Tag: bipartisan

  • Senate sends bipartisan rebuke of solar tariff policy to Biden’s desk

    Senate sends bipartisan rebuke of solar tariff policy to Biden’s desk

    [ad_1]

    congress solar tariffs 11660

    The resolution would use the Congressional Review Act to rescind Biden’s moratorium on new tariffs for solar cells and modules from Malaysia, Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam. The rule was issued as the Commerce Department investigates whether companies are circumventing existing U.S. tariffs on China by funneling products through those four countries.

    Commerce issued preliminary findings in December that said Chinese companies were indeed circumventing the tariffs, and its final determination is due later this year. But given the two-year pause, no new tariffs resulting from the probe can be levied until mid-2024.

    The resolution resurfaced long-running tensions on the Commerce probe. Solar industry officials who oppose the resolution warn it carries a threat of retroactive duties that will cost jobs, shut down planned solar projects and undercut the Biden administration’s climate goals.

    “It’s going to send a devastating message to the solar industry and particularly to our independent, small businesses,” Nevada Democratic Sen. Jacky Rosen said in an interview.

    Rosen led an open letter Wednesday with eight Democratic senators that argued Biden’s two-year pause on additional tariffs is necessary as the United States works to bolster its domestic manufacturing capabilities.

    But supporters of the resolution — including several Senate Democrats — argue it’s necessary to enforce U.S. trade law and support domestic industry, while ensuring the U.S. clean energy transition is not built using Chinese products.

    “If you vote no, that means you support slave labor,” said Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), who sponsored the Senate resolution. “You don’t want more American jobs and you don’t believe our trade policies mean anything.”

    The comment is a reference to the use of forced labor within China’s Xinjiang region — an area of bipartisan concern. The solar industry has vocally opposed the use of forced labor in its supply chain, and the resolution approved Wednesday does not directly mention the topic.

    Rosen rejected Scott’s contention on Wednesday.

    “We’re always going to be against forced labor. We’re always going to be for holding the Chinese Communist Party’s feet to the fire in everything we do,” she said.

    The measure gathered support from nine Senate Democrats on Wednesday: Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Ron Wyden of Oregon, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Gary Peters and Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, Bob Casey and John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, Jon Tester of Montana and Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin.

    Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky was the lone GOP senator to vote against the measure.

    Sen. Brown, whose state is home to one of the largest U.S. solar manufacturing companies, said in a floor speech Tuesday he was defending U.S. manufacturing.

    “You can’t say you want American manufacturing to lead the world and then allow Chinese companies, subsidized always by their government, to skirt the rules and dump solar panels into the U.S.,” he said.

    Manchin, the chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, was the only Democrat to attach his name as a co-sponsor of the joint resolution of disapproval. He argued the U.S. cannot continue to let China “get away” with laundering solar energy components through other nations with “absolutely no consequences.”

    “Let me be clear: America will never be energy secure or independent if we can’t provide the resources we need, and it would be foolish of us in Congress to allow these waivers to continue any longer,” Manchin said in a statement.

    On the other hand, eight House Republicans voted against the resolution last week, with some arguing it would cost solar jobs in their districts.

    George Hershman, CEO of utility solar company SOLV Energy, recently called Republican support for the resolution “disappointing,” given how many solar projects are cropping up in red congressional districts.

    “The largest solar districts in the country are Republican. That’s where the job impacts are going to be,” he told POLITICO last month. “I mean, I’m as disappointed with Democrats that might sign on to [the resolution] as House Republicans that understand the job creation of solar in their districts.”

    Abigail Ross Hopper, president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association, called on Biden to “quickly and decisively” veto the resolution.

    “Energy workers across the country are looking to President Biden to protect their livelihoods,” she said in a statement.

    The vote Wednesday is part of a wider trend of resolutions brought under the Congressional Review Act, which requires only a simple majority to pass the Senate, to undo parts of the Biden administration’s regulatory agenda.

    The Senate also voted 50-48 on Wednesday to pass a resolution that would overturn the Biden administration’s protections under the Endangered Species Act for the lesser prairie-chicken, a wild bird found in five states. The White House said Wednesday that Biden will veto that resolution, as well.

    Alex Guillén contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]
    #Senate #sends #bipartisan #rebuke #solar #tariff #policy #Bidens #desk
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • The bipartisan battle over capping insulin costs outside Medicare

    The bipartisan battle over capping insulin costs outside Medicare

    [ad_1]

    “Our approach reflects our years of working on this issue, and it’s so much broader. It’s so much more comprehensive,” Collins said in a joint interview with Shaheen, the moderate Mainer’s longtime partner on bills ranging from broadband expansion to post-Jan. 6 reform. Shaheen observed that “our proposal is better than theirs” before taking a more diplomatic tack: “It’s more comprehensive. That’s a better way to say it.”

    The disparate duos are fighting for the approval of Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and the Senate health committee’s chair, Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), both of whom have avoided a firm stance while assembling other pieces of a large drug-pricing measure that could get a vote as soon as this month.

    Assessing the outlook in his typically quotable style, Kennedy said that while Warnock and Shaheen are vying for Schumer’s support, “one’s probably biting on his right ear, and one is probably biting on his left ear.”

    It’s not just Democrats angling for Schumer’s attention. Insulin is important enough to Collins that she’s spoken privately about the issue with Schumer, an intriguing detente after the New Yorker spearheaded 2020’s Democratic spend-a-thon to try to beat the Maine Republican — which caused an icy few months between the two senators.

    “Both Jeanne and I were asked to come talk to him, and we’ve both done that,” Collins said. “I’m always hesitant to characterize Sen. Schumer. But he seemed receptive.”

    But Warnock has held his own meetings with the Democratic leader. The recently reelected Georgian saw his approach to insulin price caps adopted for Medicare patients last year in Democrats’ party-line passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, and he’s betting his juice will extend beyond his successful reelection bid.

    Asked if Schumer committed to moving his bill forward, Warnock said: “I have assurances that my bill to cap the cost of insulin, which is a bipartisan bill introduced by me and Sen. Kennedy, will be a part of any health care package that moves forward.”

    The Warnock-Kennedy effort would offer people with private insurance the IRA’s price cap of a $35 copay for a 30-day supply for a 30-day supply of one of each insulin dosage form — a policy President Joe Biden advocated in his State of the Union Address this year. It also directs the Department of Health and Human Services to set up a program in which the uninsured would have access to the same $35 rate through “qualified entities,” a term that likely refers to federally qualified health centers.

    Democrats pushed to include a $35 cap in the commercial insurance market in their party-line measure but were forced to strip out the provision after the Senate’s nonpartisan rules referee decided that it didn’t qualify for budget rules which evaded the 60-vote threshold. Seven Republicans supported the price cap in that vote, demonstrating the possibility of a deal under the current divided government.

    In contrast, the Collins-Shaheen bill would limit monthly cost-sharing for at least one insulin type and dosage to $35 or 25 percent of the list price, whichever is lower. It would also require pharmacy benefit managers to pass through 100 percent of insulin rebates and discounts from manufacturers to insurance plans.

    Furthermore, it largely limits insurers from imposing prior authorization and medical management on insulin products and seeks to speed up new competition to further reduce costs.

    “We’re not just looking at: How do we address out-of-pocket costs? But also: How do we encourage more competition?” said Shaheen, who has a granddaughter with Type 1 diabetes.

    Schumer is not tipping his hand on a sensitive issue that will alienate some of his members no matter what he does given his close relationships with both Shaheen and Warnock. Schumer spokesperson Alex Nguyen said: “Prescription drug reform and insulin pricing remains a top priority for leader Schumer. He’s committed to getting a $35 insulin bill passed, and the details are still being worked out.”

    The legislative push to again tackle insulin legislation comes despite recent commitments from Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk and Sanofi to lower the list price of some insulin products this year or next — a decision policy experts say is a response to political headwinds, generic competition and bigger Medicaid rebates set to kick in in 2024.

    Sanders, who introduced his own insulin pricing bill in March to cap the list price of the drug at $20 per vial, is dragging the CEOs of the three major insulin manufacturers before his committee this month. That hearing comes after the committee is slated to act on a drug pricing package this week, which focuses on pharmacy benefit manager practices and generics competition, indicating that tough choices on which insulin legislative approach to take are being deferred.

    “Advocates for lower insulin prices would rightly point out that most of these, aside from Senator Sanders’ bill, focus largely on what insurers charge patients and not what drug companies are paid,” said Stacie Dusetzina, a health policy professor at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. “If you only cap the copayment, then there is a possibility that manufacturers could raise prices.

    The Senate health committee’s May 10 hearing on insulin affordability — which will also include the CEOs of the three major PBMs — is likely to signal whether there is enough Republican support for additional insulin legislation.

    “Obviously, a dramatic change with regard to insulin is already underway, and we’ll see how that plays out,” Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) said. “Whether there’s different additional legislation needed, that’s something we’ll have to evaluate.”

    Sanders predicted a future effort to bring the various insulin bills together, a path to which Warnock appears agreeable.

    “In my view, we’re all on the same team here, we’re trying to get across with insulin,” Warnock said. “There is more than one approach here.”

    But Shaheen and Collins said their legislation is so sweeping compared with the Warnock-Kennedy bill that the two approaches would be nearly impossible to reconcile; Collins described their effort as “so much more comprehensive a bill that it’s difficult to compare.”

    From his vantage point, the twangy Louisianan thinks the four senators — and the majority leader — can put aside the sparring and cut a deal.

    “It seems to me the short way home is to let all four of us come together with Sen. Schumer and work something out in one bill,” Kennedy said. “But having said that, the real issue is how to pay for it. If we can pay for it, I can sell it on my side.”

    [ad_2]
    #bipartisan #battle #capping #insulin #costs #Medicare
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Biden gets bipartisan blowback on getting U.S. tanks to Ukraine faster

    Biden gets bipartisan blowback on getting U.S. tanks to Ukraine faster

    [ad_1]

    gettyimages 1159570662

    “This tank story is not satisfactory,” he added. “The decision’s been made, OK. Then let’s get ready to execute it and cut through whatever the red tape is.”

    The independent, who caucuses with Senate Democrats, said there is a “bipartisan concern” over the time frame, warning that not sending the tanks soon could prove to be “a tragic mistake.”

    “Our country has thousands of main battle tanks,” Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas said earlier in the hearing. “It would seem like it’s not that hard to find 31 and get them there.”

    Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill had long pressed President Joe Biden to send Kyiv U.S.-made main battle tanks, a move the administration finally agreed to in January. On Thursday, during a hearing with U.S. European Command’s Gen. Christopher Cavoli, and U.S. Transportation Command’s Gen. Jacqueline Van Ovost, senators were animated about why the administration can’t get them there much sooner.

    The initial January announcement said the U.S. would provide M1A2 tanks, which would need to be overhauled in a process that could take as long as two years. But the Pentagon said in March the military would pull out some of its older M1A1 Abrams that need less refurbishment and would arrive by the fall.

    A separate tranche of tanks is set to arrive in Germany next month for Ukrainian troops to begin training.

    The Army and defense contractor General Dynamics are working on the tanks slated to be sent this year, which have been pulled from Army depots to send to Ukraine this spring and summer.

    The armor on the tank’s turret and the optical sights are not eligible for export, so they need to be swapped out before they are sent overseas, something that can happen within weeks.

    The work is being done at the Army’s facility at Lima, Ohio. The line has been exceptionally busy in recent months, with tanks for Poland and Taiwan — along with other allies — going through the upgrade process side-by-side.

    The Polish order in particular is a rush job, with Warsaw slated to begin receiving its 116 M1A1 tanks that it ordered in January by this spring.

    While the timeline for the Ukraine-bound tanks has been sped up, the autumn delivery schedule still didn’t sit well with senators.

    Cotton accused the Biden administration of dragging its feet on following through on the January decision to provide the Abrams, which it had initially resisted but announced in tandem with a decision by Germany to send its own Leopard 2 tanks.

    “I think the main reason for that is [also] the main reason why we didn’t even agree to supply the tanks for a year, which is that President Biden didn’t want to supply them,” Cotton said. “And again, I think we could supply them faster than eight or nine months if there was the political will.”

    Cavoli, quizzed by Cotton about when tanks will arrive beyond those that will be used for training Ukrainians, said military planners were moving to speed up the process.

    “The dates are moving right now,” Cavoli said. “We’re trying to accelerate it as much as we can.”

    Another GOP senator, Mike Rounds of South Dakota, pressed Cavoli and Van Ovost on whether the nearly three dozen Abrams tanks had been identified, if they were located in the U.S. or in Europe and how quickly they could be delivered once ready. Van Ovost, who oversees the movement of military equipment and personnel around the globe, said her command has “multiple avenues to deliver Abrams tanks by air or by sea” and could do so quickly once given orders to transport tanks.

    Rounds argued the holdup amounts to “a policy decision that [the administration is] not prepared to deliver 31 Abrams tanks at this time.”

    “The bottom line is, if we needed those tanks, it shouldn’t take eight months for the United States Army to be able to access 31 Abrams tanks,” Rounds said. “If we needed them tomorrow, we’d get them very very quickly.”

    Paul McLeary contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]
    #Biden #bipartisan #blowback #U.S #tanks #Ukraine #faster
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Elton John joined a Senate Foreign Relations hearing to voice support for extending a bipartisan AIDS relief program. 

    Elton John joined a Senate Foreign Relations hearing to voice support for extending a bipartisan AIDS relief program. 

    [ad_1]

    webp.net resizeimage%20(17)
    “There is no better symbol of American greatness than PEPFAR,” John said during his opening remarks.

    [ad_2]
    #Elton #John #joined #Senate #Foreign #Relations #hearing #voice #support #extending #bipartisan #AIDS #relief #program
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Volodymyr Zelenskyy met with a bipartisan trio of senators in Ukraine that included Joe Manchin, Lisa Murkowski and Mark Kelly (along with country music star Brad Paisley). 

    Volodymyr Zelenskyy met with a bipartisan trio of senators in Ukraine that included Joe Manchin, Lisa Murkowski and Mark Kelly (along with country music star Brad Paisley). 

    [ad_1]

    russia ukraine war one year anniversary 84442
    Paisley played a song outside in the rain in Kyiv, posting a brief video of the moment.

    [ad_2]
    #Volodymyr #Zelenskyy #met #bipartisan #trio #senators #Ukraine #included #Joe #Manchin #Lisa #Murkowski #Mark #Kelly #country #music #starBrad #Paisley
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • There’s bipartisan outrage over Russia’s detention of a Wall Street Journal reporter — and calls for his immediate release. 

    There’s bipartisan outrage over Russia’s detention of a Wall Street Journal reporter — and calls for his immediate release. 

    [ad_1]

    mccaul ap 1160
    “The Russian government must release Evan immediately,” Michael McCaul said.

    [ad_2]
    #bipartisan #outrage #Russias #detention #Wall #Street #Journal #reporter #calls #release
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • How Iraq war powers repeal turned into an unlikely bipartisan win

    How Iraq war powers repeal turned into an unlikely bipartisan win

    [ad_1]

    “My preference when dealing with an issue like this — which doesn’t strike me as particularly ideological — is to address members on a one-on-one basis and figure out what anxieties or concerns they might have,” Young said in a joint interview conducted with Kaine.

    Kaine said he’s brought the topic up regularly in Democratic caucus meetings for a decade now, describing himself as a “Johnny one-note” on an issue he first took notice of in 2002 while serving as lieutenant governor of Virginia.

    “Congress needs to own these responsibilities. Having a good bipartisan colleague on this just makes the difference,” Kaine said.

    Since introducing their first joint war powers repeal bill in 2019, Kaine and Young have taken different tacks with their respective parties on the matter. Kaine said that his challenge hasn’t been winning support from fellow Democrats so much as grabbing the focus of the caucus amid a host of competing national security issues.

    “It’s been a long crusade of Sen. Kaine’s,” said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), who recalled his colleague “standing up in our caucus and bringing it up every couple of months.”

    On Young’s side of the aisle, pro-repeal Republicans said the passage of time and the growing opposition to prolonged war within their party’s base made it easier to sell axing the authorizations. In addition, only a handful of senators who initially voted for war in Iraq remain in the chamber.

    “Each decade we get beyond the end of the war, I think most people are finally figuring out the war’s over,” said Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), describing Young as “very, very good” at rounding up GOP support for the effort.

    Other Republican allies said Young’s experience as a former Marine lent credibility to his arguments for repealing the war powers.

    “When it comes from Todd, who’s spent years there as an officer, I think it just means a little bit even more. It’s not like he’s a dove,” said Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), a repeal backer.

    Wednesday’s repeal vote won over the entire Senate Democratic majority, in addition to 18 Republicans who ranged from centrist Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) to non-interventionist conservative Paul.

    Should the Senate war powers repeal pass the House, the Biden administration has indicated the president would support it. But getting it to Biden’s desk requires House passage — and that won’t be easy. Foreign Affairs Chair Michael McCaul (R-Texas) wants to repeal and replace both the 2002 military force authorization and a broad one passed in 2001 after the Sept. 11 attacks, the latter of which still serves as the basis for counterterrorism activities around the world.

    McCaul said this week he wants a “counterterrorism-focused AUMF without geographical boundaries” that would end after five years “so it’s not forever war stuff.”

    But McCaul also has made clear that the ultimate decision rests with Speaker Kevin McCarthy, and the California Republican is already facing trouble navigating an issue that’s split his conference.

    And the strategy Young employed to win over Senate Republicans might not work in the House: The Hoosier said he tailored his arguments depending on the member as he built a sufficient Republican bloc to deliver repeal.

    Democrats took notice — especially Young’s colleagues on the Foreign Relations Committee, which remains a rare occasionally bipartisan bastion on a bitterly divided Hill. Kaine described the Hoosier as “a natural partner,” while Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said “he’s one of the folks who acts as a glue in the Senate.”

    On his own side of the aisle, Young downplayed the idea that his work on war powers repeal created awkwardness with Senate GOP leaders, all of whom except National Republican Senatorial Chair Steve Daines (R-Mont.) ultimately opposed the legislation. (Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, still away from the chamber recuperating after a concussion, condemned the repeal vote on Tuesday.)

    “In this job, we do what we believe is right and in the best interest of our constituents and the country,” said Young, who easily won a second term last fall.

    Not every senior Senate Republican, however, took the approach of Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) — who observed of the repeal vote that “sometimes you just have to accept reality.” Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, top Republican on the Intelligence Committee, spoke for GOP colleagues who fear the repeal of the war powers may only embolden U.S. enemies abroad.

    “I’m also worried about how our adversaries will read this,” said Rubio, who opposed repeal. “Will this be used against us?”

    Meanwhile, many of Kaine and Young’s colleagues might welcome them rejoining hands to go further still by revamping or even outright repealing the 2001 war powers authorization that McCaul is eyeing, which teed up the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan. The duo said in this week’s interview that they’re open to such discussions, but acknowledge that needle will be a difficult one to thread.

    “It’ll take some heavy lifting to get there,” Kaine said, suggesting that Wednesday’s vote might create “a little bit of momentum toward exploring how to make sure we have the right authorities.”

    Young said he’d want to ensure any revisions to the 2001 war powers measure clarify there will be no gap in existing legal authorities to conduct necessary operations overseas, which he said many members view as a point of vulnerability.

    For the moment, pro-repeal senators appear openly grateful to complete work on a substantive bill after the Democratic majority considered more than 10 GOP amendments. As Murphy put it, “people have been hungry for some meaty, bipartisan bills.”

    “The country is war-weary and there’s an instinct, which is the correct one, that we can’t be at war forever,” said Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii). “And there is a beautiful left-right coalition that understands that.”

    Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) wasn’t alone in openly praising the architects of that coalition.

    “Give Tim Kaine and Sen. Young credit,” he said.

    [ad_2]
    #Iraq #war #powers #repeal #turned #bipartisan #win
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Senate, White House push new bipartisan bill that could ban TikTok

    Senate, White House push new bipartisan bill that could ban TikTok

    [ad_1]

    image

    It’s not the first bill that seeks to tackle the perceived national security threat posed by TikTok, which is owned by Chinese-based company ByteDance.

    But it almost certainly has the most momentum of any legislation introduced on the issue so far. It’s the Senate’s first bipartisan effort on TikTok this legislative cycle. It’s being pushed by two of the most powerful lawmakers on Capitol Hill — Warner is chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee and Thune is the Senate minority whip.

    And according to a statement issued during Tuesday’s presser by national security adviser Jake Sullivan, the White House is also on board.

    “This bill presents a systematic framework for addressing technology-based threats to the security and safety of Americans,” Sullivan wrote. He said the RESTRICT Act would strengthen the administration’s ability to address both “discrete risks posed by individual transactions” as well as “systemic risks” posed by multiple transactions “involving countries of concern in sensitive technology sectors.” Sullivan urged lawmakers “to act quickly to send it to the President’s desk.”

    The RESTRICT ACT is somewhat similar to legislation that advanced last week out of the House Foreign Affairs Committee without Democratic support. Like the House bill, it would alter a portion of U.S. law known as the Berman amendments, which allow for the free flow of “informational material” from hostile countries. In 2020, TikTok invoked those amendments as part of its successful court effort to block an attempted Trump administration ban. Warner said his bill would create a “rules-based process” that would short-circuit the Berman amendments and allow the president to restrict — or even ban — foreign apps like TikTok, as well as other technologies.

    Unlike last week’s House bill, however, the RESTRICT Act does not require the Commerce Department or White House to impose bans or sanctions. It would instead task federal agencies with reviewing potential threats posed by tech emanating from China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba or Venezuela. Any further restrictions, said Warner, are up to the Commerce Department.

    Warner said the RESTRICT Act is meant to improve Washington’s “whack-a-mole approach” to risky foreign technologies over the last several years — including efforts to ban telecommunications equipment from Chinese firms Huawei and ZTE, as well as actions taken against Russian cybersecurity company Kaspersky Labs. “We lack, at this moment in time, a holistic, interagency, whole-of-government approach,” Warner said.

    The senator explained that the RESTRICT Act would apply to existing hardware, software and mobile apps, as well as future AI tools, fintech, quantum communications and e-commerce products.

    The bill’s introduction comes after more than a year of discussion within the Biden administration on whether to ban TikTok, and how to limit the ability of foreign applications like it to access Americans’ data. That includes an ongoing national security review of TikTok at the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S., which was begun under the Trump administration but has stalled in the Biden administration amid conflict between national security and economic officials. The impasse has delayed a separate executive order on foreign data collection planned for over a year, and the administration still has not finished a separate Commerce Department rule on information and communications technology.

    ByteDance has long denied any association with Beijing’s surveillance or propaganda operations. Its critics, however, point to provisions in Chinese law that require companies based in-country to comply with any and all requests from state intelligence services.

    In a statement, TikTok spokesperson Brooke Oberwetter said the Biden administration “does not need additional authority from Congress to address national security concerns about TikTok: it can approve the deal negotiated with CFIUS over two years that it has spent the last six months reviewing.” She called a ban on TikTok “a ban on the export of American culture and values to the billion-plus people who use our service worldwide.”

    Oberwetter’s argument is similar to the one made last week by Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.), the ranking member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. At the time, Meeks urged his colleagues to wait for CFIUS and warned against banning TikTok “without consideration of the very real soft power, free speech and economic consequences.”

    But on Tuesday, Warner suggested many of his Democratic colleagues in the House will back the RESTRICT Act. “I can assure you that I’ve actually had very positive conversations with House Democratic colleagues who have become very interested in supporting this bill,” he said.

    Despite surging bipartisan support for the RESTRICT Act, getting the bill to the president’s desk won’t be easy. TikTok regularly garners over 100 million monthly users in the United States. If the legislation is framed as a “TikTok ban bill,” that could make it tougher for vulnerable lawmakers to risk constituent ire by nuking their favorite online platform.

    “This is a popular application,” Warner said, who noted that a ban would also likely trigger First Amendment concerns. “I think it’s going to be incumbent upon the government to show its cards, in terms of how this is a threat.”

    [ad_2]
    #Senate #White #House #push #bipartisan #bill #ban #TikTok
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Biden hails bipartisan rail safety bill

    Biden hails bipartisan rail safety bill

    [ad_1]

    train derailment ohio railroad safety 56759

    President Joe Biden on Thursday praised bipartisan legislation that would strengthen safety rules governing railroads, following the fiery Ohio train derailment that left residents concerned about the air and water quality in the town of East Palestine.

    The legislation was introduced by Ohio Sens. Sherrod Brown, a Democrat, and J.D. Vance, a Republican, and four other senators Wednesday. The Railway Safety Act would bolster a slew of railroad safety measures including raising fines for safety infractions, increasing inspections and imposing new requirements for trains carrying toxic or hazardous materials.

    “I applaud the bipartisan group of senators for proposing rail safety legislation that provides many of the solutions that my administration has been calling for,” Biden said in a statement Thursday. “This legislation provides us with tools to hold companies accountable to prevent terrible tragedies like the Norfolk Southern derailment in East Palestine and to make those communities whole.”

    [ad_2]
    #Biden #hails #bipartisan #rail #safety #bill
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Get ready for a debt-limit roller coaster as tax season moves ahead. That’s the warning from the Bipartisan Policy Center this morning.

    Get ready for a debt-limit roller coaster as tax season moves ahead. That’s the warning from the Bipartisan Policy Center this morning.

    [ad_1]

    tax filing 37097
    The U.S. could approach the verge of debt default in early June, then buy itself some more time as tax receipts roll in.

    [ad_2]
    #ready #debtlimit #roller #coaster #tax #season #moves #ahead #warning #Bipartisan #Policy #Center #morning
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )