Manchin says leadership pledged permitting reform in stopgap funding bill

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said Wednesday that Democratic leadership told him the permitting reform he has pushed for will be included in a government funding measure known as a continuing resolution. 

“Permitting is in,” he said. 

Asked Wednesday whether he was told by leadership that the reforms would be included in the funding measure, he answered affirmatively. 

The Senate swing vote has pushed for legislation that would speed up the process for approving energy and infrastructure projects. When Manchin announced his support for the Democrats’ climate, tax and health care bill, he and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a joint statement that they would separately pass a deal to reform the permitting process for these projects as part of the deal. 

But the push has come under fire from progressives, led by Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), who have raised concerns about the potential for undermining environmental reviews and helping the fossil fuel industry. 

Grijalva, who chairs the House’s Natural Resources Committee, has circulated a letter asking leadership to separate the Manchin deal out of the continuing resolution. 

His office told The Hill last week that they had more than 40 signatories so far and were still circulating at that time. 

He has argued that these measures are largely ones that are supported by Republicans, and shared concerns with environmentalists that expedited reviews could harm vulnerable groups. 

However, it’s not clear whether or how many progressives would vote against a measure to fund the government, as Democrats would be unlikely to want a government shutdown ahead of the midterms. 

Asked about the progressive resistance, Manchin said: “I think people need to see what’s inside and how much good it does for the country.”

A summary released by Manchin’s office said that the reforms will set maximum timelines for environmental reviews and complete a pipeline that runs through West Virginia.

Source: TEST FEED1

A better strategy to rein in Big Tech

The framers of our Constitution recognized that concentrated power is a threat to personal liberty, famously resulting in the separation of powers in the federal government. But they also knew that that threat was not limited to kings and queens.

Indeed, the American tradition has long been skeptical of private concentrations of power, whether the “hated trade monopolies” of the American Revolution or the industry-dominating trusts before Teddy Roosevelt came to office.

Today, our tech markets are controlled almost exclusively by a few companies. They influence almost every aspect of our lives. They tell us what’s true and what’s false. They decide what we see online, what we say, what we’re allowed to find and what apps we can download. Like the Eye of Sauron, they watch so much of what we do and curate our online experiences that increasingly determine what we do and think offline.

Worse yet, these companies have grown so powerful through a host of unique government privileges. From legal immunity to vast tax breaks, they can and do control markets (and too often narratives) with impunity and no accountability to the American public.

You don’t like it? Too bad. They run the show.

If we’re going to rein in Big Tech, make the market work for the people and not the powerful, we need a holistic strategy to combat their ever-enveloping influence.

Executive action is one possible solution — but it has limits. Despite Lina Khan’s trust-busting chops, the Federal Trade Commission has had little success stopping mergers or breaking up Big Tech in court. And now the courts are considering whether the Federal Trade Commission even has the constitutional authority to file suit.

That leaves Congress to rein in Big Tech. And fortunately, a bipartisan group of lawmakers has been looking at establishing guardrails.

Most prominently, Sens. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) introduced the Open App Markets Act to even the odds for consumers by promoting competition in app stores. Google and Apple (most famously) have leveraged their dominant position to stifle consumer choice of apps on their respective stores. Narrowly targeted and broadly bipartisan, the bill sailed through the Senate Judiciary Committee in February.

So why hasn’t Congress brought the Open App Markets Act to a vote? Political gamesmanship.

Rather than move forward on the Open App Markets Act, Senate leaders have tied its fate to the much broader American Innovation and Choice Online Act, which aims to address self-preferencing by internet giants. Although commendable for its intent, the devil is always in the details; and there are many, many details to be worked through in such a wide-ranging bill.

So, it’s no surprise that many senators who nominally support the bill have called for reworking it, leaving it – and consequently the Open App Markets Act – on indefinite hold.

We cannot let the great be the enemy of good. Congress is unlikely to pass the self-preferencing bill in its current form, and congressional leaders will need time, months perhaps, to fine-tune its terms to limit unintended consequences. At this point, Congress should green-light what’s ready to go – the Open Apps Market Act – and take the time that is needs to iron the wrinkles out of its self-preferencing bill.

Incremental progress is just sound policy.

Of course, even if Congress were to adopt both bills, we would still have a long way to go to unravel the Big Tech Gordian Knot. In particular, Big Tech would still exert significant control over our digital public squares.

For example, a study from North Carolina State University showed that Gmail often treats Republican emails as spam and Yahoo treats Democratic emails as spam, even for users who sign up to receive political emails. 

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently admitted that Facebook has censored posts at the government’s behest, including those by media outlets like the New York Post. And researchers have long been concerned about algorithmic bias against Black Americans and other people of color on social media.

What connects all these stories? A lack of transparency (or much belated transparency on Facebook’s part) about how Big Tech decides what we see and when we see it.

The good news is that Democrats and Republicans alike support increasing transparency for the tech sector. It’s time for Congress to flex that bipartisan muscle and bring these massive platforms out of the darkness and into the light.

Despite what you see on the news every day, bipartisanship survives in Washington, D.C., and a host of public servants are working to reduce the power of Big Tech, to protect our privacy and to safeguard our children online. 

But for this work to have an impact on the American public, the Senate needs to start by bringing these good, bipartisan bills to the floor for a vote.

Joel Thayer is president of the Digital Progress Institute and a Washington-based telecom and tech attorney.

Source: TEST FEED1

Five ways California is changing to handle rising temperatures

Story at a glance


  • California has spearheaded state efforts to combat climate change.

  • Now, a record-breaking heat wave underscores the importance of the state’s past and future initiatives. 

  • Below are five ways California is adapting to rising temperatures.

California is currently experiencing one of the state’s worst heat waves in history, with record high temperatures expected to last for up to nine days. 

The crisis is so bad, operators feared the state’s power grid would fail as demand for electricity skyrockets. On Tuesday, temperatures reached 116 degrees in Sacramento and 109 degrees in San Jose. 

“This will be essentially the worst September heat wave on record, certainly in Northern California, and arguably for the state overall,” Daniel Swain, a University of California Los Angeles climatologist told the Los Angeles Times. “It might be one of the worst heat waves on record, period, in any month, given its duration and its extreme magnitude.” 

California remains at the forefront of state efforts to combat climate change, and has adopted and introduced several measures to better adapt to rising temperatures over the years. 

Here are five ways California is changing to handle rising temperatures. 

1. Phasing out of gas-powered vehicles

In August, the state announced it would ban sales of all gas-powered cars starting in 2035. Traffic-related greenhouse gas emissions are a significant contributor to climate change and pose hazards to humans in the form of air pollution. One visible form of air pollution is ground-level ozone, or smog. Heatwaves, which have become more intense thanks to climate change, accelerate the formation of smog, exacerbating health risks in humans. 

By phasing out gas-powered vehicles and reducing heat-trapping greenhouse gasses, the state aims to lower its overall contribution to climate change and improve air quality both during heat waves and at normal temperatures. 

2. Reduced dependence on the Colorado River 

Droughts are common when heat waves strike, and often strain individuals’ water usage. In light of the extreme heat and diminishing water levels hitting the region, California is looking to cut the amount of water it takes from the Colorado River. The decision is in response to an emergency demand made by the federal government regarding dangerously low levels in Lake Powell and Lake Mead.

Approximately 10 percent or at least 100 trillion gallons of the state’s water allocation from the Colorado River will be left in reservoirs next year. California has never made any cuts to its share of the river, while other states who depend on the water supply are expected to follow suit. 

3. Reflective coatings in low-income areas

Low-income urban areas are subject to the urban heat-island effect whereby limited shade and dense concentrations of concrete and buildings work to trap heat, increase air pollution and exacerbate heat-related health problems. Many low-income individuals cannot afford air conditioning, prompting the need for creative solutions to soaring outdoor temperatures.

Some city regions throughout California are installing coatings in parks and on pavement that reflect the solar infrared radiation typically absorbed by asphalt. The process works to lower the ambient air temperature in heat-prone regions, and has been shown to lower pavement temperatures by up to 10 degrees. Because pavement releases heat trapped during the day at nighttime, the solution can also help reduce night temperatures. 

4. Solar panels on canals 

In an effort to reduce its dependence on nonrenewable energy sources, California is planning to begin a new project that would install solar panels over canals. Along with generating renewable power, the project will determine whether installations can reduce water evaporation. 

Previous research on the proposed project estimated that by covering 4,000 miles of canals the state could save more than 63 billion gallons of water each year. This total amounts to that needed to irrigate about 50,000 acres of farmland or supply the water needs of 2 million residents. From an electricity perspective, researchers predict the project could generate around one-sixth of the state’s total power. 

5. State assistance programs for water bills 

Proposed legislation would provide financial assistance for low-income California residents to help pay for water bills. Water rates rose by 45 percent between 2007 and 2015 and currently outpace inflation. In September of 2021 residents and businesses owed over $315 million in total unpaid water bills. 

The bill, which awaits Governor Newsom’s signature, will create a state program to help low-income Californians pay their water and sewage bills, marking the first of its kind in the country. How many residents would be eligible for the program or how much assistance they would receive remains unknown. To combat dehydration, residents experiencing heat waves are encouraged to drink water and other fluids regularly

Source: TEST FEED1

Abbott holds 7-point lead over O'Rourke in new poll

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) is maintaining a 7-point lead over his Democratic opponent Beto O’Rourke, according to a new poll released on Wednesday.

The University of Houston-Texas Southern University survey found that 49 percent of likely voters supported Abbott while 42 percent supported O’Rourke.

The results of Wednesday’s survey track with other recent polls. An August poll from the Dallas Morning News and the University of Texas at Tyler also showed Abbott holding a 7-point lead over O’Rourke.

Support for the two candidates breaks down sharply along partisan lines, with “virtually every Texas Democrat” intending to vote for O’Rourke and “virtually every Texas Republican” planning to vote for Abbott, according to the latest poll. 

Abbott’s and O’Rourke’s likely voter bases also represent vastly different demographics. While the current governor was more popular among older white voters, O’Rourke was more popular among younger voters of color. 

In the UH-TSU poll, Abbott leads the Democratic candidate by 29 points among white voters, but O’Rourke leads Abbott by 57 points among Black voters and 15 points among Latino voters.

The Silent Generation/Baby Boomer cohort and Generation X favored Abbott by 28 points and 11 points, respectively, while Millennials and Generation Z favored O’Rourke by 21 points and 23 points, according to the poll.

However, the gender breakdown is less distinct. While Abbott leads O’Rourke by 18 points among men, the two candidates are tied at 45 percent among women.

After the deadly shooting at a Uvalde elementary school brought the gun control debate back to the forefront, O’Rourke appeared to close the gap between himself and Abbott, leading to a sense of cautious optimism among the state’s Democrats. However, O’Rourke has been unable to gain further ground on Abbott in polls.

The UH-TSU survey was conducted from Aug. 11 to Aug. 27 with 2,140 respondents and had a confidence interval of +/-2.1. 

Source: TEST FEED1

Ossoff isolating in India after testing positive for COVID-19

Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) is isolating in India after testing positive for COVID-19, his office confirmed on Wednesday.

Ossoff, who has mild symptoms, headed to India for an eight-day economic delegation at the end of August.

He was expected to return to the U.S. this week as Congress resumes business after the August recess, but his office confirmed he would return next week instead.

“Senator Ossoff is isolating in India and has been unable to return to Washington as planned for Senate votes and committee business this week,” the statement from his office reads. “Senator Ossoff expects to be back in Washington for Senate business next week.”

Ossoff, a former investigative journalist, assumed office last year after winning a close race against then-incumbent Republican Sen. David Perdue.

The senator previously isolated during the pandemic when his wife tested positive for COVID-19 in 2020.

In India, Ossoff met with officials in Mumbai, the largest city in the country, and with Tibetan holy leader the Dalai Lama in the city of Dharamshala.

Source: TEST FEED1

In Lebanon, the next six months will shape the next six years

Lebanon is suffering in the throes of one of the largest economic collapses of modern times as it struggles to recover from a disastrous peacetime blast that devastated the Beirut port and whole neighborhoods in August 2020. Presidential elections in the fall could influence the course of the country for years to come. The next few months deserve particular domestic and international attention to help Lebanon move toward socioeconomic recovery.

The term of the current president, Michel Aoun, an ally of Hezbollah, ends on Oct. 31.  According to Lebanon’s precarious constitutional system, it is parliament’s role to elect a new president to a fresh six-year term. This occasion is pivotal and casts a long shadow over subsequent years because a new president is a key player in nominating a prime minister and participating in the formation of the next government.

A new presidential term is also likely to be accompanied by appointments to such key posts as commander of the Army, heads of intelligence services, governor of the Central Bank, and other major positions. The replacement of a Hezbollah ally by a more independent, reform-minded, and nationalist figure would have an important, long-term impact on Lebanon’s chances of reclaiming its compromised sovereignty, implementing urgently needed reforms, pulling the country back from the brink of full-fledged collapse, and strengthening support for our shared interests in the region.

The current parliament, elected in May, is almost evenly split between allies and opponents of Hezbollah and neither side is likely to muster the necessary quorum in a timely manner to elect a president, potentially delaying the election for weeks or even months. But Lebanon can ill afford another long vacancy in its governing institutions. 

The Hezbollah-allied coalition has its own client candidate — or candidates — lined up. Unfortunately, the reformist opposition coalition is less centralized and has yet to agree on its preferred candidates. It is imperative that this coalition try to agree on an effective strategy and identify presidential candidates to leverage votes in parliament and block the election of another Hezbollah client. The election of an independent, reform-minded president could help turn the country’s fortunes around.

The international community has an interest in helping Lebanon reverse its downward spiral. A fully failed state on the eastern Mediterranean is in no one’s interest. That would threaten U.S. ally Israel, generate new refugee flows westward to Cyprus and the European Union, open the ground for the potential return of ISIS and al Qaeda, and further strengthen Hezbollah’s and Iran’s powers in Lebanon.

The presidential election is an opportunity to adjust Lebanon’s course for the next six years and set the country on the path of recovery. The U.S. should not pass up the opportunity to lead a coordinated international effort to encourage the election of an independent, reformist president.

For the time being, the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) is the main institution standing in the way of a collapse of order and state institutions. Maintaining its operational readiness is in the interest of the United States, France, our European allies, and importantly, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries. And thanks to American and international support, the LAF has been able to perform this critical role. This support must continue, not only to maintain order and help counterbalance Iran’s influence in Lebanon, but also to keep Russian influence — which is only a drive of several hours away in Syria — out of the country. 

The U.S. has been critical in advancing talks between Lebanon and Israel on demarcating the disputed maritime border between the two countries. Amos Hochstein, U.S. special envoy for energy affairs, has made tremendous progress in bringing these countries close to agreement, in spite of their current conflicts. A final agreement, under American auspices, would enable both sides to take advantage of valuable offshore gas resources, and importantly, help calm the increasingly hostile rhetoric heard along the Lebanon-Israel border. 

Many eyes in Lebanon are attentive to the on-again, off-again talks between the U.S. and Iran in Vienna. A return to the Iran nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), could calm tensions in Lebanon and might help enable a way forward between the two opposing coalitions. A collapse of the talks could escalate regional pressures and increase the risk of Israeli-Iranian tensions spilling over into another devastating Hezbollah-Israel war.

Importantly, American interests are best served by supporting the people of Lebanon through programs that advance American values through education, humanitarian family and health care, and democracy programs that directly empower and support Lebanese citizens.

A large cross-section of the Lebanese population launched an uprising in October 2019 to demand the replacement of a corrupt and colluding political class. The port explosion two years ago intensified the discontent and drew Hezbollah more directly into the public’s hostility.  Although this defiant movement has not managed to properly unify, or to put forward someone charismatic like Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky to articulate its message, the country’s suffering yet defiant population deserves the attention and support of the international community.

The next few months will be seminal for this small but critical country’s future. It is up to the Lebanese people and their representatives to make the right choices in the selection of the next president and other leaders who will fill important positions and implement urgently needed policies in the months and years ahead. But the U.S. and international community have an interest in continuing to give Lebanon the attention and support it deserves, to help ensure that the country indeed turns a corner toward revival and does not slip into full state failure and decades of chaos and ungovernability. 

Edward Gabriel is a former U.S. ambassador to Morocco and the current president of the American Task Force on Lebanon. Follow him on Twitter @EdGabrielDC.

Paul Salem is president of the Middle East Institute. Follow on Twitter @paul_salem and @MiddleEastInst.

Source: TEST FEED1

Jane Fonda says she feels stronger than she has in years after cancer diagnosis

Legendary actress and activist Jane Fonda said that she feels stronger than she has in years after being diagnosed with B-cell non-Hodgins lymphoma. 

In a blog posted on her official website Tuesday, the 84-year-old Academy Award winner thanked her fans for sending well wishes since the announcement of her cancer diagnosis, adding that since completing her first chemotherapy treatment three weeks ago, she has been active.

“Many have asked how I am feeling. Well today, about 3 weeks from my first chemo session, I must tell you that I feel stronger than I have in years,” Fonda wrote in her blog post, also sharing a video of her doing a squat exercise routine. “The doctor told me the best antidote to the tiredness that chemotherapy can cause is to move. Walk. And I have been walking. Very early before the record heat kicks in. Also working out.” 

“This is not my first encounter with cancer,” Fonda added. “I’ve had breast cancers and had a mastectomy and come through very well and I will do so again.”

Fonda also noted in her blog post other cancer patients might not receive the “top-drawer treatment” as she does, adding that her goal is to continue the push for better health care in the U.S. 

“As I said in my statement last week, I am painfully aware that the top-drawer treatment I receive is not something everyone in this country can count on and I consider that a travesty,” Fonda said. “It isn’t fair, and I will continue to fight for quality health care for all.” 

Fonda, who received acclaim for her portrayal of Grace Henson on the Netflix hit series “Grace & Frankie,” announced her non-Hodgins lymphoma diagnosis last week.

Fonda recently created her own political action committee (PAC) that is focused on climate change efforts. 

“This diagnosis has only made me more determined than ever to continue to end the deadly effects of fossil fuels,” Fonda said in his statement. “We have it within our power to change this and I intend to do everything in my power to do so. This cancer will not deter me.”

Source: TEST FEED1

William Cohen labels Trump a ‘clear and present danger to democracy’

Former Defense Secretary William Cohen said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Wednesday that former President Trump is a “clear and present danger to democracy.” 

Cohen, a Republican who led the Pentagon under former President Clinton, pointed to remarks that former federal judge Michael Luttig made before the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection in which he said Trump was a threat to democracy. 

Cohen told Will Geist of MSNBC that the recent revelations about the documents that Trump had at his Mar-a-Lago residence confirmed Luttig’s portrayal of the former president “over and over.” 

“The notion that the former president had documents, highly classified documents, in his possession and in unsafe circumstances, or any circumstances, puts our nation at risk, potentially,” he said. “So, I think there’s no justification.” 

The Washington Post reported on Tuesday that FBI agents found a document that details a foreign nation’s nuclear capabilities and military defenses during the search. 

Cohen said no one can say that the documents being present at Mar-a-Lago is a mistake at this point, and anyone who claims that is “flat-out lying.” 

The former Pentagon chief said he would be “in handcuffs” if he had possession of the documents that Trump had at Mar-a-Lago after leaving office. He said the question of why Trump had the documents in his possession is not relevant to whether he broke the law.

Cohen added that the Justice Department is going about its investigation methodically and deferentially.

A federal judge granted Trump’s request on Monday to have a special master appointed to review documents the FBI obtained during its search of his Palm Beach, Fla., property last month. The ruling effectively pauses the investigation while the special master examines documents to determine if they are protected by attorney-client or executive privilege. 

The Justice Department is investigating if Trump violated three federal statues — including the Espionage Act — for continuing to possess documents, some of which are classified, that he should have turned over to government record-keepers when he left the White House. 

Trump allies have said the former president declassified the documents he had, but classification status of the documents is not a determining factor in some of the potential violations of the law.

Source: TEST FEED1

Students sue Oklahoma Education Department over enforcement of transgender ‘bathroom bill’

Story at a glance


  • Three transgender minors are suing the Oklahoma Education Department and several state education officials over the enforcement of a new law that blocks them from using school facilities that align with their gender identity.

  • Under Oklahoma Senate Bill 615, public schools and public charter schools are required to restrict access to multiple occupancy restrooms and locker rooms based on students’ sex assigned at birth.

  • The lawsuit was filed Tuesday in federal court by Lambda Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the ACLU of Oklahoma.

Three transgender students in Oklahoma are suing the state Department of Education over a controversial law enacted in May that prevents them from using school restrooms or locker rooms consistent with their gender identity.

In a lawsuit filed Tuesday in federal court by Lambda Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the ACLU of Oklahoma, attorneys for transgender students attending Oklahoma City area schools claim Senate Bill 615 violates the U.S. Constitution and Title IX by discriminating on the basis of sex, gender identity and transgender status. 

Under the measure, signed into law by Gov. Kevin Stitt (R) in May, all pre-K through 12th grade public schools and public charter schools in the state are required to restrict the use of multiple occupancy restrooms and changing rooms based on students’ sex assigned at birth.

School boards under the law are charged with creating a disciplinary policy for transgender students who violate the new restriction, and the Oklahoma State Department of Education (OSDE) must penalize schools that do not comply with the law with a 5 percent reduction in state funding.


America is changing faster than ever! Add Changing America to your Facebook or Twitter feed to stay on top of the news.


Tuesday’s lawsuit names OSDE, members of the state Board of Education, four Oklahoma school districts and Oklahoma Superintendent of Public Instruction Joy Hofmeister — the Democratic nominee for governor — as defendants.

Oklahoma Attorney General John O’Connor (R) is also listed as a defendant in the complaint. In a May statement following Stitt’s signature on the measure, O’Connor said he stood ready to defend the new law from any forthcoming legal challenges.

O’Connor’s office said it could not comment on the complaint at this time.

The complaint filed Tuesday alleges the plaintiffs, all of which are transgender minors, will be “irreparably harmed” by the law and requests that the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma issue a preliminary injunction to block its enforcement.

Similar measures restricting public restroom use for transgender people have been blocked by court orders in North Carolina and Tennessee. An Alabama law preventing transgender students from using school facilities that match their gender identity took effect in May.

Proponents for such legislation have argued that it is necessary to protect students and others from predators that may take advantage of trans-inclusive policies. A 2018 study by researchers at the Williams Institute found that those fears are not “empirically grounded.”

“I am a boy, and while living authentically hasn’t always been easy, it’s given me a sense of relief and happiness,” Andy Bridge, one of the plaintiffs in Tuesday’s lawsuit, said in a statement released by his attorneys at Lambda Legal.

According to the lawsuit, Bridge, a 16-year-old senior at Noble High School, used the school’s boys’ restrooms last year without issue. But prior to the start of the current school year, Bridge and his mother were informed by school officials that he would have to use a single-occupancy restroom this year because he is transgender.

If Bridge continues to use the boys’ restroom, he will be subject to disciplinary action, the school’s principal and vice principal told them, according to the complaint.

“Being able to use the boys’ restroom might seem like a small thing to others, but it is a vital step in my transition,” Bridge said Tuesday. “Being barred from using it leaves me singled out and excluded from the rest of my friends and classmates, but also feeling like I’m being told that I’m not worthy of the same respect and dignity as everyone else.”

Source: TEST FEED1

NY House primary runner-up opts against progressive challenge to Dan Goldman in November

New York state Assemblywoman Yuh-Line Niou (D), who finished second in the House primary for New York’s 10th congressional district last month, is opting against a progressive challenge to Dan Goldman, the Democratic nominee for the district.

Niou, who has served in the New York State Assembly since 2017, narrowly lost the Democratic primary to Goldman, an attorney who served as the lead counsel during Former President Trump’s first impeachment trial, by 2.1 percentage points. Days after her defeat she said she was mulling a run for the seat as a member of the Working Families Party.

The progressive Working Families Party in June endorsed Niou in the Democratic primary.

But on Tuesday, Niou announced that she is sitting out the race.

“Enough of the absentee ballots have been counted, and we are conceding the primary. And I will not be on the WFP line for the general,” Niou said in a video posted on Twitter.

She put off formally conceding the race because of outstanding absentee ballots.

“We simply do not have the resources to fight all fights at the same time, and we must protect our democracy now. This starts with keeping insurrectionists from taking control of Congress in November,” she added.

Sochie Nnaemeka, the director of the New York Working Families Party, said the decision to keep Niou off the ballot in the general election was made “after careful deliberation” between the candidate and the party.

“As we approach November, we’ll collectively turn our efforts to defending our democracy against an increasingly extremist GOP. We’re proud of Yuh-Line and know she will continue to be a courageous voice and a beloved leader in the WFP,” Nnaemeka said in a statement.

Both Niou and the Working Families Party took jabs at Goldman, an heir to Levi Strauss & Co. who put millions of his own personal wealth into the race and secured the coveted New York Times endorsement.

And at the end of the primary, progressive candidates in the race appeared to team up against him.

Niou and Rep. Mondaire Jones (D-N.Y.), whose third-place finish will end his time in Congress, campaigned together to try to counter Goldman.

Jones, who currently represents New York’s 17th congressional district, moved into the 10th district after redistricting, which left the latter seat open. Jones decided to move to the 10th district after Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.), the chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, opted to run in a newly drawn district that encompassed a large part of Jones’s old area.

Former New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio (D) was also in the primary for the 10th congressional district but dropped out of the race in July.

Source: TEST FEED1