a trial centered on events that remain raw and visceral, even for Republicans. At one pivotal point, Raskin told his personal story of bringing his family to the Capitol the day of the riot, to witness the certification of the Electoral College vote, only to have his daughter and son-in-law hiding in an office, fearing for their lives. “Senators, this cannot be our future,” Raskin said through tears. “This cannot be the future of America.” The House prosecutors had argued there is no “January exception” for a president to avoid impeachment on his way out the door. Rep. Joe Neguse, D-Colo., referred to the corruption case of William Belknap, a war secretary in the Grant administration, who was impeached, tried and ultimately acquitted by the Senate after leaving office. If Congress stands by, “it would invite future presidents to use their power without any fear of accountability,” he said. On the vote, six Republicans joined with Democrats pursue the trial, just one more than on a similar vote last week. Cassidy joined Collins, Murkowski, Mitt Romney of Utah, Ben Sasse of Nebraska, and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania. But the total of 56 was still far from the two-thirds threshold of 67 votes that would be needed for conviction. It appears unlikely that the House prosecutors will call witnesses, in part because the senators were witnesses themselves. At his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida, Trump has declined a request to testify. Presidential impeachment trials have been conducted only three times before, leading to acquittals for Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton and then Trump last year. Because of the COVID-19 crisis, senators were allowed to spread out, including in the “marble room” just off
