Archive by Author

Senate Democrats reject proposal to share more power

Senate Democrats voted by secret ballot Thursday to reject a proposal sponsored by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) to bar senior members from the Democratic leadership from also chairing A-list committees — a reform aimed squarely at top members of Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) leadership team.  

The proposal would have required three Democratic chairs — Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (Ill.), Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (Mich.) and Rules Committee Chairwoman Amy Klobuchar (Minn.) — to pick between their gavels or their senior leadership positions.  

Durbin also serves as the Senate Democratic whip, while Stabenow chairs the Senate Democratic Policy and Communications Committee and Klobuchar heads the Senate Democratic Steering Committee.  

Under current caucus rules, they can hold senior leadership positions and committee chairmanships simultaneously.  

But some Democrats want power to be shared more broadly, though they have kept their complaints about not having more input into major political and policy decisions behind closed doors.  

Whitehouse declined to comment in detail about his proposed reform, telling The Hill this week: “Caucus stuff stays in caucus.” 

Schumer declined to take a public position on the proposal when asked about it Tuesday.  

“All I’ll say is we had a robust discussion and there will be a vote on Thursday,” he said.  

Whitehouse’s proposal is an expanded version of a reform he pushed two years ago, before Democrats took control of the Senate majority.  

Two years ago, he called for preventing the Democratic whip from also chairing a full committee.  

If enacted it could have paved the way for Whitehouse taking over as chairman of the Judiciary Committee, had Durbin decided to keep his whip’s office.  

The Senate at the time instead adopted a proposal sponsored by Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) to let the Democratic whip hold one chairmanship at a time.  

That reform prevented Durbin from also chairing the powerful defense appropriations subcommittee in the 117th Congress.  

Source: TEST FEED1

Arizona judge orders Cochise County board to certify election results after refusal

A state judge on Thursday ordered the Cochise County, Ariz., board of supervisors to certify the county’s vote canvass after two GOP members refused to do so over an unfounded conspiracy theory about vote machine certification.

Pima County Superior Court Judge Casey McGinley ruled that two GOP supervisors’ decision to opt against certification by a Monday statutory deadline was unlawful after Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs (D), who is now the governor-elect, and an outside group sued the county.

McGinley ordered the board to convene later on Thursday to certify the canvass, and attorneys for the plaintiffs vowed to seek a contempt order if board members do not comply.

“Today’s court decision was a win for Arizona’s democracy and ensures that all Arizonans will have their votes counted,” Hobbs said in a statement.

Arizona has become an epicenter for GOP allegations of voter disenfranchisement in the midterms, although most of those claims centered on malfunctions in the Phoenix area.

In Cochise — a Republican-controlled county in the state’s southeast that was the only jurisdiction to not certify by the statewide deadline — GOP supervisors voted against certification after a trio of conspiracy theorists claimed the county’s vote machines were not properly certified.

Those allegations were refuted by the U.S. Elections Assistance Commission, which oversees the certification process, and state election officials.

Thursday’s hearing came after the board scrambled to find legal representation.

The county’s attorney declined to represent the supervisors in court, saying he believed their decision was unlawful.

Supervisors subsequently voted to hire an outside attorney who had represented them previously, but the attorney declined.

The board again convened just hours before the hearing to approve hiring Daniel McCauley III, a third attorney, but he was not present in the courtroom, and the judge indicated he had not filed a notice of appearance.

Supervisor Tom Crosby (R) asked for a delay of court proceedings until early next week so McCauley could attend, but the judge rejected the motion, leaving the supervisors to represent themselves.

After that ruling, plaintiffs proceeded to ask the judge to require the county to hold a certification meeting later on Thursday, rather than its scheduled meeting for Friday, a motion the judge granted.

Board Chair Ann English (D), who had opposed her Republican colleagues’ effort to not certify, said Crosby wanted to wait until Friday to hold a “smackdown” with opposing testimony from election deniers and the secretary of state’s office.

“I’ve had enough, I think Republicans had enough, and so I’m asking for a swift resolution to this,” English said at the hearing.

The judge’s ruling paves the way for state officials to certify the results on Monday.

Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake and Republican attorney general candidate Abe Hamadeh have vowed to file lawsuits once the state certifies its election results.

Updated at 4:45 p.m.

Source: TEST FEED1

Senate votes to avert costly rail strike

The Senate voted Thursday to avert a costly nationwide rail strike next week that lawmakers in both parties worried would shut down much of the economy and further add to inflation.  

Senators voted 80 to 15 for a House-passed bill to implement the labor agreement between freight rail carriers and unionized workers brokered by an emergency board President Biden established in July.  

But senators rejected a proposal to add seven days of paid sick leave to the agreement, which four rail unions demanded.  

By intervening, Congress will avert the threat of a national rail shutdown that would have ravaged supply chains and brought significant portions of the economy to a halt in the middle of the holidays.  

Roughly one-third of U.S. cargo is transported by rail and truckers would not be able to take on more capacity.  

But the outcome will likely enrage rail workers who argued that railroad executives were refusing to meet their demands because they knew Congress would step in and block a strike. 

The proposal to add sick leave to the tentative labor deal, which passed the House narrowly on Wednesday, failed on the Senate floor.  

The sick-leave measure needed at least 60 votes to pass and fell short, 52 to 43.  

Six Republicans voted for it: Sens. Mike Braun (Ind.), Ted Cruz (Texas), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), Josh Hawley (Mo.), John Kennedy (La.) and Marco Rubio (Fla.). 

Sen. Joe Manchin (W.Va.) was the only Democrat to vote against extra sick leave.  

Several Democrats voted against the labor deal because it didn’t include the sick leave provision.  

“My point here is that forcing people to have no sick time and you fire them if they don’t show up is like an 18^th century French coal mine. It’s an absolutely outrageous way to treat your workers,” said Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), who voted no on forcing workers to accept the labor deal negotiated over the summer.  

In addition to Merkley, Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) also voted no. 

The tentative agreement, negotiated with the help of Biden administration officials in September to avert an initial strike threat, provides rail workers with 24 percent raises over five years and makes it easier for workers to miss time for medical appointments. 

However, the deal doesn’t provide any paid sick days — just one additional personal day — sparking outrage from some rail workers and union leaders. 

Four of the 12 rail unions failed to ratify contracts and didn’t appear close to reaching an agreement with railroads, which refused to budge over the issue of paid sick leave.  

The Senate also rejected a proposal offered by Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) to send rail companies and unions back to the bargaining table for another 60 days to work out a new agreement. That failed by a vote of 26 to 69.  

The votes capped four days of frenzied discussions in the Senate after Biden urged Congress on Monday to avoid a “potentially crippling national rail shutdown.” 

The potential crisis flared up on Nov. 21 when the transportation division of the Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transportation union (SMART-TD), and the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET), which together represent more than 50,000 workers, announced they would not ratify the tentative labor deal moderated by Biden’s emergency board.  

The Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen (BRS) and the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees (BMWED), which together represent 17,000 workers, voted against the deal last month.  

Biden called the top four congressional leaders to the White House Tuesday morning to urge them to pass legislation implementing a labor deal by the end of the week.  

All 115,000 rail workers would have gone on strike if just one union did not ratify a deal by the Dec. 9 deadline. This week’s legislation will force the remaining four unions to accept the tentative deal.   

Though the strike deadline wasn’t until the end of next week, the White House worried the prospect of a labor freeze would begin to slow down supply chains early next week, adding more inflationary pressure to the economy.  

“Even though the actual shutdown is the 8^th, you need to act a few days before that because a lot of the suppliers stop sending their stuff on the trains if they think there’s a possible shutdown,” Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) told reporters after the White House meeting.  

Schumer cited chlorine needed to sanitized water supplies in many towns and cities as a critical product that would be held up within days of a potential rail shutdown.  

Business groups and the Biden administration warned lawmakers not to drag out negotiations, noting that railroads would begin to wind down services this weekend. That would lead to delayed shipments and commuter rail cancellations.  

Biden ramped up pressure on Congress throughout the week. 

“Let me say that again: without action this week, disruptions to our auto supply chains, our ability to move food to tables, and our ability to remove hazardous waste from gasoline refineries will begin,” the president said in a statement Wednesday.  

Updated at 4:10 p.m.

Source: TEST FEED1

Cotton blocking quick passage of bill compensating 9/11 victims

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) is blocking the Senate from voting on a bill aimed at providing close to $3 billion to victims of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, calling for victims of the 1983 bombings of the U.S. Marine Barracks in Beirut, Lebanon to share in the compensation. 

The Republican senator opposed efforts by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) last month to fast-track the “Fairness for 9/11 Families Act” to a vote on the Senate floor.

The bill, H.R. 8987, passed the House in September with overwhelming bipartisan support, with 400 in support and 31 against.

Cotton’s opposition comes as the 117th Congress comes to a close, and could force its sponsors to reintroduce the bill in the House in the next Congress, which begins in January. 

Cotton exercised his right to oppose the bill amid negotiations by Schumer to bring the legislation for a quick Senate floor vote through a process of unanimous consent, which can be employed when a bill is viewed as noncontroversial. 

“Senator Cotton will not allow a live [unanimous consent] of the bill as long as the Beirut bombing victims are left out,” James Arnold, press secretary for Cotton, told The Hill. 

The Fairness for 9/11 Families Act was drafted to compensate 5,364 9/11 victims, spouses and dependents who were excluded from the U.S. Victims of State Sponsored Terrorism Fund (USVSSTF), established in 2015 as a way to compensate victims of terrorism who have secured final judgements in American courts against a state sponsor of terrorism. 

The more than 5,000 9/11 victims had earlier received compensation from the 2001 Victims Compensation Fund, but had argued they had been unfairly excluded from compensation from the USVSSTF.

A report by the Government Accountability Office published in August 2021 found the amount the 9/11 victims applied for through the USVSSTF amounted to about $2.7 billion. 

Lawmakers sought to provide this amount of money in a “catch-up payment” and drafted the Fairness for 9/11 Families Act, using leftover funds from the 2020 CARES Act, the COVID-19 relief package. 

But victims of the 1983 Beirut bombings are lobbying to also be acknowledged as missing out on payments provided by the USVSSTF. 

Last month, seven retired, four-star marine corps generals called for Senate leadership to address the exclusion of the Beirut bombing victims in the “Fairness” act, in a letter exclusively obtained by The Hill. 

Menendez had earlier told The Hill that he was open to including the Beirut bombing victims in the Fairness Act.

“I have to look at it. I don’t know why I wouldn’t…  I’d have to see the specificity, also timing, we’re trying to get this done. I’d have to look at it,” he said. 

A Menendez spokesperson confirmed the senator offered Sen. Cotton to work on a path forward to advance bipartisan relief for the Beirut bombing victims outside of the pending House-passed Fairness for 9/11 Families Act, but those talks broke down.

Cotton on Wednesday introduced the “Fairness for American Victims of State-Sponsored Terrorism Act,” which mirrors the 9/11 bill, but includes the Beirut bombing victims. It is co-sponsored by Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska).

“Increasing payments to all American victims of state-sponsored terrorism is important and unobjectionable,” Arnold, Cotton’s spokesperson, told The Hill. “There’s no reason to leave any victims behind. With Senator Menendez’s support, this bill could easily pass before year’s end.” 

In a statement to The Hill, Menendez said Cotton’s decision to block the Fairness for 9/11 Families Act, and his demand for changes “may only ensure that no one gets justice at the end of the day.” 

“The 9/11 widows and children have been waiting seven long years for Congress to address their initial exclusion from the Fund [USVSSTF]. We have an opportunity to do what is right for 9/11 families now, before H.R. 8987 dies in the lame duck session, and we have offered our commitment to work in a bipartisan way with Senator Cotton to deliver justice to the 1983 Beirut Marine Barracks bombing victims and families in a separate legislative vehicle that will not delay relief for 9/11 families,” the senator said. 

Source: TEST FEED1

Senate rejects proposal to give rail workers seven days of paid sick leave

The Senate voted on Thursday to reject a proposal to give railway workers seven days of sick leave, a benefit that was left out of a labor deal brokered by the presidential emergency board between freight rail companies and unionized workers.  

The proposal to give workers seven days of sick leave, which was championed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and other liberal Democrats, failed to pick up enough Republican support to overcome a 60-vote threshold set for adopting the measure and fell 52-43.  

Six Republicans voted for the sick leave measure: Sens. Mike Braun (Ind.), Ted Cruz (Texas), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), Josh Hawley (Mo.), John Kennedy (La.) and Marco Rubio (Fla.). 

Sen. Joe Manchin (W.Va.) was the only Democrat to vote against it. 

It passed the House Wednesday with a narrow bipartisan majority, 221 to 207 with only three Republicans voting for it.  

The votes in the Senate and House now give Democrats the ability to blame Republicans for imposing a labor deal on rail workers that includes little flexibility for taking time off work due to illness or doctors’ visits.  

“This is not a radical idea. It’s a very conservative idea. And it says if you work in the rail industry, you will get seven paid sick days. And I would hope that we would have strong support and the 60 votes that we need to pass this very, very important amendment that is wanted by every one of the rail unions,” Sanders said before the vote.  

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), another leading liberal voice, predicted that nearly every single Democrat would vote for the additional sick leave and that it was up to Republicans whether it would be added to the labor deal.  

“I think we’ll get all the Democrats. The question is whether any Republicans will join us,” she said.  

“The right solution is that people don’t have to come to work to try to operate trains after they’ve had heart attacks and broken legs. But right now where we are is caught between shutting down the economy and getting enough Republicans to join us in making sure enough Republicans have access to sick leave,” she added.  

Warren said there was “frustration” expressed at the Senate Democratic lunch “with this multi-billion-dollar industry that has made money hand over fist and continues to treat workers like they are just widgets to be moved around.”  

Railroads lobbied GOP senators to oppose the paid sick leave measure, arguing that congressional modifications to a contract would set a dangerous precedent. 

“Unless Congress wants to become the de facto endgame for future negotiations, any effort to put its thumb on the bargaining scale to artificially advantage either party or otherwise obstruct a swift resolution would be wholly irresponsible and risk a timely outcome to avoid significant economic harm,” Association of American Railroads CEO Ian Jefferies said in a statement.

Railroads have drawn the ire of workers and progressive lawmakers for refusing to offer paid sick days despite making record profits in recent years amid soaring demand for shipped products. 

The Senate also rejected a proposal sponsored by Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) to delay any potential strike for 60 days to give railroad companies and unions more time to negotiate a deal.

That proposal garnered the support of many Republicans, including Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), an influential moderate.  

She said sending the negotiators back to the bargaining table “would send a signal to both sides that we want them to solve this problem and not have Congress get involved in imposing a settlement that four of the 12 unions have rejected.” 

Labor unions swiftly pushed back on the proposal. They noted that it would delay raises for workers and argued that railroads were not interested in negotiating further. 

Sullivan’s legislation to establish a 60-day cooling off period failed by a vote of 26 to 69. It needed 60 votes to pass the Senate.  

The failure of the measure to give railroad workers seven days of sick leave sets up a vote on another House-passed bill to implement the tentative agreement negotiated between railroad companies and unions with the help of the presidential emergency board. 

That agreement would increase wages by 24 percent by 2024 and $1,000 annual bonuses over a period of five years.  

It was rejected by four of the 12 rail unions, however, because it did not provide for any paid sick days, just one additional personal day.  

Source: TEST FEED1

Supreme Court to weigh Biden bid to restore student debt relief plan

The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to review the Biden administration’s effort to reinstate its student debt relief plan, but the justices declined to immediately revive the program.

In a brief unsigned order, the court indicated it would hear arguments in the case in February.

The move comes after the administration urged the Supreme Court last month to clear one of the legal obstacles blocking the policy.

The administration is currently fending off two separate rulings issued in recent weeks that have effectively halted President Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan, which would give federal borrowers making less than $125,000 a year up to $10,000 debt relief. 

The appeal to be heard by the justices arose after the St. Louis-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit halted the loan relief program.

Separately, the New Orleans-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit last night denied the administration’s request to revive the policy while it appeals a lower court ruling.

This story was updated at 3:07 p.m.

Source: TEST FEED1

Schumer pledges to keep senators in Washington until rail deal is done

Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Thursday he will keep senators working in Washington until they pass legislation to avoid a nationwide rail strike, which he warned could begin disrupting the nation’s supply chain as soon as next week.  

“The Senate cannot leave until we get the job done and Democrats will keep working with Republicans to find a path forward that everyone can support,” he announced on the Senate floor.  

The Democratic leader began the so-called Rule 14 process on Wednesday evening to put a House-passed bill to avert the rail strike on the Senate calendar.  

The legislation passed the House earlier in the day 290-137 to impose a labor deal on freight rail carriers and workers that would keep the rail lines running ahead of Christmas. Seventy-nine House Republicans voted for the bill and eight Democrats voted against it.  

President Biden called on congressional leaders to impose the labor deal on railroad companies and workers after four of 12 unions voted down a tentative deal brokered by Biden’s emergency board that would have given workers a 24 percent raise by 2024 but little flexibility on taking sick days.  

A companion House bill giving workers an additional seven sick days passed the chamber by a much narrower margin, 221 to 207, with only three Democrats voting for it.  

Schumer only put the bill averting the potential strike on the calendar, not the legislation adding more sick days to the deal — indicating that additional sick leave will be voted on as an amendment to the base bill imposing a labor contract on the industry.  

“Senators are working morning, noon and night to enact this measure ASAP,” Schumer said.  

Republicans want to pass an amendment sponsored by Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) that would postpone a strike for 60 days, giving freight rail carriers and unions more time to negotiate a settlement.  

Senate Republican Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) said leaders are negotiating whether to allow the amendments on extra sick leave and more time for negotiations at 51- or 60-vote thresholds. If the amendments need 60 votes to pass, then neither one is likely to be adopted.  

“Right now they’re working out the path forward on amendments,” Thune said. “The question … is going to be what is the threshold for amendment votes. That affects both sides.”  

Thune said Sullivan’s proposal to postpone a strike for two months and send the parties back to the negotiating table has broad support in the GOP conference.  

“There is a lot of support on the GOP side. Whether there’s full support is another issue,” he said.  

Source: TEST FEED1

With lobster 'good enough for the White House,' Maine delegation highlights fishery dispute

If it’s good enough for the White House, surely it’s good enough for Whole Foods.

The White House’s decision to plate lobster for its Thursday night state dinner with French President Emmanuel Macron has served up some veiled — and not so veiled — comments from Maine lawmakers upset by a tumultuous few weeks for the state’s favored fishery.

Maine lobster temporarily lost its sustainable seafood certification from the Marine Stewardship Council two weeks ago, due to a recent court ruling in the battle to protect the right whale.

It’s a move that has been heavily bashed by Maine’s political leaders, who point to language from the counsel noting that “no evidence was found that the Maine lobster fishery is responsible for entanglements or interactions with right whales.”

Still, the temporary pull was enough to push Whole Foods to suspend their sales of Maine lobster – and made lobster a particularly important selection for the state dinner in the eyes of Maine’s delegation.

“Delicious, sustainable Maine lobster is an excellent choice for the main course for the president’s first State Dinner. If Maine lobster is good enough for the White House to serve, it’s good enough for every seafood retailer — including Whole Foods — to sell,” Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) wrote on Twitter.

The Maine lobster industry has for years been battling with environmental groups over efforts to protect the endangered right whale, whose estimated population stands at under 350.

Many have been struck by boats at sea, others have died after becoming entangled in fishing gear from various fisheries, including one whale last spotted off the coast of Massachusetts.

But the Maine lobster industry argues they have been unfairly targeted and asked to undertake draconian measures to save whales that have died after strikes with various types of vessels.

“If the Biden White House can prioritize purchasing 200 Maine lobsters for a fancy dinner, @POTUS should also take the time to meet with the Maine lobstermen his administration is currently regulating out of business,” Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine), who represents the district that includes Maine’s largest lobster port, wrote on Twitter.

The delegation recently spoke out against new regulations from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency, arguing new regulations on the shipping industry have been softer than those targeting the lobster fishery.

“Through this proposed rule, it is clear that the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is holding Maine’s lobster industry to a much more stringent standard than other sectors,” the four-member delegation wrote in a letter.

Whole Foods is one of the few major grocery chains to have strict requirements for its seafood, claiming it has “seafood standards like nowhere else.”

The grocer has said it will resume its purchasing of Maine seafood if the Marine Stewardship Council renews its certification. Maine has lost and regained such a certification before as a result of shifting policy following court rulings.

“These third-party verifications and ratings are critical to maintaining the integrity of our standards for all wild-caught seafood found in our seafood department,” a Whole Foods spokesperson told The Washington Post. 

“We are closely monitoring this situation and are committed to working with suppliers, fisheries, and environmental advocacy groups as it develops.”

The White House bought 200 lobsters for the dinner, with a posted menu listing “butter poached Maine lobster” among the offerings — along with beef with shallot marmalade, American artisanal cheeses, and an orange chiffon cake for desert.

But there was one through-line from the lawmakers in reaction to the Macron state dinner: sustainability, even as Maine’s own certification hangs in suspension.

“Glad @POTUS and @EmmanuelMacron are supporting Maine lobstermen and the thousands of small businesses that work our waters,” Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) wrote on Twitter.

“There is no better meal than sustainable, delicious Maine [lobster] to represent our country on the world stage.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Biden student loan debt forgiveness plan suffers another setback

A federal appeals court on Wednesday declined to shelve a lower court’s ruling blocking President Biden’s student debt relief plan as the administration’s full appeal proceeds.

The decision from the New Orleans-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit marks the second appeals court to issue a setback to the policy, effectively halting the plan that gives federal borrowers making less than $125,000 per year up to $10,000 in debt relief, with additional relief for Pell Grant recipients.

The three-judge panel, who were appointed by presidents from both parties, in a brief Wednesday night order declined to block a Texas-based trial judge’s decision last month ruling that Biden overstepped his power in developing the plan.

The panel also ordered the administration’s full appeal to be considered in an expedited manner.

Following the lower court’s ruling, the Biden administration stopped accepting student loan forgiveness applications while insisting the plan is legal.

After the St. Louis-based 8th Circuit Court of Appeals blocked the plan in a separate case, the Justice Department last month asked the Supreme Court to lift the decision, arguing debt holders were left in limbo.

That lawsuit was filed from six GOP-led states — Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas and South Carolina — arguing they were harmed by the policy.

Several other legal challenges have been filed against the student debt plan but have yet to find success in the courts.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett previously rejected two cases seeking emergency relief from the Supreme Court, but the justices may be more inclined to do so now because the federal government is the one seeking relief and the different decisions reached by various courts.

The Biden administration had planned to end a pause in federal student loan payments at the end of the year, but the president decided last week to extend the pause until no later than June 2023 amid legal challenges.

“I’m confident that our student debt relief plan is legal. But it’s on hold because Republican officials want to block it,” Biden said in a statement announcing the extension.

The loan payment pause was first put in place by the Trump administration in March 2020 as COVID-19 cases rapidly spread across the country, and the pause has since been extended under both the Trump and Biden administrations.

Source: TEST FEED1