Tag Archives : Build House

Blumenthal: Midterms will determine how successful Biden will be as a 2024 candidate

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said on Sunday that November’s midterm elections will determine how successful President Biden will be as a candidate in 2024. 

During a joint appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union” alongside Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), moderator Dana Bash asked Blumenthal if Biden is the best candidate for the Democrats in 2024.

“I’m gonna be very blunt and very honest with you,” Blumenthal replied to Bash. “My focus is totally on this November because I am running for reelection.”

“But also I think this November’s gonna determine how successful President Biden is in the next two years and how strong he would be as a candidate.” 

Blumenthal also stressed the need for more Democratic senators to pass Biden’s goals in the next two years on topics such as abortion and inflation, also pointing to the possibility of appointing more Supreme Court justices.

“We are making tremendous progress,” Blumenthal added. “The Inflation Reduction Act is one example. Veterans burn pits legislation, which I helped to lead. Very important.” 

Blumenthal’s remarks came after a 51-50 vote in the Senate on Saturday to advance the Inflation Reduction Act, with Vice President Harris breaking the deadlock.

The proposed legislation would address climate change issues, lower the cost of prescription drugs and reform the tax code.

Blumenthal added that he would support Biden if he decides to run for reelection.

“I will support President Biden,” Blumenthal said. 

“Do you want him to run?” Bash asked

“If he decides he wants to run and I think his decision will be determined by how November ends for the Democratic Party and for senators like myself who are running for reelection.”

Source: TEST FEED1

The gathering political storm in America

A student once asked me, “Is this the most divided we’ve ever been as a country?”

“You know, we did once have a civil war,” I felt compelled to respond. “It’s estimated that three quarters of a million Americans died as a result of the Civil War, many from disease and starvation.

“But,” I added, “this is probably the most divided the country has been since the Civil War.” In fact, half of all Americans say they expect a new civil war “in the next few years.” It won’t be sectional (imagine New York and California at war with Texas and Florida). Nor would it be an economic class war (many working class voters today are conservative Republicans).

It’s a cultural division.

Its origins date back to the 1960s, when the Democrats embraced the civil rights movement and set off a massive voter realignment.

Let me give you my favorite statistic from U.S. political history.

In the 1968 election, Mississippi was Republican Richard Nixon’s worst state: He got less than 14 percent of the vote. George Wallace got over 63 percent. Four years later, in 1972, Mississippi was Nixon’s best state: He got more than 78 percent of the vote. See what happened? Nixon used his “southern strategy” — appealing to white racial backlash voters — to fold the Wallace vote into the Republican vote… where it’s been ever since.

And it’s not just southern whites.

A lot of northern urban ethnic whites — who used to be called “Archie Bunker voters” — were also folded into the GOP.

The result has been to invert the class division in American politics. In the 1930s, class differences were at the heart of politics. It was the culmination of an era of epochal labor strife (sit-down strikes, lockouts, union-busting). The U.S. had the most violent labor history of any industrial country — not the most radical, but the most violent. In those days, the question that worked best to define a voter’s politics would have been, “Do you sympathize more with business or more with labor?”

Beginning in the 1960s, class conflict has given way to cultural conflict.

Today, the questions that work best to define a voter’s politics (besides race) would be, “How often do you go to church?” and “Do you have a college degree?”

Education and religiosity define a voter’s culture — liberal or conservative.

It has long been the case that the wealthier you are, the more likely you are to vote Republican. That is still true, though not as much as it used to be. In the 2020 election, support for Trump came from 44 percent of the voters with family incomes below $50,000 and from 54 percent of those with family incomes of $100,000 or more.

What’s new is “the diploma divide.” Today, the better educated you are, the more likely you are to vote Democratic. White voters with a college degree voted 51 percent for Joe Biden in 2020; non-college whites voted 67 percent for Donald Trump.

What happens among voters who are both wealthy and well educated? They’re cross-pressured. Their conservative interests pull them to vote Republican. Their liberal values pull them to vote Democratic. That’s why, under Trump, Republicans have been losing so many wealthy white suburban voters. He offends their values. To many college-educated Republicans, Donald Trump is an embarrassment.

In a July New York Times-Siena College poll, Trump’s support drops from 58 percent among non-college Republicans to 28 percent among Republicans with a college degree. The split is painfully evident in this year’s Republican primaries between establishment conservatives and MAGA insurgents.

Consider this: In the 2020 election, Biden carried every one of the ten best-educated states in the U.S. One of them is Virginia, the only southern state that voted for Biden. Trump carried eight of the ten least-educated states. The exceptions: New Mexico and Nevada, which have large Latino populations. The least-educated state is — surprise! — not Mississippi: It’s West Virginia, a state that’s 94 percent white… and voted 69 percent for Donald Trump.

Religion has also become a critical source of division — not what faith you belong to, but how religious you are. Regular churchgoers vote much more Republican than non-churchgoers, at least among whites. Trump’s strongest support comes from white evangelicals.

I once asked a religious right activist why a man like Donald Trump, who has few evident religious convictions, was so popular with religious voters.

“Because he delivers,” he answered.

“What has he delivered?” I asked.

His response: “What we have been praying for for 50 years: the Supreme Court of the United States.”

Differences based on religion, race and education are not simply differences of interest, like business versus labor. They are differences of values and identity. Differences of interest can be negotiated and compromised. Differences of values and identity cannot.

In segregated southern schools like the ones I attended, it used to be fashionable to teach that the Civil War was really fought over tariffs — i.e., a conflict of interests (the high-tariff industrializing North against the low-tariff agricultural South). That was nonsense, of course. The real issue was slavery, a conflict of values. Compromise over slavery, like the one famously embedded in the original U.S. Constitution, was ridiculous.

Conflicts over identity and values today are no less intractable.

Bill Schneider is an emeritus professor at the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University and author of “Standoff: How America Became Ungovernable” (Simon & Schuster).

Source: TEST FEED1

Graham slams Democrats' climate, tax, health bill: 'This is gonna make everything worse'

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said on Sunday that he will not support the Democrats’ landmark climate, tax, and health legislation, adding that the bill will “make everything worse.” 

During an joint appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union” alongside fellow lawmaker Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Graham told moderator Dana Bash that he’s not going to vote for the Inflation Reduction Act, saying that it will not help address the ongoing inflation problem in the country. 

“This is gonna make everything worse. I voted for the bipartisan infrastructure bill, voted for gun legislation,” Graham told Bash. “I’m not gonna vote for this.” 

“And the bottom line, it’s not going to help inflation is gonna make everything worse,” Graham added. 

Graham also dismissed estimates that the package will reduce the deficit. 

“The truth is … the ObamaCare subsidies go away after three years. We all know they’re not going to go away. So if they stayed in place for 10 years, it would add $280 billion to the deficit,” Graham said. “So it’s a gimmick.” 

“This is gonna make everything worse and not one Republicans can vote for it.” 

Graham’s remarks came after a 51-50 vote in the Senate on Saturday to advance the legislation, with Vice President Harris breaking the deadlock. 

The proposed legislation would reform address climate change issues, lower the cost of prescription drugs and reform the tax code.

Source: TEST FEED1

Coons: Senate Democrats have 'stayed unified' on reconciliation bill

Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) on Sunday said he has “no doubt at all” that the Inflation Reduction Act will pass as Democratic senators continue to kill off amendments to the bill as part of an around-the-clock series of votes known as a vote-a-rama.

During an appearance on ABC’s “This Week,” Coons said that Senate Democrats have “stayed unified” all night to fight off Republican efforts to strike down the bill.

“The Democrats in our Senate caucus have stayed unified throughout the night,” he said. “Every single amendment vote of the dozens we’ve taken so far we’ve defeated Republican efforts to knock down this important, even landmark piece of legislation that will reduce prescription drug prices, reduce health care costs, reduce the deficit and make a big down payment on combatting climate change.”

When asked by host George Stephanopoulos whether it is fair to call it the Inflation Reduction Act, noting that Congressional Budget Office says the bill’s going to have a negligible effect on inflation this year, Coons said it would reduce costs.

“This is going to reduce the costs that hit American families in their pocketbook,” he said. “Prescription drug costs, health care costs, energy costs. It’s going to make for a more secure and stable and cleaner and more affordable future for American families.”

Coons said that while the country may not see huge impacts on inflation in the first or second year, Treasury secretaries who have served both party administrations support the bill and that the AARP confirmed that it would impact prescription drug prices.

“It may take a year or more,” he said. “But, look, George, we’ve seen gas prices come down week after week after week for the last five weeks in a row…Yes, inflation is higher than it should be, but we just got a robust jobs number, more than 500,000 jobs created in this past month. Unemployment’s the lowest it’s been in my lifetime. And I think we’ve got a strong economy, a strong recovery underway.”

The Senate will continue its vote-a-rama toward midday Sunday.

Source: TEST FEED1

South Korea’s Danuri mission shows the return to the moon is international

The most recent mission to the moon was launched by South Korea, a signatory to the Artemis Accords. The mission is called Danuri, or Korea Pathfinder Lunar Orbiter. Danuri, which is a combination of the Korean words “dai” meaning moon and “nuri” meaning enjoy, is South Korea’s first deep-space mission. It is another example of the growing international nature of space exploration.

The Danuri was launched on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket. The Falcon 9, because of its reusability, has become so affordable that several entities, including smaller countries like South Korea, can now explore space. South Korea has been a technologically advanced country for decades and can now add deep space travel to its portfolio. The Korea Aerospace Research Institute (KARI) has already launched numerous satellites into Earth orbit and is developing its own line of launch vehicles, including the KSLV-1 and the KSKV-2.

NASA is a partner in the South Korean moon mission. The American space agency provides the communications and navigation services of its deep-space networks and an instrument called ShadowCam.

ShadowCam is a more advanced version of the Narrow Angle Camera that was carried on board the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. The instrument is designed to detect ice in the permanently shadowed craters at the lunar poles. The ice will be a fuel resource for future lunar explorers.

Space exploration used to be a tool of superpower competition. It still is, to a certain extent, as China increasingly becomes an opponent to the United States and its allies. However, because of a Reagan administration strategy, the proposal of a space station with international partners, NASA’s Artemis return to the moon program is also driven as much if not more by international cooperation.

By becoming a partner in the Danuri mission, NASA is pursuing a strategy developed by Former Associate Administrator for Space Policy and Partnerships Mike Gold during the Trump administration.  Gold was the father of the Artemis Accords. By forming international partnerships for the Artemis program. NASA is enhancing American soft political power. Most countries in the world will realize that participation in returning to the moon is one of the perks of being America’s friend. The scientific and engineering expertise of many nations will be occupied with returning humans to the moon, this time to stay.

If all goes well, Danuri will enter a polar orbit around the moon by the middle of December. It will spend at least a year taking measurements of the lunar surface, seeking possible landing sites for future missions, including crewed missions under the Artemis program.

KARI already plans a second lunar mission, which will include another orbiter as well as a lander and a rover, by 2030. The mission is planned to be launched on a Korean domestically built rocket, the KSLV-2.

Danuri is the second lunar mission to launch in 2022, the first being the recent NASA CAPSTONE mission. Future missions include Intuitive Machines’ Nova-C and Astrobotics’ Peregrine under the Commercial Lunar Payload Services program as well as international missions such as Japan’s Hakuto-R and India’s Chandrayaan-3, scheduled for late 2022 or early 2023. Japan is a signatory of the Artemis Accords. So far, India has yet to sign the international agreement governing activities on the lunar surface.

These and other uncrewed missions are leading to the Artemis crewed missions to the moon. Artemis-1, which will not carry a crew, is slated to launch on Aug. 29. Artemis-2, which will carry four astronauts, including a Canadian, around the moon is scheduled for 2024. The first crewed lunar landing, Artemis-3, will depart for the moon’s surface as early as 2025.

The Apollo lunar missions carried Americans to the moon 53 years ago. The Artemis expeditions will certainly be international in nature, crewed not just by Americans, but by astronauts from many nations. Artemis will be the greatest undertaking by an alliance of countries that does not involve waging war.

America landed on the moon first on July 20, 1969, earning for itself everlasting glory in the Cold War against the Soviet Union as well as a bounty of science. The civilized world will return to the moon in three or so years, earning not just glory and science, but the economic wealth Earth’s nearest neighbor promise. In a world beset by war and political strife, returning to the moon is surely a good thing.

Mark R. Whittington is the author of space exploration studies “Why is It So Hard to Go Back to the Moon?” as well as “The Moon, Mars and Beyond,” and “Why is America Going Back to the Moon?” He blogs at Curmudgeons Corner.

Source: TEST FEED1

The dangers of Nancy Pelosi’s Taiwan trip

The decision by House Speaker Pelosi (D-Calif.) to visit Taiwan was, as Thomas Friedman wrote earlier this week, “utterly reckless, dangerous and irresponsible.”

Pelosi’s trip neither improved Taiwan’s security nor strengthened global democracy — in fact, it does the opposite. The trip raises fears of conflict in the region by needlessly provoking China, and it directly undermines the West’s goals in Ukraine by bringing Beijing and Moscow closer together.

Moreover, the Speaker’s decision was politically unwise, uncharacteristically so. By making the trip, Pelosi publicly thumbed her nose at the Biden administration — which repeatedly indicated its desire for her not to visit Taiwan — at a time when President Biden is already struggling to present himself as a strong, capable commander in chief.

Simply put, Speaker Pelosi should have known better.

Given the United States’ and China’s fragile and, at times, antagonistic relationship, it was clear before Pelosi made the trip that China would use her visit as a pretext to take provocative military action in the region in retaliation.

In response to Pelosi’s visit, China launched live-fire military drills, firing intense barrages of ballistic missiles and artillery off Taiwan’s coast. This forced commercial flights and ships to change course and amounted to what the Taiwanese military has called “an air and sea blockade of Taiwan.”

On Friday, China also announced that it would cease cooperation with the United States on numerous policy areas, including military relations, defense maritime safety and climate change.

Moreover, by antagonizing China for senseless self-promotion, Pelosi undoubtedly will bring Beijing and Moscow closer, directly undermining the West’s efforts to isolate Russia and aid Ukraine amid the ongoing war.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has facilitated an axis of authoritarianism which includes Russia and China as well as Iran. These authoritarian countries have made known their intentions to bring down the Western-led liberal world order that has prevailed since the end of World War II. The timing of Pelosi’s decision to visit Taiwan only strengthens this unholy alliance.

As tensions between the United States and China intensify, Moscow is already seizing on the opportunity to deepen its relationship with Beijing. At some point, Putin could seek even more Chinese support for the war in Ukraine, possibly including military support, something China has so far avoided providing.

Leading up to Speaker Pelosi’s visit, the Kremlin reprimanded the United States and reiterated its support for China in a statement: “We want to emphasize once again that we are absolutely in solidarity with China … Washington is bringing destabilization to the world.”

Thus far, the Biden administration has been able to limit China’s support for Russia by threatening that China would lose access to its most important trading partners — the United States and Western Europe — should Beijing provide military aid to Moscow. That being said, Russia has been able to keep its economy alive by sending oil and gas to China, as well as to India and other European countries that have not yet cut off Russian supplies. Pelosi’s trip further undercuts the United States’ goal of squeezing Russia’s energy sector, by bolstering China’s and Russia’s economic ties.

And, given that our European allies are bearing the brunt of Russia’s weaponization of energy exports, it is inconceivable that these countries would readily join the U.S. in a conflict with China — or increase their efforts to counter Russia, which is needed at this stalemate phase of the war — that was triggered by Pelosi’s self-serving visit to Taiwan.

From a political perspective, Pelosi’s decision to make the trip was surprisingly reckless for someone who is otherwise savvy about domestic politics. By undercutting the administration’s wishes, she is doing harm to President Biden at a time when Democrats should be focused on boosting the public’s confidence in the president’s ability to lead on the international stage.

Indeed, just 35 percent of Americans — including just 24 percent of independents — approve of President Biden’s handling of foreign policy, per recent YouGov polling. Now, instead of celebrating President Biden’s commendable decision to kill Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, the administration has been dealing with a communications crisis and trying to explain why Pelosi was emboldened to act against President Biden’s wishes. According to reporting by Bloomberg, the White House is fuming at Pelosi for inflaming tensions with China and embarrassing the president.

Pelosi’s trip is a gift to Republicans and a blow to Democrats’ efforts to stem their losses in the midterm elections. Republicans have seized on it to underscore the Democratic leadership’s dysfunction and to bash the administration’s policies vis-à-vis China.

It is true that Pelosi is not the first Speaker of the House to visit Taiwan — Newt Gingrich did so in 1997. Yet China did not pose such an intense economic and military threat to the United States in the late ’90s, and then-Speaker Gingrich was not acting against the wishes of a president from his own party.

This is not to say that the U.S. should abandon Taiwan. Defending Taiwan against Chinese aggression is vital to safeguarding and preserving democracy globally.

However, Pelosi’s visit did nothing to help achieve this end. It was a reckless decision, both politically and practically.

Douglas E. Schoen is a political consultant who served as an adviser to former President Clinton and to the 2020 presidential campaign of Michael Bloomberg. He is the author of “The End of Democracy? Russia and China on the Rise and America in Retreat.” 

Source: TEST FEED1

2 in 3 in new poll say US economy getting worse

Almost 70 percent of Americans said in a new poll that they believe that the U.S. economy is getting worse.

The ABC News/Ipsos poll found that 69 percent of respondents said that they think the U.S. economy is getting worse, compared to 12 percent who said that it is getting better. 

Eighteen percent of those surveyed believe that the U.S. economy has remained the same.

Thirty-four percent of respondents, meanwhile, said they approve of President Biden’s handling of gas prices, a percentage that is up 7 points from a similar poll published in June. 

Forty-nine percent of respondents also said they will favor a candidate who supports keeping abortions legal, while 27 percent of respondents said they will support a candidate who supports limiting abortion access. Twenty-two percent of those surveyed said that they don’t care about their preferred candidate’s stance on abortions. 

And 75 percent of Republican respondents said they are very enthusiastic about voting in the midterm elections, while 68 percent of Democrats agreed as did 49 percent of independents.

The new ABC News/Ipsos poll was conducted from August 5 to August 6 with a total of 665 respondents participating in the survey. The poll’s margin of error is 4.2 percentage points.

Source: TEST FEED1

DeSantis disses ‘The View.’ Conservatives should follow his lead

The invitation was a kind one: An ABC News program reached out to a popular Florida governor, asking him to come on its signature panel show, “The View.” 

“I hope you’re having a good summer. I am reaching out to invite Gov. Ron DeSantis to be our special guest on THE VIEW next season, which starts Sept. 6,” wrote supervising talent producer Todd Polkes recently. “We would be honored to have him join us in studio sometime in the Fall.”

A DeSantis appearance on “The View” undoubtedly would be one of the program’s highest-rated segments of the year, if not the highest. The Republican governor is seen as a clear frontrunner for his party’s presidential nomination if Donald Trump does not run. And even if the 45th president does run, poll after poll on state levels shows DeSantis either about even with or slightly ahead of Trump in a head-to-head matchup, including in the key battlegrounds of Florida, Michigan and New Hampshire. 

In terms of active GOP candidates, DeSantis is by far the bigger catch from the right for the liberal program to land. 

But the governor, unlike many others in the party, is exceptionally shrewd when it comes to handling the media, if we can fairly call “The View” that, despite it operating under the ABC News umbrella. We witnessed this during the media’s shameful coverage of the passing of the Florida Parental Rights in Education Act, which many news outlets dubbed the “Don’t Say Gay” bill despite the word “gay” not appearing in the bill once. 

“Does it say that in the bill?” DeSantis retorted to a reporter who referenced the bill as “Don’t Say Gay” during a press conference. “I’m asking what’s in the bill because you are pushing false narratives. It doesn’t matter what critics say. It says ‘classroom instruction on sexual identity and gender orientation,’” the governor continued. “The idea that you wouldn’t be honest about that and tell people what it actually says, it’s why people don’t trust people like you, because you peddle false narratives.”

And that’s correct: The bill applies to kids in kindergarten through second grade being taught sexual instruction. Polls in Florida show a solid majority of voters agree with the bill despite the false narrative from many local and national outlets.

So should DeSantis, who clearly has the ability to spar with hostile journalists, appear on “The View,” and would he be asked tough but fair questions presented in a professional manner? 

A look at past comments by the program’s co-hosts suggests that would not happen. And so, in responding to the invite, DeSantis’s press office respectfully declined while pointing out the unhinged, vitriolic comments made by the hosts that go well beyond disagreement on policy. 

The program’s most senior host, Joy Behar, in an example included in the DeSantis press office response, once called him “a negligent, homicidal sociopath” who was “risking lives of children, children’s parents, their grandparents, anyone they may come into contact with, so he can appeal to his white supremacist base.” 

The program’s part-time “conservative,” Ana Navarro, who has said she voted for DeSantis’s 2018 gubernatorial opponent, Democrat Andrew Gillum, as well as Joe Biden in 2020, once called the governor “anti-Black.” Another co-host, Sunny Hostin, has referred to the governor as “DeathSantis” and a “fascist” and a “bigot.”

“If you start coming after Black people, what comes next, right? Of course the LGBTQ+ community, and then women, and then other marginalized groups,” Hostin also alleged. 

Add it all up, and here you have three hosts accusing a sitting governor – who appears to be coasting to reelection in a state that is almost even in terms of registered Democrats versus Republicans – of being a homicidal maniac targeting kids, parents and grandparents to appeal to white supremacists while going after Black people.

On what planet does anyone believe it’s a wise idea for DeSantis or any conservative outside of #NeverTrumpers to ever appear with those who seek, not a spirited conversation on the big issues of the day (inflation, energy, crime or border policy), but simply to make themselves the story in their attempts to humiliate and embarrass a guest because of his ideology?

On cue, DeSantis is being accused of ducking “tough but respectful questions.” 

Per the Poynter Institute, which bills itself as “a nonprofit media institute and newsroom that provides fact-checking, media literacy and journalism ethics training to citizens and journalists”: 

“It would be nice to think DeSantis could sit down and face some tough but respectful questions instead of ducking some pushback on his beliefs. And if he does have designs on national politics, he absolutely should face some pertinent questions and be able to confidently defend his positions — regardless of who is asking the questions.”

Again, who believes the questions would be “respectful” given the past comments made? It’s completely conceivable to see Behar or Hostin asking questions like “Governor, why are you putting your political ambitions ahead of the lives of children?” or “Governor, your supporters also support the KKK. Will you denounce them?” 

It’s one thing for DeSantis to go on real news programs such as “Special Report”on Fox News or “Face The Nation” on CBS or “World News Tonight” on ABC. Such interviews would entail challenging questions, but they would be done professionally and without the anchor or host playing to applause from a one-sided studio audience. And if the governor performed well in those situations, his numbers likely would go higher nationally, if challenging Trump for the nomination is his goal. 

For his part, DeSantis revealed on Thursday that he wasn’t aware that his staff had declined the invitation earlier in the week but was in agreement on their decision. “I didn’t know that that had been declined until I saw it in the news, because I think my staff knows better than to even bring that to me. I don’t need to be involved with some of the partisan corporate media,” he told Fox News. 

DeSantis could have appeared and landed some rhetorical blows in a hostile environment. But it would undoubtedly be personal and acrimonious if the precedent from Behar, Hostin and Navarro is any indication. 

There’s little doubt the governor’s goal is to be president one day. And one way to achieve that is by being above rolling around in the media mud. 

Joe Concha is a media and politics columnist.

Source: TEST FEED1

'Come on, Bernie': Democrats clash on Senate floor over Sanders proposal

Tensions simmered on the Senate floor early Sunday as members clashed during an overnight voting marathon over a proposal offered by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to restore the party’s expanded child tax credit.

Sanders offered an amendment to revive the expanded credit, which lapsed late last year, as part of Democrats’ sprawling tax, health care and climate bill, dubbed the Inflation Reduction Act. But the Vermont independent was the only one to support the revision, as it ultimately failed in a 1-97 vote.

The vote came as the Senate hunkered down for an hours-long vote-a-rama, one of the last, key hurdles Democrats have to clear to secure passage for their mammoth bill. During the often grueling, drawn-out voting session, any senator has the chance to force a floor vote on amendment.

In floor remarks ahead of the vote on Sunday, Sanders said the amendment sought to bring back a temporary expansion to the credit that was passed in the American Rescue Plan, a sweeping coronavirus relief package Democrats passed last year.

“Pathetically, the United States has the highest child poverty rate of almost any major country on Earth, and it is especially high among young people of color,” Sanders said. “This is the wealthiest nation on Earth, we should not have the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any country.”

“The American Rescue Plan included a $300 a month child tax credit which ended up lowering the child poverty rate in America by over 40 percent,” Sanders added, noting his amendment would restore the expanded for four years and “be fully paid for by restoring the top corporate tax rate from 21 percent to 28 percent.”

The move by Sanders drew immediate pushback from Democrats ahead of the amendment vote, who expressed support for the child tax credit provision by itself but emphasized that they could not support the change in an effort to protect final passage on the full package.

 “Sen. Sanders is right, the child tax credit is one of the most important things this body did. It brought down the child poverty rate by 40 percent almost immediately,” said Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), who has long advocated for a renewal of the expanded credit. But he urged colleagues against voting for the amendment to avoid bringing “the bill down.” 

Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) sounded a similar note, vowing to work with his colleagues on advancing the provision but arguing that it should not be moved in the climate, taxes and health care bill.

“We have to fight to make this enhanced child tax credit permanent and that’s what I will do with people on both sides of the aisle. But this does not advance that cause because we could lose the underlying bill and therefore, we should vote against the amendment,” the Colorado Democrat said.

But Sanders appeared unsatisfied with his colleagues’ positions. He shot back at Brown, asking why passing the amendment or allowing 48 Democrats to vote for it would tank the bill.

The Ohio Democrat pointed to the tenuous nature of passing legislation through budget reconciliation in an evenly split Senate, which is requiring all Democrats to sign on to the bill for it to clear the chamber. If the amendment were added to the bill, it could put final passage in jeopardy by dissuading a member from supporting the overall legislation.

Ahead of the weekend’s marathon debate, a number of Democrats vowed to vote against any amendments brought to the floor — even if they agree with the premise of the change — to preserve its chances of the bill passing.

“The arrangement in this is, all 50 Democrats support this. We know every single Republican has voted against the child tax credit not once last March but twice, but we know that this is a fragile arrangement and we’ve got to pass it, as much as I’d like to do it, as would Sen. Bennet,” Brown said.

At the end of his remarks, the senator could be heard saying, “Come on, Bernie.”

The amendment was one of several ambitious proposals Sanders brought up early Sunday, all of which were overwhelmingly defeated. He brought them up hours after criticizing Democrats’ Inflation Reduction Act for not going far enough on key issues like health care, child care and housing.

Sanders also offered measures aimed at ensuring Medicare pays no more for prescription drugs than the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and expanding Medicare coverage to include dental, oral, hearing and vision benefits as potential changes to the package.

The VA-related revision failed in a vote of 1-99, with Sanders being the sole member who voted in favor. The Medicare expansion change Sanders offered failed 3-97, after Sens. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), who is facing a tough reelection campaign in November, and Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) joined the Vermont progressive in voting for it.

Sanders also introduced an amendment to establish a Civilian Climate Corps, though the amendment failed in a 1-98 vote

The amendments from Sanders came as no surprise, as the senator has repeatedly voiced frustration with the Inflation Reduction Act, which is drastically scaled down from the Democrats’ earlier Build Back Better Act (BBB) that the Vermont senator pushed hard to pass last year.

Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) announced a deal with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) on the smaller bill in late July, months after talks around the larger plan fell apart due to opposition from the West Virginia centrist.

In remarks ahead of the vote-a-rama on Saturday, Sanders aired a list of complaints with the slimmed-down bill, which he said “does not address the reality that we have more income and wealth inequality today than at any time in the last hundred years.”

“This bill does nothing to address the systemic dysfunctionality of the American health care system,” he also said, while also criticizing the bill for not doing more to address the nation’s child poverty rates or the “major housing crisis.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Is there nothing extreme about Doug Mastriano? Nothing at all?

“There’s nothing extreme about me,” says Doug Mastriano, state senator from Pennsylvania and Republican nominee for governor. This spring and summer, Mastriano has doubled down on beliefs and behavior that not long ago would have been deemed disqualifying for any major party candidate. And Pennsylvania’s most powerful and prominent Republican politicians are sticking with him — or continuing to stare at their shoelaces.

Mastriano emerged from obscurity to become the “GOP legislator most loyal to Trump.” Between November 2020 and Jan. 6, 2021, he posted election disinformation on his Facebook page more than 100 times. Biden’s win, Mastriano claimed, was “statistically impossible.” He advocated decertifying Dominion voting machines and requiring all citizens in the state to re-register to vote. Mastriano introduced a bill in the state senate rejecting the certification of Pennsylvania’s presidential election results. He asserted that Vice President Mike Pence should not accept Electoral College tallies. Mastriano used campaign funds to charter buses to take Trump supporters to Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6 and attended the rally himself. He continues to view Joe Biden as an illegitimate president.

Mastriano has shared more than 50 tweets with the QAnon hashtag, including messages and memes promoting unfounded and debunked allegations that a pedophilia ring operated out of a pizza parlor in Washington, D.C., and Muslim terrorists burned down Notre Dame Cathedral in 2015. He posted a video claiming that COVID-19 is a “government sponsored virus” and “vaccines kill and cause autism.” Mastriano shared a meme using photographic symbols indicating that “Islam wants to kill” people of other faiths. He has compared the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade (1973) decision to the Holocaust. He ridicules climate change as “fake science.” Mastriano believes homosexuality is “aberrant sexual conduct,” opposes gay marriage, opposes allowing gays to serve in the U.S. military, and opposes the right of gay couples to adopt children.

In April 2022, Mastriano spoke at a “Patriots Arise for God and Country” gathering in Gettysburg, Pa., hosted by two QAnon activists. The event featured videos declaring that the attack on the World Trade Center was “a false flag” and affirming that a “great awakening” would soon “expose ritual child sacrifice” and “a global satanic blood cult.” After predicting he would be elected governor (“My God will make it so”), Mastriano stated that the United States was a Christian nation and mocked “the myth of the separation of church and state.” Asked about QAnon’s prominent role at the event, he replied, “So what?”

In July, investigative journalists discovered that Mastriano’s campaign paid “consulting” fees to Gab, a white nationalist web site. Its founder and CEO, Andrew Torba, boasted that neither he nor Mastriano conduct interviews with reporters from news outlets that are not Christian. “This is an explicitly Christian movement because this is an explicitly Christian country,” Torba asserted. In a video, Torba said, “We’re not bending to the knee of the 2 percent anymore,” an apparent reference to Jews. “We’re taking back our country. We’re taking back our government. So, deal with it.” Mastriano has publicly praised Torba for “giving us a platform for free speech… Thank God for what you’ve done.”

In response to the firestorm that erupted following these revelations, Mastriano released a statement indicating that he rejects anti-Semitism “in any form” and that Torba “doesn’t speak for me or my campaign.” He did not repudiate Torba or Gab. Instead, Mastriano blamed the controversy on the media and Democrats.

Confronted with Mastriano’s words and deeds, Republican politicians in the Keystone State have circled the wagons. Mastriano “has my full support,” said Kim Ward, majority leader of the state senate. Andy Reilly, chair of the Delaware County GOP and a member of the Republican National Committee, explained, “When you play team sports, you learn what being part of the team means … No matter how you slice it,” he said, Mastriano’s philosophy “is much better” than his Democratic opponent’s, Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro.

Asked about Mastriano’s Gabfest, retiring U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey told reporters, “I don’t have anything to say about it.”

Mum’s the word as well for Dr. Mehmet Oz, the GOP candidate to replace Toomey. A few months ago, it’s worth noting, Oz denounced the “Islamophobic and homophobic” remarks of Kathy Barnette, one of his rivals in the Republican primary. “It’s reprehensible that she would tweet out something that is defamatory to an entire religion,” Oz proclaimed. “This state was built on religious freedom. I’m proud as a Pennsylvanian to uphold the founding beliefs that every faith has its merits.”

MAGA zealots and their enablers, who now control the GOP “establishment,” have been quick to censure colleagues with impeccable conservative credentials who failed to challenge the 2020 presidential election results; voted to impeach Donald Trump; or cooperated with the House of Representatives Select Committee on Jan. 6.

No matter how you slice it, by embracing the election deniers, conspiracy promoters, and bigots who are emerging — with Doug Mastriano — as the faces and future of the GOP, they can no longer legitimately claim to be heirs of the party of Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, and Ronald Reagan.

Glenn C. Altschuler is the Thomas and Dorothy Litwin Professor of American Studies at Cornell University. He is the co-author (with Stuart Blumin) of “Rude Republic: Americans and Their Politics in the Nineteenth Century.”

Source: TEST FEED1