“What happened in the last financial crisis? Dodd-Frank was put in place to reflect those lessons,” Porter said in an interview, using the colloquial name for the 2010 law shaped to rein in the industry after the Great Recession of the Obama years. “Not even 10 years later, look what happens: The so-called pro-business Democrats and the Trump administration and Republicans voted to weaken the capital holding requirements.”
But Porter’s two main Senate rivals, Reps. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), are also pointing to the 2018 vote as an example of Wall Street’s hold over Congress and a leading cause of the regional bank’s failure. Schiff previewed his own proposal Monday on MSNBC to hold bank management accountable. Schiff and Lee both voted against the 2018 bill; Porter, who at the time was a House candidate, said she’d oppose it and is now working on legislation to reverse it.
The California trio’s close and loud positioning on the bank failure may not yield much competitive advantage for any single candidate, despite voters’ laser-focus on an uncertain economy. But it does focus new attention on lingering divisions between Democrats lining up to blame the 2018 legislation and the handful of centrists still in office who voted for it, some of whom face tough reelection battles this fall.
The 2018 measure sparking the current Democratic backlash had rolled back capital requirements put in place for smaller banks in the aftermath of the Great Recession, which some experts and Democrats say would have allowed those institutions to better weather economic volatility.
“The capital requirements are really the bottom line for banks,” said Alexandra Thornton, a senior director for tax policy at the liberal-leaning Center for American Progress. “When they don’t have enough equity there, it’s other people who are harmed. And then, if the government has to step in, that just creates the expectation that this will happen again and again.”
The Bank Policy Institute, a group that represents mega- and regional banks, has pushed back on claims that the rule change played a role in the ongoing turmoil — noting that the change “does not appear to have been a major factor in SVB’s or Signature Bank’s failure.”
Schiff, who built a national profile on the House Intelligence Committee where oversaw a lengthy investigation into former President Donald Trump, announced his own plan on Monday as lawmakers picked through the wreckage of SVB’s collapse. The Los Angeles Democrat, whose district includes tony swaths of Hollywood and Burbank, said that Congress needs to craft rules that would force SVB’s executives to disgorge bonuses and stock sale proceeds.
“I plan to introduce legislation to claw back those earnings from these delayed bonuses from stock trades that were beneficial in the run up to this run on the bank,” Schiff said during an appearance on MSNBC, adding that the “failure of oversight” and a “failure of the banks’ management” merited different solutions.
For her part, Lee said in a statement that the next step following the Biden administration’s actions was ensuring “that we have the strong regulation in place to prevent future problems, and that we seek accountability for any impropriety or market manipulation.”
Other House progressives, in some ways, see themselves vindicated for their 2018 opposition to the deregulation bill by the fallout from the bank failure and the likely family conversation looming in the party.
“Silicon Valley Bank’s collapse is the predictable and direct outcome of a furious 2018 effort by bank lobbyists to evade basic oversight, transparency, and financial stability in favor of profit,” said Congressional Progressive Caucus chair Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), in a statement highlighting the group’s raising of the alarm against the legislation, though the liberals singled out Republicans for creating a “future of more chaos for our economy and more impunity for bank misbehavior.”
Nearly half of the 33 House Democrats who voted for the 2018 bill have since left the House, including now-Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.). She’s since faced harsh campaign-trail criticism from Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), who’s vying for the Senate seat in next fall’s elections, over her past positions on banking regulation.
Some House Democrats still in office who voted for the 2018 bill, like Reps. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) and Sanford Bishop (D-Ga.), could still face competitive reelection challenges in the future. But Thornton, the Center for American Progress expert, said the banking reform should transcend partisan politics.
“Here’s the thing, members go through elections, and those are difficult. But there should be people on both sides of the aisle — there should be Republicans strongly supporting an increase in capital requirements,” she said.
And it’s not just candidates who are openly criticizing fellow Democratic or Democratic-aligned lawmakers for their past votes. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who represents Silicon Valley, knocked his party colleagues for the vote in a tweet that remarked “[t]oo many Dems voted yes” in 2018.
Feinstein and then-Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) joined the majority of their party in opposing the 2018 banking bill.
[ad_2]
#Californias #Dem #Senate #hopefuls #vie #higher #ground #Silicon #Valley #Bank #debacle
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
Rubio agreed, saying Congress needs to review the classified documents found in the possession of the president, former president and former vice president to assess whether the response was appropriate.
“A special counsel cannot have veto authority over Congress’ ability to do its job,” Rubio said. “This is going to be addressed one way or the other.”
Warner responded: “Amen.”
None of the intelligence officials who testified on Wednesday, including Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, immediately responded to Warner or Rubio’s comments at the end of the open hearing.
The Justice Department has cited ongoing special prosecutor probes into Biden and Trump as limiting its ability to share the documents with the lawmakers.
Earlier in the hearing, both Haines and FBI Director Christopher Wray said under questioning from Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) that they had personally reviewed some, but not all, of the recovered classified documents. Specific teams conduct document reviews and provide reports following those, Haines and Wray said.
“Although I have not reviewed all of the documents myself, I have gone through a fairly meticulous listing of all the documents that includes detailed information about the content,” Wray said. “So it’s not reading every page.”
Cotton said members were “very frustrated” that the documents haven’t even been characterized to the committee, warning that “some of us are prepared to start putting our foot down” without better answers from intelligence community agencies.
[ad_2]
#Dem #Intel #chair #Biden #admin #position #classified #docs #fails #smell #test
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
So don’t expect him to charge into the Senate’s famed bipartisan gangs. He’s still skeptical of “bipartisanship for its own sake,” quipping in an interview in his temporary basement office this week that “the Iraq war was bipartisan, and it was a fucking disaster.”
Even so, the 38-year-old quickly built an intriguing dynamic with Brown, a flinty 70-year-old who needs support from some of Vance’s voters next November to win his own tough reelection battle. After predicting that Vance would lose his Senate race and move to California, Brown called to congratulate him on beating former Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio) and it’s been surprisingly rosy between them since.
If the duo can get their bill done, it could prove that Congress can actually respond to emergencies, while boosting Brown’s prospects for a fourth term and perhaps replacing some of Vance’s pugnacious reputation with the congenial aura of the man he replaced. Former Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), a buttoned-up Washington fixture, enjoyed a collegial and productive relationship with Brown, making the populist Vance’s arrival a significant transition for the state and the Senate itself.
Circumstances quickly forced Brown and Vance to establish an alliance of sorts. The Marine veteran, author of “Hillbilly Elegy” and first-time office holder landed on the Banking Committee, which Brown chairs — meaning their partnership could extend beyond East Palestine.
“I certainly came in expecting the political environment to be so partisan, that it would be harder to get anything done,” Vance said. “In reality, so long as you’re not being a total jerk about it, I think it’s possible to do things.”
Brown and Vance’s new rail bill would require minimum train crews of two people, enact new safety standards for carrying hazardous materials and increase fines for railroads found at fault. That’s in addition to a series of bipartisan letters from both senators in response to the crash.
“He’s been nothing but cooperative on this. We’ve done a lot of letters together. We’re talking about a lot of things,” Brown said of his new colleague. “I operate under the assumption we’ll work together. Portman and I did a ton of things together, you know.”
Brown added that while Portman “has a different tone,” Vance has offered “nothing but encouragement.”
Whether Brown’s 2024 race will strain that early bonhomie is TBD. Portman and Brown had an understanding that they wouldn’t explicitly campaign against each other, and it’s not clear if that dynamic will carry over to Vance’s tenure. While Vance said he’d be more effective making an affirmative case for a Republican than attacking Brown, he also acknowledged he may “say negative things about Sherrod during his reelection.”
“I certainly would prefer there to be a Republican in his seat,” Vance said, declining to rule out a role in the GOP primary to challenge Brown. “If I think that there’s a candidate who’s clearly better than the rest, then yeah, I’ll get involved.”
It’s too early to say where Vance’s politics fit in the clubby Senate. He initially criticized Trump, then won the former president’s endorsement in his GOP primary and is now officially supporting Trump in 2024. But within the Capitol, Vance is not off to a hard-charging and colleague-alienating start like the Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) of 10 years ago.
Even so, he can still take culture wars into Senate hearing rooms. Vance questioned acting FAA Administrator Billy Nolen last month about the agency “preoccupying itself” with gendered language.
He’s also adamant that sending billions of dollars in aid to Ukraine is a mistake, a view that’s nails on a chalkboard in Senate GOP meetings. Vance admits he’s on a Ukraine-aid island of perhaps 10 Republicans but will still “be very assertive in my view that it’s at best a waste of money.”
“I like J.D. It may be good politics to go soft on Putin and hard on China. It’s terrible national security policy,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who has also endorsed Trump.
The fight over more Ukraine funding is somewhat theoretical — it’s unclear exactly when the Biden administration will ask for more money. The response to the Norfolk Southern crash is more urgent.
Vance has had preliminary discussions about his priorities with McConnell and other Senate colleagues. And he’s getting positive Democratic reviews from more than just Brown.
“We had a great first experience working with his office. They were good-faith negotiators and very solutions-oriented,” said Adam Jentleson, chief of staff for Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), a co-sponsor of the new rail bill.
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) invited Vance to appear at a hearing next week on the disaster at the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. And he’d like to see Norfolk Southern CEO Alan Shaw also testify in front of Congress.
He even envisions a Paycheck Protection Plan-style aid package for East Palestine — a throwback to a bipartisan Covid-era policy — and hopes in the end that Norfolk Southern pays for it.
“We have a broadly accepted principle in our government that when people become destitute through no fault of their own, there should be some social safety net to step in. And I think that that’s basically what’s going on with East Palestine,” Vance said.
Getting anything done quickly may be a challenge, though, as senators from disaster-wracked states often discover. Schumer said he wants to take up and pass Brown and Vance’s rail bill, which could conceivably include money for East Palestine too. That requires 60 votes, at least nine of them Republican, which may take significant work — so Vance has added a PR component to his pitch.
Two weeks ago, Vance visited a polluted creek and posted a video of the chemical sheen in the water, drawing millions of views. And he appeared alongside Trump last week as the former president visited the town.
“He was bringing a spotlight to the fact that these people are being ignored,” said Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley, a like-minded Republican.
Hawley, Vance and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) are co-sponsoring the railroad bill, but it’s not yet clear how far GOP support extends for more regulations or a major aid package for East Palestine. In a statement, McConnell praised Vance for “delivering strong leadership for Ohio and making sure that communities like East Palestine are never forgotten or left behind.”
McConnell, a Portman ally, hoped to get Vance’s vote last year in his leadership race against Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.). Asked how he voted in that secret-ballot contest, Vance heeded his own advice about Senate diplomacy and not being an “asshole.”
“The Senate leadership race is over. Mitch McConnell won,” Vance said. “It makes a lot more sense to look forward as a caucus than backwards.”
[ad_2]
#J.D #Vance #Dem #friends #rail #safety
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
The vote came after a lengthy back-and-forth on Tuesday, with Republicans repeatedly shooting down Democratic amendments meant to rein in different parts of the legislation. In a brief interview with POLITICO on the sidelines of Tuesday’s markup, McCaul said he hoped the split wasn’t the start of a broader collapse of bipartisanship on issues related to Chinese tech.
“We’ve been negotiating this for a solid month, without a whole lot of progress,” McCaul said. “The bottom line is, [Democrats are] not prepared to go forward on any measure related to TikTok. They would prefer to defer to the CFIUS process, where we want to move forward as a Congress.” McCaul was referring to a long-running security review of the risks posed by TikTok by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.
ByteDance, TikTok’s China-based parent company, has long denied any association with Beijing’s surveillance or propaganda operations. Its critics, however, point to requirements in Chinese law that require companies based in-country to comply with any and all requests from state intelligence services.
Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.), the committee’s ranking member, disputed the notion that Democrats would oppose any bill that targets TikTok. In a brief conversation with reporters on Tuesday, he said Democrats are open to “more conversation and dialogue” on a TikTok ban — but, he added, “we have to have all of the facts.”
“I don’t want to supersede CFIUS,” Meeks said. “In the meanwhile, we can be having hearings and conversations, bringing in witnesses and experts on sanctions.”
Meeks said the DATA Act was “unvetted” and had been thrust on his staff with little warning. “We could have held hearings before the markup and carefully crafted bipartisan legislation together,” Meeks said Tuesday. “Instead, my staff and I received the text of this legislation a little over a week ago, and have only had several days to review a bill that would dramatically rewrite the rules-based international economic order.”
Aside from that debate on process, Tuesday’s markup discussion revealed a widening gap in how Republicans and Democrats perceive the threat they say TikTok poses. The GOP increasingly frames the company as a willing participant in Beijing’s espionage activities — McCaul called it a “spy balloon in your phone.” But Democrats appear hesitant to ban an app that roughly 100 million Americans use each month.
“We cannot act rashly without consideration of the very real soft power, free speech and economic consequences of a ban,” Meeks said on Tuesday. He later warned his colleagues against using the tactics of “fear” to pass a TikTok ban. “I’ve seen that tactic utilized before — fear that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, without evidence or proof,” he said.
In response to the Wednesday vote, TikTok spokesperson Brooke Oberwetter said that a “U.S. ban on TikTok is a ban on the export of American culture and values to the billion-plus people who use our service worldwide.”
“We’re disappointed to see this rushed piece of legislation move forward, despite its considerable negative impact on the free speech rights of millions of Americans who use and love TikTok,” Oberwetter added.
The DATA Act 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 — to provide what McCaul called a “constitutional framework” that would let the president ban a foreign app. In 2020, TikTok invoked the Beman amendments as part of its successful court effort to block an attempted Trump administration ban.
The bill would also require the president to impose sanctions on companies with ties to Chinese-owned apps that are “reasonable [sic] believed to have facilitated or may be facilitating or contributing to” a broad slate of nefarious activities by Beijing.
On Tuesday, Meeks called that language “dangerously overbroad.” He warned it would inadvertently impose sanctions on a wide swath of U.S. and allied companies that do business with Chinese firms, including independent subsidiaries that operate outside the reach of Beijing.
The DATA Act has already prompted outside pushback. The American Civil Liberties Union sent a letter on Monday that urged lawmakers to oppose the bill, which it called “vague and overbroad” as well as a violation of the First Amendment. On Tuesday, progressive tech group Fight for the Future launched a “#DontBanTikTok” campaign opposing the legislation.
While McCaul’s TikTok bill is the first to pass out of committee this Congress, it’s not the only legislation percolating on Capitol Hill. In January, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) unveiled their own TikTok ban bill. And in February Sens. Angus King (I-Maine) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla). introduced legislation to ban the app. A previous version of that bill was backed late last year by Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.), who now chairs the new Select Committee on China.
Gavin Bade contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
#GOP #rams #TikTok #ban #bill #Dem #objections
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
Usyk’s removal had roiled the bloc’s members, who are typically conflict-averse. A well-respected Hill veteran, she’d been brought on as the Hispanic Caucus head staffer earlier this year after stints with Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Rep. Tony Cárdenas (D-Calif.). The group, following Usyk’s termination, now has no staffers.
Barragán, a fourth-term lawmaker, has developed a reputation as a harsh boss — netting higher-than-average turnover in her office, as tracked by the nonpartisan site Legistorm. She’d brought on Usyk as the top staffer for the Hispanic Caucus, but other top staffers departed the group soon after Barragán was elected unopposed to its top job in December.
The lack of staff threatens to hurt the caucus’ ability to meaningfully engage on policies like immigration, preventing the group from leading House Democrats on certain critical issues. The group was set this week to bring on a new communications director, Bianca Lugo Lewis, though it is unclear if she will still start the job. She did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
[ad_2]
#House #Dem #leaders #calm #outrage #Hispanic #Caucus #chair
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
The postmortems that Barnes’ aides undertook were similar to the ones that advisers to other high-profile Black Senate candidates conducted after an election in which Democrats fared well, but those contenders fell short. While there are numerous reasons why none of the Black candidates trying to flip seats won, they’ve gravitated to a common theme, one that’s more personal than a typical after-action campaign report: Black candidates needed more trust — and, with it, funding — from the Democratic Party’s infrastructure.
“Hindsight is always 20/20 and there’s no doubt that Cheri Beasley and Val Demings were in tough races, but given the right investment they both could have won,” said Rep. Barbara Lee, a California Democrat and chair emeritus of the Congressional Black Caucus, referencing the two Democratic Black women who ran for Senate in North Carolina and Florida.
Lee may be speaking out of self-interest. She has told colleagues that she plans to run for the Senate. And in Demings’ case, it’s unclear how more funding could have overcome a decisive 16-point loss. But her analysis overall of the 2022 results was echoed by 10 elected officials, strategists and campaign operatives who spoke to POLITICO. They don’t just see the issue as one of campaign money but, rather, of Black candidates getting the same institutional support as their white peers.
“Generally speaking what I’ve seen since I’ve gotten here is not enough Black unity across the country, from a political perspective, and not a strong enough Black political infrastructure to support Black candidates across the country,” said Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.), who is Black. “That’s something that’s very concerning to me. And something I want to use my voice and platform to help build going forward.”
At the beginning of the midterm election cycle, many Democrats were optimistic about the Black Senate contenders on the ballot, even with the historical challenges the party faced given that it controlled the White House and Congress.
Past high-profile Black candidates — like Sen. Raphael Warnock, Stacey Abrams, Jaime Harrison and Barack Obama — had been some of the party’s star fundraisers. And there was a sense that the long-standing belief that Black candidates couldn’t compete financially with their white counterparts had finally been put aside.
The numbers ended up supporting that theory. Barnes raised $42 million compared to Johnson’s $36 million in the 2022 election cycle, according to newly released data from the Federal Election Commission. Beasley brought in nearly $39 million in 2022, versus Republican opponent Ted Budd’s almost $15 million. Demings, meanwhile, was the third-best Senate fundraiser of the cycle, bringing in $81 million, while Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fl.) collected about $51 million. And it wasn’t just Democrats. Two Black Republicans, Sen. Tim Scott and Senate challenger Herschel Walker, also smashed fundraising expectations, raising roughly $54 million and $74 million, respectively
But in the modern political system, raising money is only one component of a successful campaign. Getting outside help is the other. And as the 2022 cycle came to a close, operatives on some of the high-profile races said they felt ill-equipped to compete against GOP super PACs as Democratic Party groups looked to protect incumbents and poured money into other races, like Pennsylvania.
Barnes, for one, was hit with $62 million in outside spending from Republican groups including the Senate Leadership Fund, a super PAC tied to Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), according to an analysis of general election spending by OpenSecrets. By contrast, Democratic outside groups, including the top Senate Democratic super PAC Senate Majority PAC, spent $41 million on the Wisconsin race.
September was particularly difficult for Barnes, according to his campaign. That month, Democrats were outspent $28 million to $20 million on the airwaves in the Wisconsin Senate race, per AdImpact, which tracks campaign media spending, including broadcast, cable, radio, digital and satellite. The vast majority of GOP spending came from its outside groups.
Barnes’ aides didn’t point fingers at any specific group — they said the extra money they needed could have come from super PACs or to their own campaign — but said the key fact is they were outmatched.
“People were seeing three negative ads for every one good thing they were seeing about the lieutenant governor. That has a pretty significant impact,” said Kozloski. “Unfortunately, it certainly cost us 26,000 votes.”
The Pennsylvania Senate contest, another major midterm battleground, received the most outside spending of all federal elections in 2022, according to OpenSecrets. Almost $113 million was spent on now-Sen. John Fetterman’s behalf by Democratic outside groups, while GOP organizations bolstered Mehmet Oz with more than $95 million in the general election. Fetterman was the only candidate to flip a Senate seat in 2022, where he won by almost 5 percent of the vote, and received investments from both Senate Democrats’ campaign arm and its super PAC ally, Senate Majority PAC, as well as other outside groups.
Beasley, for her part, was the only Democratic Senate candidate in a state that Trump carried in 2020 to receive outside spending help from Senate Majority PAC, which invested about $13 million in her race, according to its FEC filings. Other outside groups spent almost $9 million more backing her in the general election, according to OpenSecrets.
But there wasn’t a direct expenditure from the DSCC in the contest. (According to a DSCC aide, the group sent out tandem emails for direct fundraising and bundled money on her behalf.) And the total outside spending in the general for Beasley didn’t match what the GOP did for Budd.
Republican outside groups spent almost $62 million, with money coming from the National Republican Senatorial Committee, Senate Leadership Fund and other organizations, according to OpenSecrets.
Demings received no outside support from the DSCC or Senate Majority PAC. Like with Beasley, the DSCC sent tandem fundraising emails and bundled money for her, the DSCC aide said. But in Demings’ case, Democrats were not outspent. Outside groups invested just under $3 million on Demings’ behalf, while Republican organizations spent more than $3 million to help Rubio during the general election, according to OpenSecrets.
A Demings spokesperson declined to comment. A person close to the campaign said that while Demings didn’t struggle with a spending disparity in her own contest, that wasn’t the case in the Florida governor’s race, where the GOP dominated in spending and earned media. In their view, that blew back on Demings.
“Anything that we talked about was sort of a sideshow, which is pretty unusual in a Senate race,” the person said.
Democratic officials noted that, as a rule, party committees and outside groups prioritize protecting incumbents. While Barnes, Beasley and Demings were all either challengers or open-seat contenders, Warnock was running for reelection and receiving the full-throated support of Democratic outside groups. Georgia Honor, which is tied to Senate Majority PAC, spent more than $60 million in the race, according to the FEC. The DSCC also invested nearly $11 million in opposing Walker.
“We’re proud to have invested over $62 million in Wisconsin and North Carolina this cycle—and to have helped level the playing field for our candidates as they faced an avalanche of fear-mongering attacks from a handful of right-wing billionaires,” said Senate Majority PAC spokesperson Veronica Yoo. “In the end, SMP’s strategic investments accomplished our mission: defending and expanding our Democratic Senate majority against the odds.”
Those officials have also defended their funding decisions by noting that, in some cases, Black Senate candidates in 2022 were competing in difficult states. While Wisconsin is a perpetual toss-up, Florida has been trending redder in recent years. And North Carolina has been just out of grasp for Democrats in many statewide elections. Beasley lost by 3 points. Demings fell short by 16 points.
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.), head of the DSCC, said that there wasn’t any more support that the group could have given to the non-incumbent Black candidates. “We provided support. In Wisconsin, we provided major support,” he said, referring to the group’s $3 million independent expenditure to oppose Johnson.
“I think they’re the strongest candidates that we could have had in each of those states,” Peters said. “I was very excited about all of them. But part of the problem was just that they were running in challenging states. They’re just difficult states for a Democrat to win. They all had great runs and came close. And Barnes, in particular, came really close.”
Democrats who object to complaints about spending decisions also note that outside group support isn’t as important as a candidate’s own fundraising. That’s because candidates receive discounted rates to air their advertising while outside groups have to pay market rates, allowing a candidate’s money to stretch further on the airwaves.
But other veterans of the 2022 cycle, including those who worked for those high-profile Black Senate candidates, said that significant outside investment can help provide additional messaging that has a cumulative impact for voters.
“Republicans decided that their path to victory involved tearing down this incredibly accomplished woman,” said Travis Brimm, Beasley’s campaign manager. “And they were going to spend as much money as they needed to get across that finish line. And ultimately, to be in a position to get through that and win in a Trump state, we were going to need outside investment to be a lot closer to parity.”
In addition to boosting candidates in outside spending, some Black politicians and strategists believe there should be more tailor-made support to help Black candidates’ campaigns. Bowman, for one, said more infrastructure should focus on grassroots organizing and communicating Democrats’ positive message to voters.
He said that after the midterm elections, he and Harrison, who is now Democratic National Committee chair, discussed diversity issues in the party, including supporting more Black candidates and better ways to campaign for Black voters.
“You know, we both have bald heads, but we go to barbershops all the time. And we have conversations at barbershops about how people feel,” Bowman said. “And you know, people have felt like Democrats aren’t fighting hard enough — for Black men in particular.”
In the wake of his loss, Barnes has decided to take on that initiative as well. He has launched a new PAC called The Long Run to support diverse candidates running for office. Though he proved to be an adept fundraiser, his aides said that he had to contend with the fact that donors routinely questioned his electability.
“There’s always this question to younger candidates, candidates of color. You know, when you don’t look like the majority of the electorate, there’s always the question: ‘Can you win?’” Barnes told POLITICO. “I get it. That’s valid, ‘Can you win?’ is a valid question. But there comes a certain point where it’s like, you’ve proven that you can actually win, where you have done the work. And, you know, the question still exists.”
Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.), herself a one-time Senate candidate, said that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, DSCC and DNC could all be doing more to support the specific needs of Black candidates, and candidates of color generally.
“People have to see Black candidates as, you know, Senate leaders,” Bush said, talking about Democratic organizations and voters. “I remember my very first race, I ran for U.S. Senate, and what they said to me was, ‘You’re a Black woman. Black women, Black people don’t win statewide in Missouri.’”
As she gears up for her own Senate run, Lee said she has had similar experiences. When she first ran for Congress, she recalled being told not to do so because it was too difficult.
“There’s no doubt that Black women have the highest systemic barriers to success,” said Lee. “Smaller donor networks, less organizational support, and more barriers to entry. The other more establishment and overly-funded candidates have the resources, but we are the backbone of the party.”
[ad_2]
#Black #candidates #sound #needed #Dem #groups
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
Whitmer noted that the poll question was not conducted as a matchup between candidates. Former President Donald Trump, who lost to Biden in 2020, has been the only Republican to announce a campaign — though others in the Republican Party have also teased potential 2024 ambitions, some more clearly than others.
Whitmer and the White House have both pointed to the Biden administration’s legislative accomplishments and Democrats’ performance in the midterms as proof of his ongoing electability, despite the recent polling.
Speaking on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Gov. Phil Murphy (D-N.J.) said support for Biden is likely to catch up to his achievements.
“I think there’s a lead lag factor here. I think we underestimate the trauma of the past several years,” he said, adding: “I don’t think you snap back from that overnight.”
[ad_2]
#Whitmer #dismisses #lack #Dem #enthusiasm #Biden
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
She greeted the suspect and as she entered her elevator, the suspect entered along with her and started doing pushups before punching Craig in the chin and then grabbing her neck, the report said. She threw her hot coffee at the suspect to get away, the report continued, and escaped.
Officers searched the basement parking area of the apartment, which is in the H Street NE neighborhood less than a mile from the Capitol. Police announced the arrest of 26-year-old Kendrick Hamlin on suspicion of the assault later Thursday.
It quickly raised alarms among Craig’s colleagues, many of whom have remained on edge about the uptick in political violence in recent years. Other than members of House leadership and those who receive targeted threats, most lawmakers do not receive personal security.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said in a statement later Thursday: “We are very grateful that she is safe and recovering, but appalled that this terrifying assault took place.”
Jeffries said he’d asked the House Sergeant at Arms and the Capitol Police to work with Craig and her family to keep them safe both in Washington, D.C., and Minnesota.
The attack could revive calls to beef up spending on personal security for lawmakers — a concern that has flared after the attack on Paul Pelosi, Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) husband, last October, and, more broadly, the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol. Lawmakers have, generally, reported an uptick in public harassment in recent years.
Led by the sergeant at arms office, House officials increased security funding last year, creating a residential program that funds at-home cameras, motion sensors and locks for lawmakers at a cost of up to $10,000.
The Capitol Police, in a statement, said the assailant was “believed to be homeless.”
“At this time, there is no information that the Congresswoman was targeted because of her position, however the case is still under investigation by both the MPD and the USCP,” the department said.
The Hill’s police force said last fall that it needed more resources to provide “physical security” for members of Congress at their residences after the Pelosi attack highlighted shortcomings. The department also opened field offices in Florida and California in the aftermath of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot to investigate threats to lawmakers.
Lawmakers have become increasingly concerned about their safety in recent years, with the Capitol Police citing 7,501 investigations into threats in 2022, including direct threats and “concerning statements.”
[ad_2]
#Minnesota #Dem #reports #attack #D.C #apartment #building
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
The Illinois governor on Thursday called on the federal government to not only enact a federal law legalizing abortion nationwide but also to assist people who have to travel from their home states for access to abortion.
The prospects for such a law at the federal level appear dim. President Joe Biden has asked Congress to pass a law reestablishing abortion rights nationwide, a proposal with virtually zero chance of making any progress on Capitol Hill. The president did sign an executive order in August that directed the Department of Health and Human Services to consider ways to expand coverage for patients traveling out of state for reproductive health care.
Democratic North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper said Thursday at POLITICO’s event that he “wouldn’t back down” when it comes to reproductive freedom, as his state has similarly become a haven for abortion access in the South. Cooper has promised to block anti-abortion measures proposed by the Republican-led legislature, which has aimed to enact restrictions that go beyond the state’s current 20-week ban on abortion.
When asked about whether he thinks a national abortion ban, a policy item pushed by some Republicans, is possible, Cooper said “we’re just not going to let that happen.”
“We have become a critical access point in the Southeast and we need to hold the line to protect women’s health,” Cooper said. “Get politicians out of the exam room with women and their doctors.”
Cooper said he believes the majority of people in his state support abortion rights. He added that the Supreme Court’s reversal of the right to abortion access previously guaranteed in Roe v. Wade sets a new precedent.
“This court has already stripped a right that has been in place for five decades. My real concern is what’s going to happen in the Supreme Court for other kinds of constitutional rights that we have,” Cooper said. “They obviously left the door open here.”
[ad_2]
#Dem #governors #pledge #protect #abortion #neighbors #add #restrictions
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
He’s even talked directly to Yellen several times about the matter. Summing up his approach of late, Manchin said: “I’ve been raising hell.”
“They almost act like they gotta send $7,500 or a person won’t buy a car. Which is crazy, ludicrous thinking for the federal government,” Manchin said in an interview this week. “I just totally and absolutely am disagreeing with what they’re doing.”
A frustrated Manchin is nothing new for Democrats, but the current situation is plainly untenable for them. He’s still undecided on reelection next year in a state that’s critical to keeping their Senate majority. And as Energy Committee chair, he has the power to wreak havoc by slowing down nominees, hauling in Biden officials for public testimony and pushing legislation against the administration’s wishes.
What’s more, Manchin’s grievances go beyond just the tax credit. He dislikes the public perception of the law he insisted on calling the Inflation Reduction Act, which he sees as an energy security measure rather than a climate change-fighting one — a distinction with a political difference in a deep-red, fossil-fuel state like West Virginia.
Notably, the Manchin-backed law also requires new sales of oil and gas leases that his progressive colleagues might otherwise have opposed. So as he weighs a bid for reelection, he’s touting the power of the bill he wrote in order to puncture Democratic hopes of ending U.S. reliance on fossil fuels.
At Wednesday’s Senate Democratic retreat, Manchin handed out a one-page summary of his perspective on the proposal he revived last summer in a nearly singlehanded show of force, telling colleagues that the U.S. is on track to energy independence as a result of it, according to a person briefed on the meeting who spoke candidly on condition of anonymity.
“This is bullshit. So they’re gonna basically starve us out of energy that we have a tremendous, abundant supply of because of their aspirational thoughts?” Manchin said of fellow Democrats who want to quickly transition the nation away from oil and gas. “I will continue to fight and I’ll do everything I can to make sure the public knows what they’re doing and what it will do to you and your economy and your lifestyle.”
Manchin’s approval ratings back home took a hit after he supported the Inflation Reduction Act. And being at odds with the White House is just good politics for red-state Democrats. In a similar turn, Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) is openly skeptical of the Biden administration’s response to the Chinese spy balloon that flew over his state last week, and he will hold a hearing Thursday on it.
Some in the administration and the Senate see Manchin’s moves as catering to his state’s conservative voters as he considers whether to run again for six more years in deep-red territory. West Virginia continues to depend on energy production for its economy, and Manchin’s fight to preserve a fossil-fuel bridge to a clean energy future may play well there.
Still, at the moment the schism is alarming enough that Democrats are working to patch things over. Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), a close Biden ally, recently traveled to Europe with Manchin and is among those hoping to turn down the temperature.
“I recognize that this is a tense and challenging dynamic, but one where I hope to be able to contribute,” Coons said.
And Republicans, all of whom opposed the Inflation Reduction Act, are reveling in the discord.
“It’s clear the Democrats have no clue what they voted for. Only a full repeal would fix it,” said Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), the No. 3 Senate Republican and the ranking member of the Energy Committee.
This is not the nadir of relations between the president and Manchin. It was only 14 months ago that the senator pulled the plug on the sweeping, more expensive and liberal-leaning party-line bill known as “Build Back Better,” with the White House accusing him of a “breach of his commitments to the president.” Since, the two Joes have rekindled their partnership — until the last few weeks.
The president is subtly working to smooth things over. On Tuesday evening during the State of the Union, Biden stated that “We’re still going to need oil and gas for a while,” adding that it would be at least 10 years, if not more, before the country can wean itself off those fuels.
And the White House is done going after Manchin. In a statement, spokesperson Michael Kikukawa said that Biden “has great respect for Senator Manchin and communicates with him frequently about the important task of implementing the Inflation Reduction Act in a way that achieves President Biden’s and Congress’ goals.”
Manchin is not nearly as cool to Biden as he was toward former President Barack Obama, whom he did not support in the 2012 election. To hear Manchin tell it, Biden is caught between his personal views and a more progressive Democratic Party that runs much of the day-to day-work in his administration.
“Joe’s been pushed pretty hard,” Manchin said. “I’m pleased that he’s worked his way back to where I think he always has been, that center left. But, the headwinds are strong there, and they keep going.”
The Treasury Department is expected to finalize its guidance for the credit in March, giving consumers at least a few more weeks of access to the full tax credit regardless of the sourcing used for electric-vehicle parts. Treasury did not comment for this story, but released a white paper outlining how complicated the issue is and said last month it needed extra time “to work through significant complexities.” The department has already implemented an income cap on tax credits.
Manchin said that, during his conversations with Yellen, he’s told her she’s “absolutely out of your wheelhouse” in her implementation of the law. Some Democrats, however, are perfectly comfortable with it.
“I completely agree with Joe Manchin in creating industrial policy to build that stuff here. But we also have to manage the supply chain between now and when those factories open,” said Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), “It takes three years to build a factory.”
For Manchin, that’s kind of the point. He took the leap to plow hundreds of billions of dollars into clean and domestic energy, shore up health care access and raise taxes on corporations, in part to reorient the economy toward his vision. He wants a supply chain anchored domestically, with his state competing for the accompanying energy jobs — and if that means fewer tax credits designed to boost clean cars for a while, so be it.
The Inflation Reduction Act “was passed for energy security, not purely for accelerating the environmental pathway. That’s not going to happen until the technology’s there,” Manchin said. “It’s not going to happen overnight. They know it. We know it.”
Josh Siegel contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
#Manchin #raising #hell #White #House #handling #marquee #Dem #bill
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
