Archive by Author

Party primaries test power of Trump’s backing and progressive platform

The 2022 midterm election campaign season will be full of political thrills, chills and spills. Tuesday, there were shocking developments in primaries in Pennsylvania, Oregon, North Carolina and Idaho. Next week, primary contests in Texas and Georgia will heighten the drama.

Trump report card

Former President Donald Trump still has some sway over GOP primary voters, but he clearly doesn’t have enough juice to turn fetid water into fine wine. His endorsement and the votes of his supporters may have helped boost candidates Mehmet Oz in Pennsylvania and J.D. Vance in Ohio in wide-open races. But Trump’s backing was not powerful enough to save Madison Cawthorn in North Carolina or Janice McGeachin in Idaho. Cawthorn, the scandal-ridden congressman, lost his quest for reelection. McGeachin, the Lt. Gov. of Idaho, who has ties to the right-wing extremist groups, lost her primary campaign against the incumbent Gov. Brad Little.

Trump won big Tuesday in the GOP U.S. Senate fight in North Carolina where he supported the winner, Rep. Ted Budd, who beat former Gov. Pat McCrory. But the former president’s hit or miss record in the early primaries is unlikely to scare off his own challengers — other GOP presidential hopefuls like Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Florida Gov. DeSantis who may run for the GOP nomination in 2024.

Trump may have put Budd, Vance and Oz (pending a recount) over the top, but he’s also may have made enemies of Gov. Brad Little of Idaho and Jim Pillen of Nebraska this primary season. Little and Pillen will likely be the governors of these bedrock GOP states when Trump likely makes another bid for the presidency. They probably will not look kindly at the candidacy of the man who endorsed their primary opponents in heated contests for governors’ mansions.

Pennsylvania primary

Along with Michigan and Wisconsin in the industrial Midwest, Pennsylvania is a battleground state that plays an important role in presidential politics and occupies vital terrain in the midterm election battles.

The possible Supreme Court reversal of the right to reproductive freedom guaranteed in Roe v. Wade will likely weigh heavily in a state where are majority of voters support abortion rights. The open seats in the races for governor and U.S. senator will present a crystal-clear and compelling contrast between Democratic and Republican candidates on the grounds of abortion rights.

Trump backed Oz, the celebrity surgeon, for U.S. Senate and currently leads his opponent, McCormick, by a slim margin. However, the pending recount will determine the victor.

Fetterman won a decisive victory in the Democratic Pennsylvania primary for U.S. Senate. The battle for this open seat has national implications because the outcome may determine whether Democrats can retain control of the upper house of Congress.

The contest for governor will feature the Democratic Attorney General Ben Shapiro and GOP State Sen. Doug Mastriano, another Republican endorsed by Trump.

The state, which President Joe Biden won narrowly, will be a hotly contested key to the outcome of the 2024 presidential election. Mastriano gained a following advocating to overturn Biden’s presidential win in favor of Trump. If Mastriano wins the gubernatorial race, he will be able to appoint the secretary of State who will oversee elections — including the 2024 presidential race.

Progressive progress

Fetterman’s big win was a significant victory for progressive Democrats. He is  a strong backer of Sen. Bernie Sander (I-Vt.). He roundly defeated Rep. Conor Lamb, a moderate Democrat.

He’s not the only one: In Oregon, liberal challenger Janice McLeod-Skinner leads the moderate Democratic Rep. Kurt Schrader who had the endorsement of Biden. 

Both progressives were able to tie their opponents to moderate Democratic U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia.  If Fetterman and McLeod-Skinner win their election battles in the fall, there may be an increased progressive presence in diminished Democratic caucuses in Congress. These primary battles could be a preview of the ideological fight for the Democratic presidential nomination between progressive and moderates in 2024, if Biden does not run for reelection.  

May 24th primaries

Primary battles in Texas and Georgia are next up on the campaign calendar on May 24.

A runoff in Texas offers another battle between a moderate Democratic House incumbent and a progressive challenger. Rep. Henry Cuellar is in a tight race with a liberal candidate Linda Cisneros. Cuellar is anti-abortion and his home was recently raided in connection to an FBI investigation. Voters are not kind to incumbents when they are in a fulsome mood. He could become the next — and not the last — member of Congress to bite the dust in this contentious campaign cycle.

Also on May 24: Battles in Georgia. Trump’s power of endorsement faces another key primary test in Georgia, where he backed former U.S. Senator David Perdue in his race against Gov. Brian Kemp in the race for governor. Like Mastriano, Perdue is an election denier, and Trump is not fond of the incumbent, Kemp, who certified Biden’s victory in this swing state in 2020. Perdue trails in the race and if Kemp holds on, he still faces a difficult challenge from Democratic candidate Stacey Abrams. It’s set to be another purple state contest that has vital ramifications for this November and the presidential race of 2024.

These primaries are just the beginning of a long marathon thru 2022, so stay tuned for further developments in the many months ahead on the long and winding road to November.

Brad Bannon is a Democratic pollster and CEO of Bannon Communications Research. His podcast, “Deadline D.C. with Brad Bannon,” airs on Periscope TV and the Progressive Voices Network. Follow him on Twitter: @BradBannon

Source: TEST FEED1

Democrats spend big in GOP governor primaries

Millions of dollars in attack advertisements are hitting television screens in Illinois castigating Aurora Mayor Richard Irvin’s (R) track record as an attorney for defendants accused of violent crimes.

But the advertisements targeting Irvin aren’t coming from his main rival for the Republican nomination for governor. They are funded by Democrats, more than a month before the Republican primary takes place in late June.

The Democratic Governors Association has spent millions in both Illinois and Nevada, where incumbent governors are seeking reelection, in an apparent effort to weaken their likely Republican opponents.

“The DGA is wasting no time in educating the public about these Republicans,” said Christina Amestoy, the group’s senior communications advisor. “These elected and formerly elected officials want to deceptively retell their histories, and we’re just filling in the gaps.”

So far, the DGA has dropped $8.4 million on television ads across Illinois, including more than $4 million in the Chicago market alone. Those ads target Irvin, the leading Republican ahead of next month’s primary, in which he faces state Sen. Darren Bailey (R) and a handful of other contenders. The winner of the GOP primary will face Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) in November.

And Democrats have spent $2.3 million in Nevada, targeting Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo (R). Lombardo leads attorney Joey Gilbert (R) and former Sen. Dean Heller (R) in the race to take on Gov. Steve Sisolak (D).

The group is also spending early money on what is likely to be an effort to boost an independent candidate in Oregon in hopes of syphoning votes away from the newly minted Republican nominee. The DGA has funneled at least $61,000 to a group called Oregonians for Ethics, which is preparing advertisements that will paint former state Sen. Betsy Johnson, an independent, as a conservative.

Johnson, elected as a Democrat to represent a timber-heavy district on Oregon’s Pacific Coast, is trying to build a multi-party coalition in her bid to become the state’s first independent governor in nearly a century. This week, she touted support from both former Gov. Ted Kulongoski (D) and former Sen. Gordon Smith (R).

“Instead of standing up for our values, she sided with the right wing to advance their agenda,” says a digital ad paid for by Oregonians for Ethics, citing Johnson’s votes against raising the minimum wage and a cap and trade proposal.

Johnson will vie against former state House Speaker Tina Kotek (D) and former House Republican Leader Christine Drazan (R), who won their respective primaries this week.

The early spending comes after Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro (D) ran an unconventional advertisement spotlighting state Sen. Doug Mastriano (R) and his support for former President Donald Trump. That ad reminded both Republican and independent voters of Mastriano’s ties to Trump, dual missions with two very dissimilar goals.

On Tuesday, Mastriano and Shapiro both won their primaries in the race to replace term-limited Gov. Tom Wolf (D).

Republicans say the early spending is a sign that Democrats have already hit the panic button in the midst of an unfavorable political climate.

“The DGA’s spending decisions indicate they are very worried about their incumbent governors’ chances as their failed records are being litigated for voters,” said Jesse Hunt, a spokesman for the Republican Governors Association. “There isn’t enough money for them to meddle in the nearly dozen states where Democrats are in danger of losing their hold on the governor’s office.”

Meddling in another party’s primary, or goosing an independent candidate in hopes of syphoning off votes from a rival, is a rare but not unheard-of occurrence in modern politics.

In 2012, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) ran advertisements slamming then-Rep. Todd Akin (R) as too conservative ahead of the Republican primary — a message that conservative voters wanted to hear. Akin won the GOP primary, and McCaskill trounced him that November.

That same year, allies of Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) ran advertisements attacking Dan Cox, the Libertarian Party nominee, as an arch conservative. Cox took just 6.5 percent of the vote — a share that might otherwise have gone to then-Rep. Denny Rehberg (R). Tester won with just 48.6 percent of the vote.

Republicans in 2020 tried their own late trick, paying for ads that elevated state Sen. Erica Smith (D), a progressive Black woman. Smith took almost 35 percent of the vote against former state Sen. Cal Cunningham (D), national Democrats’ preferred candidate — though Cunningham lost to Sen. Thom Tillis (R) after details of a sordid affair sunk his campaign.

Thirty-six states will elect governors this year, including eight states where incumbents are not seeking a new term. Democrats have strong chances to pick up seats in Maryland and Massachusetts, where popular Republican governors are retiring, while Republicans are aiming to knock off Democratic incumbents in key states like Wisconsin, Michigan, Maine and Kansas.

Source: TEST FEED1

5 things to watch on Biden's first trip to Asia as president

President Biden is making his first trip to Asia since taking office, traveling to South Korea and Japan to focus on the Indo-Pacific region even as much of the world’s attention remains on Ukraine.

Biden will meet with leaders of both countries, talk with business and technology leaders in South Korea and attend a summit of Quad allies, which include Japan, Australia and India.

Here are five things to watch for during Biden’s trip.

U.S. on alert over North Korea threat 

The Biden administration is bracing for the possibility that North Korea conducts a provocative ballistic missile or nuclear test.

White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan said that U.S. intelligence suggests either kind of test is a “genuine possibility” during or around Biden’s trip to Asia. 

North Korea has test-launched more than a dozen ballistic missiles this year, but doing so during a presidential trip to Asia would no doubt escalate tensions. Nuclear tests are much more rare; the last time Pyongynang conducted a nuclear test was in 2017. 

Sullivan insisted that the administration is prepared for any provocations, noting the U.S. has spoken with countries in the region including China about the prospect of a nuclear or missile test by North Korea.

“We are prepared for those eventualities,” Sullivan said aboard Air Force One Thursday. “We know what we will do to respond to that.”

It’s unclear exactly how dramatically a ballistic missile or nuclear test would impact Biden’s trip.

Sullivan insisted Thursday it would only “​​underscore one of the main messages” of the Asia visit – that the U.S. is committed to defending its allies and responding to threats decisively. Officials have indicated the U.S. could change its military posture in the region in the event of North Korean provocation.

“Should that happen, we’ll take a look at our own security posture and footprint as appropriate,” Pentagon press secretary John Kirby told reporters on Thursday. 

China looms over visit

Biden will use the trip to deepen U.S. ties with its allies in Asia, at a time the administration is also trying to counter China’s economic and military influence in the region.

The administration has been careful not to be too confrontational with China, drawing a rhetorical contrast with the previous Trump administration. The Quad is widely viewed as an alliance meant to counter China, but the group does not characterize itself that way.

At the same time, Biden has been clear that he views China as the stiffest U.S. economic competition and has rebuked China over unfair trade practices and human rights abuses. 

The administration has also warned China repeatedly over its military activities near Taiwan. U.S. officials are closely watching how Russia’s war in Ukraine influences China’s thinking on Taiwan, an island democracy that Beijing claims to control.

China’s top diplomat, Yang Jiechi, warned Sullivan over the U.S. support for Taiwan in a phone call earlier this week, according to a Chinese government readout. 

“The message we’re trying to send on this trip is a message of an affirmative vision of what the world can look like if the democracies and open societies of the world stand together to shape the rules of the road,” Sullivan said Wednesday. 

“We think that message will be heard everywhere. We think it will be heard in Beijing. But it is not a negative message, and it’s not targeted at any one country.” 

How Biden confronts India

Biden will meet with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi as part of a gathering of Quad alliance leaders at a time when India has thrown a wrench into the U.S. approach to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

India in recent days banned exports of wheat, citing concerns about its own supply. But India is the second largest producer of wheat, and other nations were hoping its exports would be able to blunt some of the effects on global food markets as Russia and Ukraine are some of the largest producers of wheat.

India, the world’s largest democracy, previously continued to import Russian oil despite Western bans, and remained neutral in United Nations votes on human rights atrocities carried out in Ukraine, a break with other U.S. allies.

Biden met virtually with Modi last month, and deputy national security adviser Daleep Singh traveled to New Delhi for talks with Indian officials days before that call. This weekend’s meetings will give Biden and other leaders another opportunity to try and pull Modi more in line with the global response.

Joshua Fitt, an associate fellow at the Center for a New American Security, said he would not expect specific actions on Ukraine to be a major part of the Quad agenda, as it has been a source of differences among the leaders.

“The war in Ukraine has been a notable point of tension among the four quad countries given India’s initial reluctance to say anything contrary to the Russian position,” Fitt said, noting that there has been a shift in India’s rhetoric since the beginning of the war.

Is Ukraine a big topic

Even though much of the focus of Biden’s trip will be on relations with South Korea and Japan and how to confront China and North Korea, the war in Ukraine will loom over the weekend’s proceedings.

Just before departing for South Korea, Biden hosted the leaders of Finland and Sweden to throw his weight behind their bids to join the NATO alliance. While the leaders he will meet with this weekend are not part of NATO, he may still face questions about allaying concerns from Turkey about expanding the organization to include Finland and Sweden.

Japan and South Korea are among the countries that have imposed export controls in a bid to further isolate the Russian economy, and Biden is expected to meet with business leaders while in Seoul to underscore efforts to address supply chain and economic issues caused by the war.

And Sullivan acknowledged on Wednesday that the conflict in Ukraine and the Biden administration’s policies in the Indo-Pacific are intertwined.

“We think that there is something quite evocative about going from meeting with the president of Finland and the prime minister of Sweden to reinforce the momentum behind the NATO Alliance and the free world’s response in Ukraine, and getting on a plane and flying out to the Indo-Pacific not just to deal with security issues, but… to deal with Korea and Japan on issues that actually affect working people here in the United States, including major investments that will create jobs in states across the country.”

Bolstering economic ties

A key piece of Biden’s agenda while in Asia will be rolling out a new economic framework, which could provide a win for the president while inflation domestically continues to hound him.

While in Tokyo, Biden will launch what the administration is calling the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework,” which will outline efforts to regulate the digital economy, bolster supply chains and boost investment in clean energy and infrastructure.

That announcement alongside leaders from southeast and northeast Asia will come after Biden meets in South Korea with technology and manufacturing leaders who are investing in the United States.

The meetings in Asia come at a time when the White House has tried to tamp down inflation and address supply chain issues exacerbated by the war in Ukraine.

“We think we go into this trip very much with the wind at our back, with a strong case to make that we have what it takes to be able to deliver against the security and economic challenges of our time,” Sullivan told reporters.

Source: TEST FEED1

Senate passes bill to expand infant formula access

Legislation that aims to protect low-income families from infant formula shortages passed the Senate by unanimous consent on Thursday.

The Access to Baby Formula Act passed the House late Wednesday on a rare bipartisan vote of 414 to 9, and now heads to President Biden’s desk for his signature.

“It’s rare that we have unanimity in the Senate on important measures, and I wish we had more. But this is one of those important issues, and I am glad we are acting with one voice,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on the Senate floor. 

The legislation is aimed at expanding the pandemic-era flexibilities granted to the government’s nutrition program for women, infants and children (WIC). WIC participants buy about half the baby formula in the U.S., making it the nation’s largest purchaser of formula.

“The step we are taking today is going to add flexibility and relief to WIC beneficiaries, and almost half of all baby formula consumed in the U.S. is by WIC beneficiaries. Now millions of parents will have an easier time finding the baby formula they need,” Schumer said.

Each state awards a sole-source contract to a formula manufacturer to provide its product to WIC participants. As a result, WIC participants can only redeem their WIC voucher for formula made by the manufacturer that holds the contract for that State.

WIC benefits restrict the types of formulas that recipients can buy, as part of the program’s contracting rules. Abbott Nutrition is one of just two companies that serve nearly 90 percent of all infants in the program. 

The bill would allow the Department of Agriculture to waive WIC’s contract restrictions during emergencies, disasters and supply chain disruptions, meaning families would be able to use WIC benefits to purchase whatever formula is available. 

But the fate of a separate House bill to provide the Food and Drug Administration $28 million in emergency funding is uncertain. That legislation passed the House 231 to 192, but GOP senators have expressed wariness about spending the money.

Source: TEST FEED1

Flood insurance bill seeks to curb rising tide of bankruptcies

Americans with homes that are repeatedly flooded by extreme weather events could soon have the federal government buy their houses under a new bill introduced Thursday by Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.).

The bill would allow the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), the federal flood insurer of last resort, to buy houses and zones deemed indefensible in lieu of continually paying to repair them.

“You’re not obligating people to move but you’re saying like, you know, if you want to if you want to avail yourself with the NFIP program, we’re going to structure it towards a buyout rather than rebuilding,” Casten said.

Casten, who worked on the bill with Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), says it aims to solve two problems: one serious, the other potentially catastrophic.

More immediately, there’s looming the risk of  bankruptcy of the NFIP, which is straining under the weight of ever more frequent and severe flood events. Congress paid $16 billion to bail the program out in 2018, and Congress proposed another $20 billion in 2021.

That problem is only growing. Flood damage could rise more than 25 percent by 2050, putting an additional $8 billion at risk. And 14.6 million homes are at “substantial” risk of flooding, according to data from nonprofit First Street.

“Unfortunately, the National Flood Insurance Program is not designed for the reality of this problem,” Blumenauer said in a statement.

Meanwhile, the nation’s coastlines are set to rise an average of 12 inches in sea level rise by midcentury — with Florida and the Gulf Coast facing even higher water levels, according to data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association.

“That’s basically saying that if you’re building a home south of I-10 in Louisiana, if you’re building that home today, it’s going to be underwater before you have paid off a 30 year mortgage,” Casten told The Hill.

It’s not only a coastal problem: in Illinois alone, over 400,000 residential properties, 50,000 miles of roads, 35,000 commercial properties, 1000 infrastructure facilities, and 2400 social and community facilities are under risk of flood, according to a national risk assessment published by nonprofit First Street.

Under the current system, the NFIP — which in large swaths of the country is the only place homeowners can secure flood insurance — only does buyouts as a last resort, and payments can take up to 5 years to reach homeowners. 

That means in practice homeowners simply repair or rebuild a damaged — or even totalled — house on the same spot.

“Except that now, because of the rate of climate change, you know that that property is going to flood again in the near term future,” Casten said. 

That means that millions of properties which under current policies would most likely receive funds to rebuild in areas of worsening climate change.

“And so then two years later, it’s gonna flood again, and a year later, it’s gonna flood again and six months later, it’s gonna flood again,” Casten said.

“Because the scary reality of climate change is that it’s all not linear. It’s not ‘two, four, six’ — it’s ‘two, four, eight,’” he added. “And so you’re seeing that huge acceleration.”

Under current policies, that means a growing liability for U.S. taxpayers — and little path out for homeowners themselves. Even if they are authorized for a buyout, they are still responsible for 10 percent of the housing cost — meaning that if they can’t come up with the cash, they’re stuck. 

“Many flood-damaged homeowners have opted out of utilizing the voluntary floodplain buyout program because flood prone property buyout assistance is too slow — with some buyouts taking up to five years to complete,” Kurt Woolford, executive director of the Illinois’s Lake County Stormwater Management Commission, said in a statement.

Casten and Blumenauer’s bill would have the federal government move far more quickly to pick up the entire housing cost to move homeowners to new houses above the danger zone — leaving the old property converted to spongey, flood-fighting wetlands.

These reforms take a small step towards addressing the second, more catastrophic risk — which is what led House Financial Services Committee Chair Maxine Waters to direct members to overhaul the NFIP to begin with, Casten said. The Hill reached out to Waters for comment on the bill.

The concern is that a growing wave of uninsured losses could spread through the financial system, destroying small and mid-size banks and pension funds. There have been over 5.2 trillion in losses since 1980 — 70 percent of which were uninsured, according to a February 2021 speech by Federal Reserve Governor Lael Brainard.

Large investors like Blackstone and Bank of America and reinsurers like Swiss Re carry out their own quiet retreat from endangered lowland and coastal properties, while selling off those properties to less savvy investors — and counting on the NFIP to serve as free backstop, Casten added. 

That creates the potential for a domino cascade of bankruptcies analogous to the Savings and Loan Crisis of the 1980s, which saw community banks and pension funds wiped out across the country. 

“You’re not seeing the Blackstones come in and buy,” Casten said. Flood-prone properties are instead getting spun off to groups like “you know, the local Cleveland, Ohio, firefighters pension fund.”

With the Federal Reserve showing little sign of changing lending guidelines around climate change — particularly after the March collapse of climate financial risk expert Sarah Bloom Raskin’s nomination — reforms to the NFIP are a key step in shoring up the financial bulwarks that protect American taxpayers, Casten said.

The worsening scope and increasing frequency of flood, which risks rendering large swaths of the coast uninhabitable “sucks, to be crass about it,” Casten told The Hill. It could potentially force millions to make politically difficult and agonizing choices about leaving beloved landscapes, neighborhoods and communities.

“But this isn’t a question of whether or not we can stick our head in the sand and the problems are going to go away,” he added. “The problem only gets worse.”

Source: TEST FEED1

FDA sparks anger with decision on ‘phthalates’ — a chemical in fast-food packaging

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said Thursday that it will not impose a total ban on a set of dangerous chemicals commonly found in fast-food packaging, angering scientists and environmental groups who have long pressed for their removal.

The decision came in response to three separate petitions requesting that the FDA limit the use of compounds called phthalates, which are known to disrupt hormone function and have been linked to birth defects, infertility, learning disabilities and neurological disorders. 

Despite proven negative health impacts, the compounds are still common ingredients in food packaging. Scientists have found that marginalized groups suffer disproportionately from the chemicals, partly because they consume more fast food.

The FDA on Thursday did institute a ban on the use of 23 phthalates for food contact applications, but it noted that those particular compounds had already “been abandoned” by manufacturers anyway. In taking its action, the FDA agreed to a July 2018 petition submitted by an industry group known as the Flexible Vinyl Alliance.

The FDA will still allow the use of nine other similar compounds in food contact applications. And it denied a separate petition on Thursday from several environmental groups that had asked it to ban the 23 phthalates and an additional five from having food contact.

It said the organizations that had brought the petition, including the Natural Resources Defense Council, Earthjustice and the Environmental Defense Fund, “did not demonstrate that the proposed class of phthalates is no longer safe for the approved food additive uses.”

The FDA also denied another related petition — from some of the same environmental groups — that requested a ban on food contact use for certain phthalates and the revocation of previously sanctioned authorizations for others.

The FDA said it rejected this petition because it failed to “demonstrate through scientific data or information” that such a ban on phthalates was warranted.

Several groups in a research consortium called Project TENDR — Targeting Environmental Neuro-Developmental Risks — condemned the FDA’s decision.

“These chemicals are approved for their use, they have the ability to leach out of these products into the food, they’re ending up in our food in our bodies and are leading to serious and irreversible health effects,” said Ami Zota, an associate professor at the George Washington University’s Milken Institute School of Public Health who is a member of Project TENDR.

“That can affect the basics of human condition — like our ability to learn, our ability to have safe and healthy families,” she added. “And marginalized communities are disproportionately being burdened.”

A statement from the consortium faulted the agency for leaving “numerous authorizations in place that perpetuate phthalate contamination of the food supply.”

Earthjustice, one of the organizations behind the rejected petitions, pointed out that although Congress deemed many phthalates too dangerous for use in children’s toys more than a decade ago, the FDA is enabling the continued “contamination of food and drinks.”

“FDA’s decision recklessly green-lights ongoing contamination of our food with phthalates,” Earthjustice attorney Katherine O’Brien said in a statement.

She accused the agency of “putting another generation of children at risk of life-altering harm” while “exacerbating health inequities experienced by Black and Latina women.”

“FDA’s announcement that it will now start reviewing new data on phthalate safety — six years after advocates sounded the alarm — is outrageous and seeks to sidestep FDA’s legal duty to address the current science in proceedings on the existing petitions,” O’Brien added.

In January, the House Oversight and Reform Committee sent a letter to the FDA demanding that the agency take immediate action to address this class of compounds, as The Hill previously reported. 

The previous month, health and environmental advocates sued the FDA over its failure to rule on the 2016 petition that was rejected on Thursday. The FDA was required by law to respond to the principal petition within 180 days of filing, according to the suit.

Asked why the agency would have approved the industry petition, but rejected the two broader petitions from the environmental organizations, Zota said that she could not speak to the FDA’s rationale or motivation.

She suggested, however, that the point of the industry petition may have been to “continue use of those phthalates that are most commonly used in plasticizers” — compounds that serve to soften plastics.

“Here is a way we can prevent impaired learning and reproduction in all Americans, but especially the most vulnerable,” she said. “Here’s a pathway to prevention. We do not need more science. The science is clear.”

The Hill has reached out to the Flexible Vinyl Alliance for comment.

Alongside these decisions, the agency also issued a request for information on Thursday, with the goal of “seeking available use and safety information on the remaining phthalates authorized for use.”

“The FDA is generally aware of updated toxicological and use information on phthalates that is publicly available,” the agency said in a statement. “Nevertheless, stakeholders may have access to information that is not always made public.”

Zota disputed the notion that the scientific information is insufficient, urging “the FDA to make evidence-based decisions to protect the health of Americans.”

“Given the ubiquity of the problem and its magnitude on health, we need upstream policy decisions, policy action, and this is in FDA’s regulatory authority,” she added.

Source: TEST FEED1

Five ways Democrats are trying to tackle the baby formula shortage

Democrats are facing rising pressure to take action on the baby formula shortage as parents struggle to feed their children due to a series of problems that have left formula scarce.

In a flurry of legislation, actions and recommendations this week, the Biden administration and congressional Democrats have sought to show action on the shortage.

Yet some measures are focused on preventing future shortages, and others may not have an impact on supply chains or availability for weeks or months, even if passed.

The closure of an Abbott Nutrition plant in Michigan over safety concerns in February compounded a nationwide baby shortage due to supply chain and labor issues, and thrust the issue into the political spotlight heading into midterm elections.

The FDA on Monday said a deal had been reached with Abbott to reopen the crucial plant, which the company said could allow operations to restart within two weeks.

Here are measures Democrats have taken this week to tackle the country’s baby formula shortage.

Biden invokes the Defense Production Act

President Biden on Wednesday invoked the Defense Production Act in an effort to address the shortage. 

“Directing firms to prioritize and allocate the production of key infant formula inputs will help increase production and speed up in supply chains,” the White House said. 

The administration also announced that Biden would launch “Operation Fly Formula.”

Through that program, Defense Department commercial aircrafts will be used to pick up baby formula that meets U.S. standards from overseas to stock American shelves quickly. 

“Imports of baby formula will serve as a bridge to this ramped up production, therefore, I am requesting you take all appropriate measures available to get additional safe formula into the country immediately,” Biden said in a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack.  

House bills to combat the shortage

The House has passed two bills to combat the shortage. 

The first would provide $28 million in emergency funding to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). With that funding, the agency will increase inspections of formula produced in foreign plants and work to be prepared to address any future shortages.

That bill, sponsored by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), passed with a vote of 231-192. In the Democratic majority House, lawmakers voted in large part along party lines.

The other bill passed with more bipartisan support in a vote of 414-9, with nine Republicans voting against the measure. 

That bill would permanently loosen the restrictions on which formula types can be purchased by people in the federal low-income assistance program for women, children and infants.

On Thursday, it was also passed by the Senate and will now move to Biden’s desk for approval.

Senate bill to prevent future shortages

A group of Democratic senators including Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Tammy Duckworth (D-lll.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) introduced the Protect Infants from Formula Shortages Act on Thursday. 

The legislation would require manufacturers to alert the FDA of any potential supply disruptions so the agency has time to prepare for shortages.

“I am introducing the Protect Infants from Formula Shortages Act to avoid another massive disruption in availability of life-saving and life-sustaining formula and other products,” Casey said in a statement. 

“I will continue to push Abbott and the FDA to get the answers we need to make sure no family ever has to go through the fear and frustration parents are feeling now,” he added.  

Pressing the FDA for answers

Sens. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) and John Hoeven (R-N.D.) wrote to FDA Commissioner Robert Califf on Thursday, asking him to provide more information about what the agency knew ahead of the shortage. 

Specifically, they asked Califf for information about when his agency inspected Abbott’s Michigan facility.

“While we appreciate the steps currently being taken by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), we are concerned that the Agency did not take these actions sooner, and we believe that more must be done to safely alleviate the shortage as quickly as possible,” the senators wrote, arguing that faster action “would have mitigated the impact of the loss of a major manufacturing facility and prevented this crisis.”

Requests for a White House coordinator 

Thirty-two Senate Democrats wrote to Biden on Wednesday to ask the president to appoint a White House coordinator to address the ongoing issue. 

“We urge you to immediately assign a coordinator within the White House to work with manufacturers directly and oversee the development and implementation of a national strategy for increasing the resiliency of the infant formula supply chain and protecting against future contamination and shortages,” the group said in their letter, released by Sens. Patty Murray (Wash.) and Bob Casey (Pa.).

The lawmakers also pressed Biden to implement a strategy that would “rapidly address immediate needs associated with the shortage, including identifying specific action steps and deadlines for addressing the shortage.”

They also encouraged the administration to “provide critical information to parents and caregivers, including where to find formula, how to transition from one formula to another, if needed, and what to do if a medical or specialty formula is unavailable.”

Since the request, the FDA appointed Janet Woodcock, the agency’s acting commissioner before Califf was confirmed, to lead the its effort addressing the shortage. The choice came despite some criticism that Woodcock lacks food policy experience, according to Politico.

Source: TEST FEED1

We’re finally making progress supporting rural tech — we can do much more

Rural America wants to be part of the growing tech economy. 

We know because rural Americans have told us — in a national survey, nearly 60 percent of rural adults expressed interest in tech jobs and careers, according to a recent report from the Center on Rural Innovation (CORI), a nonprofit I founded in 2017.  

Who could blame them? The digital economy has been a reliable growth engine — expanding 3.5 times faster than the U.S. economy as a whole from 2005 to 2019 — and produces jobs whose median incomes are more than double that of all jobs nationally. 

We’ve seen how the COVID-19 pandemic drew attention to the ways in which many rural communities are underresourced to adapt and succeed in the digital age. Places lacking access to broadband are missing out on the power of the 21st-century economy. But the pandemic also proved that when rural America is connected it can support a thriving digital workforce.  

Achieving that at scale and overcoming these existing geographic inequities will require more than one initiative can hope to provide. It will take a concerted, multi-faceted effort. Thankfully, Washington is starting to see why this is important.  

At a Rose Garden event in May, President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris together announced the most significant investment in rural infrastructure in 100 years. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act set aside unprecedented federal funding — $65 billion — for broadband access and deployment. The recent announcement of the Rural Partners Network and talks of establishing a Rural Prosperity Office are further signs that people see potential in rural America, and that after years of decline there is more we can and should do to unlock that potential. 

And while broadband is necessary, it is not sufficient for rural communities to participate in the tech economy.  

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), Silicon Valley’s representative in the U.S. House, has been a vocal champion of the need to expand the tech workforce beyond our cities, and makes a compelling case in his recent book, “Dignity in a Digital Age.” He recognizes that upending the current imbalance in where these jobs and wealth are created — last year, more than 97 percent of U.S. venture capital went to startups in urban areas — is critical to revitalizing rural cities and towns where opportunities have dried up. More importantly: He has thoughtful, creative ideas about how national policies can support this. 

Since launching CORI five years ago, we’ve seen places doing amazing work to spark innovation and tech job growth when they get broadband and funding to support the tech economy. 

After securing funding from the under-publicized Economic Development Administration Build to Scale program, Red Wing, Minn., has become a hub for entrepreneurship and workforce development across an 11-county region with the launch of its E1 Collaborative. 

In Ada, Okla., the Ada Jobs Foundation has emphasized the inclusion of Chickasaw and other Native American founders in its initiative to increase the number of scalable tech startups in its community, which exists on Chickasaw Nation territory. Similarly, in Virginia, the Shenandoah Community Capital Fund has started to build a pipeline of female and tech entrepreneurs of color through intentional outreach efforts after recognizing its first accelerator cohort was predominantly white and male.   

And in Springfield, Vt., the Black River Innovation Campus leveraged federal funding and the town’s 10-gigabit internet to garner local philanthropic investment from the Vermont Community Foundation to attract scalable tech companies and an accelerator program for founders coming out of Dartmouth College and the University of Vermont. Now it is poised to receive $5 million in government funds to continue its transformation into a multi-use facility that can spark further innovation-based companies. 

CORI’s research, sponsored by Ascendium Education Group confirmed that in addition to a majority of rural adults being interested in tech jobs, half of those currently employed in these roles identify as self-taught. This underscores the desire for resilient, good-paying jobs and the fact that in an industry that can recruit based on competencies rather than degrees there are nontraditional paths to these opportunities.  

Furthermore, opportunities should be there to meet rural residents’ demands: We found that rural America is home to only half of the tech jobs that one would expect to find based on national tech employment patterns. Of those nearly 250,000 missing tech jobs, more than 80,000 are in the non-tech industries at the core of many rural economies — manufacturing, healthcare, government and banking. Rural employers need to check their own biases and look to their own incredible communities to find and help build the talent to ensure their businesses are profitable and secure. 

It is overwhelmingly clear that the era of telling rural people that technology and innovation jobs “are not for them” should be over. Bringing these technology skills and jobs to rural people will be transformational economically. It can serve as the fuel for longer-term tech startups that can accelerate the momentum of this kind of economic development and generate wealth in rural communities. Seeing progress being made at the federal level and a renewed focus on rural prosperity is a sign that things are going in the right direction.  

What can be done to harness this momentum? Federal and state programs should prioritize funding for rural coding and IT training programs. Infrastructure funding from agencies such as the Economic Development Administration can be expanded to explicitly include spaces for coworking and training that connect new learners to the increasing number of remote technologists in rural communities. We can offer incentives for employers to provide paid software internships that allow for project-based learning and clear onramps for rural people to enter these tech career pathways.  

Technology talent can be found everywhere. And now is the time — we must invest in rural America to ensure rural people can get high-paying, resilient jobs and, in doing so, bring our nation back together in the digital age. 

Matt Dunne is the founder and executive director of the Center on Rural Innovation. 

Source: TEST FEED1

Senate blocks $48 billion aid package for restaurants, other small businesses

The Senate on Thursday blocked a bipartisan bill to provide $48 billion to restaurants, gyms and other small businesses hit particularly hard by the pandemic. 

Senators voted 52-43 to hold a vote on the bill, falling short of the 60-vote threshold needed to move forward. Just five GOP senators voted for the motion to proceed, with the bill’s opponents citing its impact on the federal deficit and inflation.

The vote likely spells doom for the bill, which was crafted by Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and Senator Ben Cardin (D-Md.) and backed by Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) as a way to help struggling small businesses get out of debt accrued during the pandemic. 

“Well, this was our best shot. Make no mistake about it, we’re disappointed that we weren’t able to get it done,” Cardin told reporters after the vote. “But you know, I’ll always fight for small businesses. I’ll continue to look for ways we can help.”

Pressed after the vote on any potential plans for a similar measure in the future, Wicker told The Hill, “You know, time is a very fleeting commodity, so I just don’t know.”

Advocates had argued that the additional funds were needed to prevent scores of debt-ridden small businesses from closing down. 

The bill would have provided $40 billion to a relief fund for struggling restaurants. Democrats provided $28.6 billion to the fund in their COVID-19 relief package, but the federal dollars quickly ran out, with only one out of three applicants receiving aid.  

“Local restaurants across the country expected help but the Senate couldn’t finish the job,” Erika Polmar, executive director of the Independent Restaurant Coalition, said in a statement. “Neighborhood restaurants nationwide have held out hope for this program, selling their homes, cashing out retirement funds, or taking personal loans in an effort to keep their employees working and their doors open.”

The bill earmarked $2 billion for gyms and fitness facilities, $2 billion for live event operators, $2 billion for bus and ferry operators, $1.4 billion for small businesses located near border crossings that were closed during the pandemic and $500 million for minor league sports teams that took a significant financial hit due to COVID-19.

The Community Gyms Coalition, which represents nearly 20,000 gyms and fitness centers, said in a statement that Congress “failed to invest in fitness and exercise despite their obvious benefits for Americans’ mental and physical health.”

“More than a quarter of gyms and fitness facilities are permanently closed,” the group said. “Those which are still operating, but are burdened with debt taken on to survive government-mandated closures and restrictions, may soon close as well.”

Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.) joined Democrats in voting to proceed on a floor vote. Three Democrats and two Republicans did not vote. 

The bill’s Republican critics said that the relief package was wasteful and would exacerbate red-hot inflation by injecting more money into the economy.

“Democrats need to wake up and realize that dumping more money in the economy is simply pouring $5-a-gallon gas on an already out-of-control fire,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said in a speech leading up to the vote.

Aris Folley contributed.

Source: TEST FEED1