Republicans contend they are pushing for the bill, SB 1616, at the urging of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, the agency which now manages the state plane used by the governor and which has been inundated with record requests. GOP lawmakers asserted that releasing the information would allow someone to look for “patterns” that could jeopardize DeSantis’ security.
“Everything we do is monitored,” said Senate President Kathleen Passidomo (R-Naples). “Bad actors can find out a lot. … I think it’s perfectly appropriate. Here we have a young governor who has young children, a young family. God forbid something would happen because information is out there.”
Republican supporters also said there was nothing in the legislation that would alter campaign finance laws that require state political officials to disclose when they use political committees or campaigns to pay for travel.
But Democrats ripped the bill as a way to keep DeSantis’ actions out of public view while open government advocates called it one of the worst ever proposed exemptions to the state’s much-lauded Sunshine Law.
“It’s so clearly an attempt to protect this information from reporters wanting to know how taxpayer money is being spent,” said state Sen. Tina Polsky, a Boca Raton Democrat.
Barbara Petersen, the executive director of the Florida Center for Government Accountability, called the legislation “stunning” and “unbelievable.”
“It’s beyond the pale,” said Petersen, an attorney who has tracked open records laws and issues for 30 years. “It blows a hole in the public records law. … This is a governor who doesn’t want anyone to know what he’s doing.”
Under then-Florida Gov. Rick Scott — a multimillionaire who owned his own jet — the state sold off planes used by the governor and other top officials. Scott sharply criticized two of his rivals in the 2010 governor’s race by pointing to news articles that detailed how they had used the state plane at the expense of taxpayers. In one instance, a state auditor questioned whether then-Attorney General Bill McCollum had misused state resources in how he used the state plane.
After DeSantis took office, state legislators authorized spending millions to acquire a jet that could be used to get the governor around the large state and where commercial travel in and out of Tallahassee is not easy.
DeSantis routinely will use the state plane if he travels somewhere to hold a press conference or to deal with emergency response efforts. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement has been slow to turn over record requests showing when and where the state plane has been dispatched.
Flight tracking websites show that this year, DeSantis has used private chartered planes — or planes used by prominent Floridians — on out-of-state trips such as those connected with his book promotional tours. The governor’s office has said no state dollars have been used on those trips, but DeSantis’ political operation has not answered questions about the private planes.
But the bill legislators are poised to pass would essentially shield all information related to “security and transportation services” provided to DeSantis, his family, as well as visiting governors and their families, legislative leaders, the chief justice of the Florida Supreme Court and members of the Florida Cabinet.
Passidomo asserted that she was not worried about DeSantis misusing the state plane if his travel records were no longer public.
“He thinks about these things,” she told reporters.
[ad_2]
#Florida #poised #DeSantis #travel #records #secret
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
“We can all be proud that the 2022 election ran very smoothly across the state, but it is critical that we continue to safeguard against abuse, seek input from a variety of stakeholders, and make process improvements where we can,” said State Sen. Danny Burgess (R-Zephyrhills) in a statement about the legislation. “These efforts ensure we continue to maintain the integrity of our free and fair elections — a cornerstone of our nation’s democracy.”
The legislation does not address the state’s resign-to-run law, even though GOP legislative leaders said they were willing to tweak the law to make sure that DeSantis does not have to give up his office should he become the Republican nominee for president.
But Democrats still reacted sharply to the proposed bill, which was released about one day before it is scheduled for its first vote in the state Senate. The House has yet to release a similar bill, but House Speaker Paul Renner has already said he expects his chamber to push through elections-related legislation.
“It is absolutely absurd to drop a 98-page elections bill with just a 24 hour notice for its first hearing,” said Rep. Anna Eskamani (D-Orlando). “Not only is it absurd, but it’s undemocratic and clearly designed to avoid public scrutiny. We should be introducing election reforms that make it simpler for people to vote and get registered to vote; not policies that make it harder.”
The DeSantis administration last year highlighted the arrest of nearly two-dozen people for voting illegally because they had prior convictions for murder or sex offenses. But some of those arrested said they thought they were eligible because they had been issued a voter ID card. Under the process it is usually up to the state to figure out if someone is eligible.
The proposed bill (S.B. 7050) would now require a disclaimer to be placed on the card that says it is “not legal verification of the eligibility to vote.”
Desmond Meade, executive director and president of the Florida Rights Restoration Coalition, called the proposal “a rush job” and a “legislative cover up to fix a flaw.”
Meade led the push for a 2018 constitutional amendment that restored voting rights for many convicted felons. Many people registered to vote after its passage, but there is not one central database available that can tell potential voters if they meet the new criteria.
“If a returning citizen can’t rely on the state to figure out if they are eligible, who can they rely on?” Meade said.
Since the 2020 election — where mail-in voting was repeatedly criticized by former President Donald Trump — GOP legislators in the Sunshine State have pushed through several changes to mail-in voting, many of them at the insistence of DeSantis. Democrats and voting rights groups widely criticized a 2021 law that place a two-ballot limit on how many mail-in ballots someone could gather for elderly or sick voters.
Florida Secretary of State Cord Byrd had recommended several additional changes to voting laws this year including blocking voters from being able to request a mail-in-ballot by telephone. That change, however, was not included in the proposal released on Monday.
But some of the notable provisions in the bill would increase fines and penalties against outside groups that conduct voter registration drives. The proposed measure would require these organizations to give someone a receipt after they register.
The legislation would also make it a felony for anyone to intimidate or threaten election workers, a move that comes after local election officials have reported coming under repeated pressure the last few years after Trump falsely asserted there was widespread fraud in the 2020 election.
The measure would also tweak campaign finance laws by reducing the frequency that candidates and political committees have to file reports except for a five-month period during election years. It would also alter vote-by-mail request deadlines and require first-time voters to vote in person if they do not have a social security number or Florida driver’s license or state issued identification.
[ad_2]
#Florida #Republicans #poised #election #laws
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
Washington: Indian-American business leader Ajay Banga is poised to become the next President of the World Bank after the nomination period closed and no country proposed an alternate candidate for the prestigious post.
In February, President Joe Biden announced that the US would be nominating Banga to lead the World Bank because he is “well equipped” to lead the global institution at “this critical moment in history.”
The World Bank on Wednesday closed a month-long window for nominations for its next president, with no alternatives announced to 63-year-old Banga.
The former Mastercard Inc. chief, Banga currently serves as Vice Chairman at General Atlantic.
The bank’s board is expected to announce the next steps in its selection process on Thursday, with a view to confirming a new leader by early May.
“Over the next few months, you will see the World Bank undergo an important transition. We expect that Ajay Banga President Biden’s nominee will be elected President of the World Bank,” US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen told lawmakers at a Congressional hearing on Wednesday.
“He will be charged with accelerating our progress to evolve the institution to better address 21st century challenges. This evolution will help the Bank deliver on its vital poverty alleviation and development goals,” Yellen said.
If confirmed, Banga would become the first-ever Indian-American and Sikh-American to head either of the two top international financial institutions: the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
Banga is expected to replace the current World Bank president David Malpass, who will step down in June, nearly a year before his term is scheduled to expire.
Malpass faced strong criticism over the bank’s commitment to climate action and over his personal views on climate change.
Last week, reports emerged that China sounded doubtful about backing Banga, saying it is “open” to supporting “other potential candidates” based on merit.
Banga, however, received overwhelming support from major countries across the world, including India.
Following Banga’s nomination, he has travelled to several countries for support.
A coalition of 55 advocates, academics, executives, luminaries, and former government officials — including four Nobel Laureates — wrote an open letter to welcome and support Banga’s nomination as the next President of the World Bank.
Raised in India, Banga has a unique perspective on the opportunities and challenges facing developing countries and how the World Bank can deliver on its ambitious agenda to reduce poverty and expand prosperity, President Biden had said.
He has also worked closely with Vice President Harris as the Co-Chair of the Partnership for Central America.
He was awarded the Padma Shri in 2016.
Banga is expected to take over the reins of the anti-poverty lender at a crucial time, with the US and Western nations pitching for reforms to focus on addressing a slew of wide-ranging global issues like climate change.
JAMMU: In a historic achievement J&K is well on target to complete around 2 lakh works under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) this financial year.
This information was given out in a meeting chaired by Chief Secretary, Dr Arun Kumar Mehta to review the performance of Rural Development Department & Panchayati Raj schemes implemented in the UT of J&K.
Besides the Administrative Secretary, RD&PR the meeting was attended by the Administrative Secretaries of Agriculture Production and Farmers Welfare Department; Jal Shakti; Forest; PWD; Labour& Employment; IT & Information; Revenue; Health; YS&S; Secretary in RDD; HoDs of Agriculture and Rural Development Departments.
The meeting was informed that as compared to previous years the Department has this year set a very high target of 2 lakh works for it and the Department is expecting to achieve it also. It was revealed that the in the current financial year so far the Department has generated more than 2.82 Cr person days of work for the inhabitants of the rural population.
It also came to fore during the meeting that during the past years the number of works completed used to be far less than what has been achieved this year so far. It was given out that during the year 2018-19 the number of works completed under MGNREGA were mere 26,352 and increased substantially in the coming years.
The number nearly doubled and reached to 54,311 works in the next year of 2019-20 thereby taking a leap reaching 67,278 in 2020-21, 84,705 in 2021-22 and this year the scheme already crossed 1,71,824 mark in the number of works completed taking a plunge of more than 200% so far, the meeting was informed .
This remarkable number of completed works has been achieved at the expenditure of Rs 931.16 Cr. It was further given out that the percentage of women person days hovered at around 30.35% thereby extending an opportunity to the women for their empowerment through employment. The meeting was also apprised that nearly 9 lakh persons belonging to around 6.84 lakh households worked under this scheme to earn their livelihood.
It is pertinent to mention here that the average wage rate per day per person was hiked last year from Rs 213.94 to Rs 226.78 and the payments are made exclusively through online mode directly into the accounts of the workers. Most of the payments had been made in a span of just 15 days after completion of work, the meeting was apprised.
Regarding the next year plan it was revealed that the Department has proposed around 2,71,474 works which includes 1,07,249 (40%) of works related to natural resources management, 80,522 works of creation of individual assets for vulnerable sections, 82334 works of rural infrastructure besides others.
The Chief Secretary applauded the Department for this unique achievement and asked them to raise their bar of expectation in the coming years besides efficiency of achieving the targets. He enjoined upon them to utilize this opportunity under the LG administration in bringing about necessary reforms regarding the transparency, responsibility and accountability in the system thereby achieving new heights in serving the people freely as per their expectations and requirements.
“There’s an absence of prosecution,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett said. “There’s also an absence of demonstrated chilling effect.”
But the court’s liberal justices said the concerns sounded far from hypothetical. Justice Sonia Sotomayor posited a potential prosecution of a child for encouraging a grandmother in the U.S. to stay while knowing she was not here legally.
“The grandmother tells her son she’s worried about the burden she’s putting on the family and the son says, ‘Abuelita, you are never a burden to us. If you want to live here and continue living here with us, your grandchildren would love having you.’ Can you prosecute this?”
“I think not,” Justice Department attorney Brian Fletcher said, defending the statute. “I think it’s very hard.”
“Stop qualifying with ‘think,’” Sotomayor interjected. “Because the minute you start qualifying with ‘think,’ then you’re rendering asunder the First Amendment.”
The case the justices heard Monday, arising from California man Helaman Hansen’s conviction in an adult-adoption immigration fraud scheme, is a difficult one for the Biden administration and arises at an awkward time for the White House.
The Justice Department’s defense of the law puts them at odds with immigrant-rights groups who say they fear prosecution under the statute.
The showdown also comes amid growing anger by immigrant-rights activists over several recent policy moves. The administration wants to make it harder for migrants to claim asylum at the border and Biden is weighing a return to a policy of large-scale detention of immigrant families who arrive at the border without permission to enter the U.S.
Fletcher did not address those political issues, but he did urge the justices to adopt a narrow reading of the statute and clarify that its seemingly broad language covers only speech that amounts to soliciting or aiding and abetting someone to remain in the country illegally.
However, the lawyer representing Hansen, Esha Bhandari, said Fletcher’s proposed interpretation is an attempt to “rewrite” the statute.
“That is Congress’ job,” she said, appealing to conservative justices who favor literal readings of legal texts.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson expressed a similar concern, noting that Congress removed language about aiding and abetting seven decades ago.
“I guess I’m worried about an active, conscious effort on Congress’ part to exclude certain words that I now hear you wanting us to read back into this statute,” Jackson said.
Rather than adopting the government’s technical interpretation of the statute, Bhandari said, the justices should uphold a lower court’s ruling that declared the statute unconstitutional.
Early in the argument, conservative members of the court like Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch seemed to question the law’s scope.
Kavanaugh said charitable groups that provide food, water and shelter to immigrants seemed to have “sincere” worries about being prosecuted under a broad reading of the law.
Gorsuch initially expressed concern about the Justice Department’s attempt to reinterpret the law’s language, but he later seemed even more troubled by the notion of allowing Hansen to use his criminal case to raise arguments about how the law could affect others.
“It is an extraordinary thing for this court to grant third-party standing, which is effectively what we’re being asked to do here,” Gorsuch said.
But Jackson responded that courts entertain such overbreadth arguments because it can be difficult to know who or how many people are limiting their activities because of fears of prosecution.
“Is it possible to really figure out how many people have been chilled?” she asked. “We don’t know how many other people would have engaged in that kind of speech and action if it weren’t for this law.”
Justice Samuel Alito pointed to one unusual aspect of the statute: It criminalizes encouraging someone to remain in the U.S. illegally, but staying in the country without permission is not usually a crime. It’s typically a civil violation dealt with in immigration court.
Fletcher said court precedents permit making it a crime to encourage someone to violate a law punishable only by a civil penalty. He argued Congress had good reason to do so because it was worried about people taking advantage of undocumented migrants.
However, Bhandari said the government runs afoul of the First Amendment anytime it seeks to impose more severe punishment for encouraging an act than for the underlying act itself.
She also noted that some immigrants who are currently in the U.S. illegally are pursuing pathways Congress has created for them to obtain legal status, so it would be illogical to punish those who encourage such individuals to remain.
Hansen’s case is the second time in the past few years that the Supreme Court has considered possible First Amendment problems with the federal law against encouraging or inducing immigrants to stay in the U.S. illegally.
In 2020, the justices heard arguments in another case from California where the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the same law violated free-speech rights. However, the Supreme Court ultimately punted on the central issue, instead faulting the appeals court for raising the First Amendment question without it being raised by either the government or the defense.
The maximum penalty for violating the law can reach 10 years in prison if a defendant intended to benefit financially from an immigrant staying in the U.S. illegally.
[ad_2]
#Justices #poised #uphold #federal #ban #encouraging #illegal #immigration
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
The $1 trillion crypto industry is going on the offensive against what executives say is an existential threat to “de-bank” digital asset businesses, mounting a lobbying campaign to oppose efforts to discourage lenders from taking them on as customers.
“The concern is very real,” Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), one of several GOP lawmakers allied with the industry, said in an interview. “We’ve seen this sort of regulatory abuse before with Operation Choke Point,” the Obama-era program that pushed banks away from financing gun dealers and payday lenders. “A lot of the facts are lining up in the same manner right here, right now.”
The clash marks the latest front in what is already an all-out battle between the once high-flying industry and officials in Washington that could shape the future of crypto in the U.S. European lawmakers are trying to court crypto companies, sparking concern among Republicans that the U.S. may see its reputation as a home for financial innovation diminished.
The Blockchain Association, a leading advocacy group, is vowing to investigate concerns that regulators are de-banking crypto firms. Ryan Selkis, CEO of Messari, a major research firm, is pressing lawmakers to scrutinize agencies like the FDIC over claims that the fall of both Silvergate Capital and Signature Bank was connected to their crypto ties. And lawmakers like Hagerty and Rep. Tom Emmer
of Minnesota, the No. 3 Republican in the House, are joining the fight.
The FDIC — which along with the Fed and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is warning banks not to allow crypto’s risks to migrate over to the financial system — declinedtocomment. A spokesperson for the OCC, a national regulator, said it did not supervise Silvergate, Silicon Valley Bank or Signature. The Fed did not respond to a request for comment.
Much of Washington has long been skeptical — if not hostile — toward crypto, seeing little real value in digital assets and worrying about investor protection. But the industry’s troubles multiplied with the collapse of FTX, the one-time exchange giant whose founder, Sam Bankman-Fried, has been charged with massive fraud and is alleged to have orchestrated a sweeping political influence campaign to push for lighter regulation.
In the wake of FTX, lawmakers and regulators have become especially wary of the market. SEC Chair Gary Gensler, for one, is ramping up enforcement after months of calling on crypto companies to comply with securities laws. Non-compliance, he told POLITICO in January, is “part of the business model.”
As the SEC cracks down, bank regulators have put lenders on notice about crypto — prompting some experts to offer blunt assessments of their intentions.
The regulators are “taking actions to basically shadow ban crypto,” said John Rizzo, a former Treasury Department official who is now a senior vice president of public affairs at Clyde Group. “If you can’t access the banking system, how can you exist?”
Little concrete evidence has emerged to suggest there’s a coordinated campaign to force banks to turn away crypto depositors. Yet regulators’ warnings — as well as the risks themselves — appear to be carrying weight among bank executives.
Messari has had conversations with banks where “they say anything that is even touching crypto is a no-go from on high,” Selkis said. Swan Bitcoin CEO Cory Klippsten said Citigroup shut down both his company’s and his personal accounts late last year without explanation. And several banks have pulled back on their exposure to the asset class.
Even executives at the since-failed Signature Bank said last year that they planned to slash the concentration of crypto-linked deposits to under 20 percent. Others like Metropolitan Commercial Bank fled the market entirely.
“We see a lot of smoke,” Blockchain Association CEO Kristin Smith said. “We’re not sure where the fire is, but we want to figure that out.”
The Blockchain Association recently filed information requests with the FDIC, the Fed and the OCC regarding the de-banking allegations such as account closures and firms struggling to open new accounts. The group’s members include crypto exchange Kraken, brokerage eToro and decentralized finance platform Uniswap.
None of the agencies have indicated that there is anything preventing banks from dealing with crypto clients, as long as they are operating within the law and properly managing the risks. The effort, former FDIC official Todd Phillips said, is instead about alerting banks to rising and lurking risks — basic bank supervision.
“This is bank regulators doing their jobs, and it just so happens that right now the regulators have identified risks with crypto customers,” said Phillips, who is now a financial regulation consultant. Crypto firms “are clearly trying to get the banking agencies to back off by calling it something that it’s not.”
The regulators’ warnings proved prescient. Just weeks after they advised banks that crypto deposits can be volatile, Silvergate, one of the industry’s leading lenders, announced it would voluntarily wind down after suffering billions in withdrawals. Both Silicon Valley Bank and Signature failed days later.
But the de-banking concerns have persisted — fanned in part by former Rep. Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat.
Frank, an architect of the landmark Dodd-Frank reform and a Signature board member since 2015, said New York regulators’ decision to shut down the bank was tied to its crypto exposure.
“The only explanation is they just wanted to send a message that banks should not be heavily or marginally involved in crypto,” he told POLITICO.
Frank, who says he has “always been skeptical of crypto,” argued that Signature was simply doing what banks do: operating as an intermediary for its customers.
“To the extent that people choose voluntarily to migrate to crypto from traditional financing, you accommodate that,” he said. “For a bank, that’s the business you’re in.”
The FDIC took over Signature as the federal government sought to cut off any contagion within the banking system. New York regulators have pushed back on Frank’s assertion that crypto played a role in Signature’s failure. In an earlier statement, a spokesperson for the Department of Financial Services said the decision “had nothing to do with crypto” but was about “a crisis of confidence in the bank’s leadership.”
Even some executives aren’t buying the idea that the crypto industry is being unfairly targeted.
While Swan’s Klippsten also questioned the Signature shutdown, he dismissed the idea of a coordinated conspiracy to de-bank crypto.
Klippsten, who only deals in Bitcoin, points to a less mysterious theory behind why banks would be cutting off crypto depositors: Risk. Following the string of bankruptcies and fraud that rocked the market last year, including Voyager, Celsius and FTX, Klippsten said banks were naturally going to reduce their risk from the sector.
In Swan’s case, Klippsten said the Bitcoin financial services company likely got caught in Citigroup’s “dragnet” as the bank pulled back. But Swan has had little trouble since, and, with thousands of banks out there, Klippsten said that as long as a company has a “solid business,” there will be a lender willing to take it on.
“It might be a pain to get de-banked by Citibank with no warning like we were,” Klippsten said. “But you can literally walk next door to Chase or Wells if there’s nothing wrong with your business.
[ad_2]
#Crypto #industry #poised #clash #government #crackdown
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
“At a time when working families are dealing with higher costs, from health care to housing, we need to be focused on ensuring Montanans’ retirement savings are on the strongest footing possible,” Tester said in a statement. “I’m opposing this Biden Administration rule because I believe it undermines retirement accounts for working Montanans and is wrong for my state.”
The fact that Republicans are poised to push the measure through a divided Congress underscores the growing political momentum behind their crusade against what they deride as “woke” business practices. Conservative officials at the state and federal level are increasingly attacking big corporations for embracing social and environmental causes. It’s a push that Democrats in red states and swing districts are finding they’re unable to ignore.
The Biden administration said in its veto threat this week that the rollback move would “unnecessarily limit the options available to retirement plan participants and investors.”
The president’s threat in a way gives moderate Democrats a free pass to distance themselves from the president because they don’t face the risk of the rollback actually being implemented.
Asked whether Democratic leadership had pressured him to vote “no,” Tester told reporters that they gave a presentation to the broader caucus Tuesday. But “it wasn’t like, pestering.”
The 2024 election “hasn’t been my focus, but that ought to be their focus,” Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.), who sponsored the measure, told reporters. “I just tried to make the merits of the case out there understandable to everyone listening.”
Manchin took to the Senate floor to blast the Biden DOL rule as “just another example of how our administration prioritizes a liberal policy agenda over protecting and growing the retirement accounts of 150 million Americans.”
Republicans are taking advantage of procedures under the Congressional Review Act that allow lawmakers to nullify recently issued rules with simple majority votes, avoiding the Senate filibuster.
The Labor Department rule at issue doesn’t require investment managers to focus on environmental, social and governance factors in retirement accounts, but instead clarifies that they’re free to do so.
ESG investing has been a big focus for money managers for years, partly in response to consumer demand for sustainable investment products.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer in a Wall Street Journal op-ed blasted the GOP rollback effort, accusing Republicans of sacrificing their free market ideals in favor of “forcing their own views down the throats of every company and investor.”
“The whole anti-ESG operation is a fake, cooked up by the fossil fuel industry,” said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said in an interview.
[ad_2]
#Biden #poised #veto #Dems #support #rollback
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
“I do believe this race is going to be probably one of the most expensive Senate races ever,” said Ann Ravel, who chaired both the Federal Elections Commission and the California Fair Political Practices Commission, and “each Super PAC is going to want to assure that their candidate is the one who has enough money.”
Candidates and political operatives have spent months preparing for a Senate race under the presumption Feinstein’s retirement was imminent. That has intensified the competition for top political staffers.
“Schiff was very aggressive,” said an opposition researcher who asked to remain anonymous because they may be working in the race. “He’s trying to lock up all the talent.”
Among those running the pro-Schiff committee are partners at Bearstar Strategies, a blue-chip California consulting firm whose roster has included Gov. Gavin Newsom, Sen. Alex Padilla — and, in 2018, Porter. The Orange County Democrat and the firm parted ways after the 2020 cycle, when Porter endorsed Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) — her political mentor — over then-Bearstar client Kamala Harris.
“They are going to be very familiar with all her vulnerabilities, and that’s usually the job of a super PAC, is to negatively define an opponent,” said Rob Stutzman, a California-based Republican political consultant.
It is exorbitantly expensive to run a statewide race in California, where candidates must introduce themselves to millions of voters across several media markets. Independent expenditure committees can bolster those efforts by pulling in big-dollar donations
That could be especially critical for Lee as the East Bay Democrat races to make up a cash-on-hand deficit relative to Schiff and Porter, who are both prolific fundraisers with millions in the bank compared to the $54,000 Lee reported at the end of 2022.
“That is clearly the advantage they have,” said Nathan Barankin, who is overseeing the committee. “She has a long list of non-financial advantages they can never overcome, but for her purposes there’s a unique benefit to having a Super PAC.”
The consultants running Lee’s committee hint at where that money may come from. Several of them have worked for progressive prosecutor candidates in California, who benefit from a network of deep-pocketed criminal justice reform supporters. Barankin was chief of staff to Harris, whom Lee supported in the 2020 presidential race.
“I do think there is substantial overlap between many of the people who have been longtime supporters of the vice president over a number of years with those who will be supportive of Barbara Lee, not just in California but around the country,” Barankin said.
While Porter, like Warren, has focused on the corrupting influence of money in politics, she does not intend to decline outside support as Warren sought to do. Warren was caught in a bind in 2020 when she initially pledged to reject PAC support but ultimately received it. The Massachusetts senator argued it would make little sense to operate at a disadvantage to other Democrats who benefited from ubiquitous outside spending.
“You can’t control outside money, which was the thing with Elizabeth Warren,” said Karin Johanson, who helped run a pro-Warren Super PAC in 2020, but “I don’t think anyone’s going to spend money on Katie Porter that Katie Porter doesn’t agree with.”
Porter already navigated a barrage of outside spending in fiercely contested House races that saw groups spend well over $10 million for or against her, illustrating how that kind of cash has become indispensable in tough contests. That network could activate again on Porter’s behalf, although donors who helped her flip and defend a frontline House seat against Republicans will not necessarily support her against fellow Democrats. Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) endorsement of Schiff could give him access to her formidable fundraising network.
The challenge for Democrats in resolutely blue California is how to stand out to voters without alienating them by assailing other Democrats. That’s where Super PACs could be instrumental.
“It’s unlikely the candidate campaigns are going to go negative, but it’s possible the IE’s will feel freer to do things that more specifically contrast candidates,” said Ludovic Blain, who runs the progressive California Donor Table.
None of that will alter the balance of power in a narrowly divided Senate. But funders are keenly interested in shaping who represents America’s most populous state — particularly given the possibility that Feinstein’s successor, like Feinstein, serves for decades.
“Dianne Feinstein’s presence as the senator from California for 30 years was significant in the Senate,” Ravel said, “and so who gets elected to that position is something that a lot of outside interests throughout the country are going to be concerned about.”
[ad_2]
#PACs #poised #supercharge #California #Senate #campaign
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
But it remains highly uncertain whether the Fed can navigate a so-called soft-landing for the economy, in which growth slows but the country averts a recession. And other big headaches loom, including a GOP-controlled House potentially forcing a market-shaking showdown over raising the government’s debt limit.
Multiple senior Biden aides and others close to the process described the selection of Brainard and Bernstein, who is currently a member of the Council of Economic Advisers, as close to assured, but no formal announcement is set yet. It’s still possible that either job could wind up slipping to one of several other candidates or that new names could emerge, they said.
Brainard, who is meeting with other Fed officials this week in Washington to decide on the central bank’s next interest rate hike, could not be reached for comment.
“It’s not totally done yet,” one top White House official said, while not disputing that Brainard and Bernstein are the leading candidates. Another senior official agreed, while a third said the two appointments seemed definite but that Biden had not given a final sign-off.
White House Deputy Press Secretary Emilie Simons said in a statement, “There is no decision on either of these positions and any reporting to the contrary is inaccurate.”
The White House officials said installing Brainard at NEC to succeed Brian Deese would offer gender diversity to the economic leadership, It would also make it easier for Biden to pick his friend Bernstein, who is among a group of older, white male advisers, to head the CEA, the White House’s in-house economic research office. Current CEA Chair Cecilia Rouse is returning to Princeton. Deese is leaving the NEC — which is housed inside the West Wing and is the more powerful of the two offices — to be closer to his family,
A Brainard and Bernstein combination would at least partially satisfy left-leaning Democrats who pushed for a younger and more aggressive candidate for the NEC job such as Bharat Ramamurti, the current NEC deputy and a former top staffer for Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).
Progressives had questioned Brainard’s commitment on some of their key issues since she served as President Barack Obama’s Treasury undersecretary for international affairs under then-Secretary Timothy Geithner. At the time, Brainard was viewed by many progressives as insufficiently aggressive on using executive tools to fight climate change and economic inequality and as too pro-free trade and friendly with elite global bankers.
But Brainard has nudged left on some of those issues and been a progressive at the Fed on monetary policy — mostly preferring a gentler path of rate hikes to fight high inflation.
Bernstein is widely admired in progressive circles while also holding credibility with more centrist-leaning Democrats and even some Capitol Hill Republicans. He has long been a vocal critic of trade agreements so could limit any fallout among organized labor groups over the Brainard pick.
The selection of Brainard and Bernstein would come after weeks of feverish jockeying, often through strategic press leaks, for the top economic jobs, with a variety of names being floated as front-runners by Democratic insiders eager to see their preferred candidates get the jobs.
The White House has also flirted with various Wall Street veterans for top positions, including investment bankers Blair Effron and Antonio Weiss. Putting any such candidate into a policy-influencing spot would likely have enraged progressives, and the idea appears to have been mostly dropped.
Other candidates mentioned as candidates for NEC have included Deputy Treasury Secretary Wally Adeyemo, American University President and former Obama cabinet member Sylvia Mathews Burwell, Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo and senior Biden economic adviser Gene Sperling.
Friends say that Sperling, who served as NEC director under both Presidents Bill Clinton and Obama, coveted doing the job for what would be a record third time. Sperling, who splits his time between Washington and Los Angeles, has repeatedly denied wanting or campaigning for the job.
Zients is viewed as a masterful manager and problem solver but less well-versed or interested in the kind of backroom political horse-trading required to push things like a debt limit deal through on Capitol Hill. Brainard has extensive Hill relationships as does Bernstein.
Bernstein and Brainard are both considered centrist enough to offer some comfort to Wall Street investors and not averse to cutting deals with Republicans if that’s what it takes.
Brainard’s departure from the Fed would leave a significant hole at the central bank, where she is a trusted No. 2 to Chair Jerome Powell.
Brainard, a Ph.D. economist, also chairs four of the central bank’s internal committees, leading policy in key areas like whether the Fed should issue a central bank digital currency.
Victoria Guida contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
#Biden #remake #economic #team #Brainard #Bernstein #poised #top #roles
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
Haley’s expected announcement represents a turnabout: Haley declared in 2021 that she wouldn’t run for president if Trump did. But Haley telegraphed her change of plans in an interview with Fox News earlier this month, saying, “It’s bigger than one person. And when you’re looking at the future of America, I think it’s time for new generational change. I don’t think you need to be 80 years old to go be a leader in D.C.”
Trump has already started making light of the shift, pointing out to reporters over the weekend that she had previously said she would defer to him.
Haley, whose parents were Indian immigrants, has long been seen as a prospective presidential candidate. After serving in the South Carolina legislature, Haley won election to the governorship in 2010, after prevailing in a hotly contested primary in which she’d initially been regarded as the underdog. During the primary, she was bolstered by endorsements from people including former South Carolina First Lady Jenny Sanford and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
Haley spent six years as governor. In 2017, Trump picked her to join his Cabinet. After serving two years on the job, she launched a political nonprofit that served to promote her policies and, later, a political action committee that allowed her to support endorsed candidates.
The PAC, Stand for America, also helped fund Haley’s travel to early-voting states like Iowa and New Hampshire, where she stumped for local candidates.
Haley’s decision to launch her campaign in her native South Carolina highlights how critical the early-voting state is to her prospects — and several other candidates. Haley could face competition from another home-state contender, Sen. Tim Scott, who is also considering a bid. Haley appointed Scott to the Senate in 2012. He has since won elections to two full terms.
Trump also appears to be focusing on the state, having made an appearance in Columbia, S.C. over the weekend. The former president has received the endorsements of Sen. Lindsey Graham and Henry McMaster, both of whom are longtime allies.
Trump won the South Carolina GOP primary in 2016 – a contest in which he prevailed over the Haley-backed candidate, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio.
Haley stared down Trump during a congressional primary contest in South Carolina last year, when Haley put her political muscle behind GOP Rep. Nancy Mace, who faced a Trump-backed primary challenge from Katie Arrington. Mace went on to win the primary for the Charleston-area seat handily.
[ad_2]
#Nikki #Haley #poised #enter #presidential #race
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
