Tag Archives : Build House

Sinema leaves Democrats in suspense

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) has Democrats and Republicans on the edge of their seats.

With the clock ticking down to the August recess, Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) desperately wants to pass a bill that would tackle climate change and make significant changes to the tax code. But Schumer doesn’t have the votes — at least not yet.

Schumer says he’s working on Sinema and hopes she’ll be a “yes” on the motion to proceed to the measure, but the Arizona centrist hasn’t said whether she backs it. 

“We’re in touch with Sen. Sinema, we’re in touch with all of the members, and we’re hopeful — I’m very hopeful — we’re all going to stay united and pass this bill,” he said Tuesday afternoon.  

Schumer unveiled the tax and climate deal he struck with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) on July 27 after more than a week of secret negotiations. The bill would implement a 15 percent minimum tax on wealthy corporations and enact new energy and climate programs.

Seven days later, Senate Democrats still don’t know where Sinema stands. Her office says she is reviewing the legislation and waiting for the Senate parliamentarian’s review of the text. 

That means senators may not know how Sinema will vote until they bring the more than 700-page bill to the floor on Thursday or Friday.  

A Democratic senator who attended a virtual meeting of the caucus Tuesday said Sinema didn’t speak up about the bill at the meeting.

Republicans think there’s a good chance that Sinema may derail the legislation.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) slammed the deal as “terrible.”

“I would say to our friend Joe Manchin, he made a terrible deal, a terrible deal. How he can defend this from a West Virginia point of view or think of it as a centrist kind of agreement is astonishing,” he said. 

Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) believes Sinema will stick to her moderate principles. 

“I always have faith in her. I don’t know how it will come out,” he said. “I have great faith she’s going to do what she feels is right. She’s more convicted than she is transactional.” 

He predicted the climate and tax provisions in the bill will become a major issue in the midterm elections if they are seen as fueling inflation or dampening corporate investment. 

Sinema, who has repeatedly angered progressives in this Congress, will likely face a primary challenge no matter how she votes on the Schumer-Manchin bill.

As the uncertainty builds, Manchin is waging a charm offensive to win over Sinema after he left her out of the secret negotiations with Schumer. 

Manchin and Sinema worked together on last year’s bipartisan infrastructure bill and have stood together to oppose efforts by liberal colleagues to change the Senate’s filibuster rule. 

But now their relationship is being tested after Manchin cut a deal with Schumer to reform the tax code and spend $369 billion on new energy security and climate change programs. News of the agreement caught Sinema and just about everyone else in Washington by surprise.  

Manchin left Sinema a message on Monday in hopes of talking to her and explaining why he struck the deal and why she should support it. He tried to catch her on the floor for a conversation during the Monday evening vote, but without success. 

Manchin finally tracked down his colleague on Tuesday when she was scheduled to preside over the floor, a duty routinely assigned to more-junior members of the upper chamber. 

Television cameras caught Manchin kneeling on the chamber’s blue carpet next to the presiding officer’s desk, seemingly trying to cajole Sinema.

Democrats still don’t know whether Sinema will vote for the bill after Manchin insisted on adding a provision to close the carried interest tax loophole. 

The carried interest tax loophole allows asset managers to use a favorable tax rate on income. A proposal to close it was left out of last year’s House tax reform package after Sinema opposed it. 

Asked if she had spoken to Sinema or felt concerned that the Arizona senator might “tank” the deal, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said: “I’m not talking about private conversations. It will take 50 votes to get it through.”

All Republicans are expected to reject the bill, meaning Democrats cannot afford one defection.

Manchin provided little detail when asked how his talk with Sinema went. 

“We had a nice time. We had a nice time. Next?” Manchin said tersely, looking to change the subject when pressed by reporters Tuesday afternoon. 

Recognizing that Sinema could scuttle his deal with Schumer if she votes “no,” Manchin told reporters Tuesday that he’s doing his best to explain to her why he cut the deal and why it makes good sense for the country. 

He also signaled that he’s open to considering any changes she might propose.  

“We’re exchanging texts back and forth,” he said. She’s “extremely bright, she works hard, she makes good decisions based on facts. I’m reliant on that.”

Manchin said he and Schumer are “working with all the caucus” to get buy-in from all 50 members of the Democratic caucus. 

“We’re just basically exchanging back and forth, whatever I have that she hasn’t seen. And our staffs are working together very closely,” he said, adding he’s also exchanging materials relevant to the bill with other Democratic and Republican senators. 

Asked if he would be willing to change the bill’s carried interest provision, Manchin responded: “Everyone is still talking.” 

Manchin on Tuesday defended his push to close the loophole that allows money managers to pay capital gains tax rates on income they collect from advising on profitable investments. 

He told reporters last week that he was “adamant” about including it in the budget reconciliation package. 

Asked whether Sinema is upset that she didn’t get looped in to last week’s secret talks, Manchin said he didn’t loop anyone else in to the private discussions with Schumer because he didn’t want to disappoint any of his colleagues by getting their hopes up just in case the talks fell apart again. 

“She’s my dear friend,” he said. “But why bring anyone in and all their aspirations get high and the drama we go through and it doesn’t work out?

“I wasn’t really sure” a deal could be reached, he said. “I’m not in control of the timing” of the announcement of the deal, “Sen. Schumer is in control of the timing.”

But Manchin rejected the notion that Sinema or any other senator has reason to be upset because he negotiated the climate and tax deal with Schumer in secret. 

“People getting mad because they think this is some kind of orchestrated coup against them is just so wrong,” he added.

Source: TEST FEED1

GOP targets Sinema while going all out to block Democratic bill

Senate Republicans say they’re planning to pull out all the stops to deal some pain to Democrats as the majority party gets set to move a sweeping tax reform bill through the chamber and to the House and President Biden.

Republicans are strategizing and laying the groundwork to make things as difficult for Democrats as possible, and they are reaching out to Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), who has yet to back the deal.

Democrats are using a special budget process to get around a GOP filibuster, and cannot afford a single defection in their ranks.

“This bill shouldn’t pass and become law. It’s going to cause a lot of pain for the American people,” Sen. John Barrasso (Wyo.), the No. 3 Republican in the upper chamber, told The Hill on Tuesday while hinting at the GOP efforts to slow things down. “I don’t care about what pain it may cause members of the Democratic Party.”

Republican leaders are anticipating filing hundreds of amendments to the measure, known as the Inflation Reduction Act. The amendments will touch on immigration, health care and taxes as the Senate buckles up for a marathon voting session known as a vote-a-rama in the days ahead.

The vote-a-rama is just one of several hurdles that Senate Democrats must clear to use the complex budget reconciliation process to bypass a filibuster.

During the typically lengthy procedure, the minority is permitted to offer amendments to the legislation before leaders bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote. This will allow Republicans to make last-minute changes to the partisan plan, if any of the amendments are approved. They can also make Democrats take tough political votes.

“The last time we did reconciliation, I think there were over 1,000 amendments filed,” said Sen. Roy Blunt (Mo.), a member of GOP leadership, though he added senators “voted on about 45” during the session. The vote-a-rama could last until well after midnight depending on how late senators begin the voting marathon.

“We’re going to try and walk through the amendment process. Get as many votes on amendments that make it more difficult for Democrats to be for it in the end,” said Sen. John Thune (S.D.), the second-ranking Republican in the Senate.

Many Republican senators have kept their cards close about what amendments they plan to introduce, pending any potential changes to the bill that will be made while it undergoes review by the Senate parliamentarian, who decides which parts of the measure comply with budget reconciliation rules.

During the review process, Republicans also have a chance to make objections to parts of the legislation. Leaders are first awaiting figures from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

Among the proposals packed into the 700-plus-page bill announced by Democrats last week are provisions imposing a 15 percent minimum tax on corporations with profits exceeding $1 billion, a funding boost for the IRS to beef up hiring and enforcement of tax laws and language aimed at closing the so-called carried interest loophole.

The bill also includes language aimed at lowering drug prices by allowing Medicare to negotiate the cost of some prescription drugs, as well as proposed investments in clean energy.

Democrats say the bill would raise $739 billion in revenue, citing estimates from CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation. The bill would spend an estimated $433 billion on party-backed priorities in energy security, climate and health care.

Democrats say the bill would help bring down the country’s deficit by $300 billion, and are casting the legislation as an effort to reduce inflation.

But as Democrats plow forward with the plan, Republicans have been on offense, arguing the bill will contribute to higher taxes and add to inflation, as rising prices have surged to the top of voters’ minds in recent months.

“If you look at all the analysis that’s been done, the distributional analysis and everything else shows that this hits a lot of lower-income Americans, contrary to what the Democrats have said,” Thune charged on Monday.

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) said she plans to introduce amendments, adding she’s specifically focused on climate issues that could be “extremely hurtful” to her state.

Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) raised concerns about tax pieces in the plan he said could diminish part of former President Trump’s signature tax law dealing with bonus depreciation for manufacturers.

“A lot of companies have used it as increased investment,” Portman said. “This could go the other way and say you have to depreciate it over a long period of time. So, I’ll probably offer something along those lines if others don’t.”

Democrats say they’re prepared for what Republicans have in store, though there has been some anxiety on their own side of the aisle, as Sinema leaves her colleagues guessing where she stands on tax reform proposals.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), who helped craft the bill along with Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), has said he is reaching out to Sinema amid concerns about her support for the overall bill.

But Republicans are pitching her too.

“We’re going to argue to her, and everybody else for that matter, that it’s just that this is a bad time with inflation and a wobbly economy to be raising taxes,” Thune said.

Source: TEST FEED1

Strike on 9/11 al Qaeda leader highlights fallout from Afghan withdrawal

A U.S. drone strike that killed al Qaeda’s leader has underscored both the capabilities and the consequences of ending the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan nearly one year ago.President Biden and his team hailed the drone strike that took out a key planner of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Ayman al-Zawahiri, as proof that the U.S. can conduct “over the horizon” strikes in Afghanistan and eliminate terrorists without having boots on the ground.

But al-Zawahiri’s presence in Kabul — seemingly in plain sight in the country’s capital — also raises questions about whether al Qaeda leaders and other terrorist group members might be able to find safe harbor in Afghanistan once again under Taliban rule.

The killing of al-Zawahiri comes just a few weeks before the anniversary of the complete U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan, which led to massive criticism of Biden over the chaotic departure of civilians and the Taliban’s overrunning of the government.

“Zawahiri’s presence in downtown Kabul — and the Taliban’s knowledge of it — shows elements of the Taliban continue to protect al Qaeda. It’s no secret that Afghanistan has become safer for al Qaeda members under the Taliban. That’s why Zawahiri was in Kabul, with his family, in the first place,” said Katherine Zimmerman, a fellow focused on counterterrorism at the American Enterprise Institute.

Zimmerman said the U.S. showed its reach with the drone strike but noted that al Qaeda has survived such strikes against its leadership before. The difference now is the lack of boots on the ground in Afghanistan.

“What has changed is the U.S. can no longer exploit intelligence from the ground, something that the U.S. ground presence brought, making it harder for the U.S. to compound the effect of the strike by taking out other key leaders,” she said.

A senior administration official said the strike that killed al-Zawahiri followed months of careful planning and intelligence gathering. Officials were able to develop a model of the safe house where the terrorist leader was living and “build a pattern of life” that determined he spent extended periods on a balcony.

The time and energy put into gathering information ahead of the strike allowed it to be completed without civilian casualties, officials said. 

The precise nature of the strike, according to the official account, stood in contrast to the havoc seen in the wake of the American military withdrawal, in which the U.S., in one of its last missile strikes in the country after 20 years of war, claimed it had thwarted a terrorist operation but later acknowledged it had mistakenly killed 10 civilians.

Biden on Monday said that killing al-Zawahiri will help prevent Afghanistan from becoming a “terrorist safe haven.”

“When I ended our military mission in Afghanistan almost a year ago … I made a promise to the American people that we’d continue to conduct effective counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan and beyond,” Biden said. “We’ve done just that.”

White House national security spokesman John Kirby argued on Tuesday that the strike proves that Afghanistan is not a safe haven for terrorists, adding that the U.S. is mindful of the Taliban’s moves.

“We’re going to stay vigilant to the threat. We’ve made it clear to the Taliban that we know what they did. And we know who they harbored. And we know some steps they tried to take after the strike to cover up the evidence of it. So we’re mindful of it,” he said. 

Kirby argued that if the Taliban is serious about its desire for financing and a relationship with the United States, “it would behoove them to pay close attention to what we just did over the weekend.”

Still, some lawmakers have expressed concerns about what al-Zawahiri’s presence in Kabul could mean for Afghanistan under Taliban leadership.

Sen. James Risch (Idaho), the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, called the strike against al-Zawahiri the right move but argued that surveillance of terrorist groups like al Qaeda is weakened because of the withdrawal from Afghanistan. 

“Visibility on terror threats in Afghanistan remain greatly diminished after the Biden Administration’s hazardous withdrawal last year. Only through continued pressure will we keep al-Qaeda and the Islamic State Khorasan from threatening Americans,” Risch said in a statement.

Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told reporters on Tuesday that al-Zawahiri’s presence in Kabul is a blow to the credibility of the Taliban and violates the Doha agreement established under the Trump administration.

“You can’t have al-Zawahiri, No. 1 al Qaeda, residing in the capital city and say you didn’t know it. So we have to treat the Taliban as what they are, which is allowing al Qaeda elements to be in their country,” Menendez said.

But other Republicans agree that the nature of the withdrawal from Afghanistan has led to terrorist leaders like al-Zawahiri attempting to find a safe haven there.

Eric Ueland, the under secretary of State for civilian security, democracy and human rights under former President Trump, argued that Biden needs to give a clear warning to the Taliban that it will pay a price if it is hosting or supporting such individuals.

“I’m not talking about bluster from the podium, as I’m talking about direct engagement with … a full suite of tools to engage to make crystal clear to the Taliban leadership that resuming the former habit of using Afghanistan as a refuge for groups and individuals who want to target the United States and its citizens would be viewed with grim dimness by the United States,” he said.

Experts and lawmakers credited the Biden administration with carrying out the strike, saying at minimum it carries symbolic importance, even if al Qaeda is not the operational terrorist threat it once was.

Anthony Cordesman, who previously served on the National Security Council and as national security assistant to the late Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), said a broader issue in Afghanistan is a consequence of the United States’ publicly telegraphed desire to withdraw, a plan first devised during the Trump administration.

“In some ways since the Taliban took over you still don’t have any clear structure of Taliban governance,” he said. “You basically don’t have the idea that they have some clear concept of what they intend to do about the economy, which is in near collapse. They have not established a clear or stable structure of governance.”

Mychael Schnell contributed.

Source: TEST FEED1

How landlords are evading taxes and fueling the housing crisis

Opaque ownership laws that make it easier for property owners to avoid paying taxes are compounding a national housing crisis fueled by inflation and a shortage of low- and moderate-income homes.  

Limited liability companies — or LLCs — are a common way for landlords to own the real estate on which they can charge rents. But LLCs often hide the identities of the people that stand behind them, allowing property owners to be shielded from legal consequences when they fail to pay their property taxes.  

Properties can then go into tax foreclosure and be effectively taken off the market in cities where housing is in short supply, further driving up prices and forcing renters to live far away from where they work. 

Studies have “linked LLC ownership to property disinvestment, tax abandonment, even completely walking away from properties,” Princeton sociology professor Matthew Desmond told the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee on Tuesday.  

“One of the landlords I spent time with in Milwaukee, I asked her, ‘What happened to this house that I spent a lot of time with?’ And she said, ‘I just gave it back to the city.’ And what she meant was, she just stopped paying taxes on it and let it go into tax foreclosure,” Desmond said. 

“Tax foreclosure should not be part of a business strategy, but for some landlords who use LLCs, it is,” he added. 

A 2019 study by Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies fellow Adam Travis linked disrepair and disinvestment in housing to LLCs, which became widely available to property owners during the 1990s. 

“Over the past two decades, the advent and diffusion of the limited liability company (LLC) has reshaped the legal landscape of rental ownership,” the study found. “Increasingly, rental properties are owned by business organizations that limit investor liability, rather than by individual landlords who own property in their own names.” 

The study found “that signs of housing disinvestment increase when properties transition from individual to LLC ownership.” 

The share of rental properties owned by professional landlords is increasing across the country as rents and mortgage rates are driven higher by interest rate increases from the Federal Reserve. 

Professional “investors made 28.1 percent of all single-family purchases in February, a record high,” a July report from real estate market data firm CoreLogic found.  

Since the onset of the pandemic in early 2020, the share of home purchases made by investors has doubled from 14 percent to around 28 percent, according to CoreLogic data. 

Lawmakers from both parties noted that the increased holdings of professional landlords are causing concern. 

“It’s come up repeatedly from witnesses, and my colleagues have made the point about increasing percentage of single-family homes especially that are owned by private investors. And there’s a lot of people who are very concerned about that,” Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) said during Tuesday’s hearing. 

Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) echoed Toomey, arguing, “I, too, am concerned about institutional investors and the impact this is having in Nevada, why we’re seeing all these properties being purchased.” 

“I know in my state in 2021, 29 percent of the homes purchased in the Las Vegas metro area were bought by investors. And the challenge is, I can’t tell how many are institutional. I think it has everything to do with what I heard earlier, about too many LLCs and not enough transparency,” she continued. 

Across the country, property values have been increasing rapidly in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, which saw a dearth of new building projects, doubling the pace of inflation. The Case-Shiller national home price index increased almost 20 percent from May 2021 to May 2022, whereas consumer inflation was up 8.6 percent in the same period. 

Home prices rose about 20 percent and rents increased about 12 percent from 2020 to 2021, according to a joint report on national housing conditions from Harvard’s Graduate School of Design and Kennedy School of Government. 

As families are priced out of the market by investors, legal mechanisms like LLCs that are favorable to professional property owners are coming under scrutiny. 

“There’s a theme out there: out-of-town investors hiding behind a cloak of anonymity,” Laura Brunner, the manager of a government-backed real estate development agency in Cincinnati, told the Senate Banking Committee on Tuesday. 

“Last summer, we asked the city of Cincinnati for the names of the five worst landlords,” she said. “It took months of rigorous research to uncover that over 4,000 single-family homes in Hamilton County had been purchased by these five landlords. Tracking the acquisitions was an arduous task due to the high volume of LLCs used.” 

LLCs and similar legal designations, like S corporations,  were initially used to encourage entrepreneurship, so that people could undertake risky business ventures without the threat of going personally bankrupt. Today, LLCs are more often used as devices to preserve anonymity by wealthy property owners, real estate industry experts say. 

“I represent the richest people in the world and some of the most famous people in the world, and they will not buy a property unless it’s in the name of an LLC, sometimes more than one LLC, and they do that in order to keep that anonymity, so people don’t know who’s buying the property,” New York real estate attorney Adam Leitman Bailey said in an interview. 

“In nefarious ways, it allows people from various countries to buy property in another country, to buy property in America. Let’s say they’re trying to hide money. They can do so by using an LLC, and people won’t know who they are.” 

Bailey said this practice was common in high-profile cities like New York. 

“As a real estate attorney, New York is a phenomenal place. If you have money that you want to make sure is not taken away from you from another country where it could be taken away or seized, you could buy a condo in New York and use it as a safety deposit box, and simply purchase it in cash under an LLC, and only the attorney and the client will know who owns the LLC. They can hide money that way. Real estate moves very slowly, and no one asks any questions,” he said. 

Housing issues have taken center stage in hearings in both chambers of Congress in recent weeks.  

The Senate Finance Committee held a hearing in July about the role that tax incentives could play in building more affordable housing, and the House Ways and Means Committee recently held a hearing under the name of “Nowhere to Live: Profits, Disinvestment, and the American Housing Crisis.” 

The Treasury Department announced new rules last week to finance more affordable housing loans through the American Rescue Plan, and the White House held a virtual summit on Tuesday on beefing up emergency rental assistance and working toward long-term eviction reforms.

Source: TEST FEED1

Manchin’s climate buy-in comes at a cost for environmental review

In order to win Sen. Joe Manchin’s (D-W.Va.) support for their climate legislation, Democrats are poised to carry out policy changes that might directly help one of the senator’s pet projects, but that activists say could hurt low-income voters and people of color.

On Monday, Manchin revealed the details of a plan to speed up environmental reviews of potentially polluting projects that was part of the deal he made with Democratic leadership.

The deal appears to pertain to both the environmental review process broadly and more immediately to a natural gas pipeline in West Virginia that he has long sought.

“Completing this pipeline will increase supply [and] strengthen American energy security,” Manchin tweeted Tuesday.

But environmental justice advocates, who object to the pipeline’s approval, say that the agreement could undermine the entire review process, subjecting already disadvantaged groups to an even greater share of the country’s pollution burden.

When Manchin announced last week that he would move forward with climate and tax provisions that Democrats have been clamoring for, he said that Democrats would also advance “commonsense permitting reforms” this fall.

The agreement, detailed in a Monday fact sheet, would set time limits for how long environmental reviews can take: two years for major projects and one year for those with less of an impact. It would also require the president to keep a list of 25 energy projects that are prioritized.

And it essentially gives states a one-year time limit to veto infrastructure projects such as pipelines that run through their waters, while clarifying that water quality impacts of the activity itself must be the basis of the review.

The Trump administration had implemented some similar reforms that are now being reversed by the Biden administration.

The fact sheet also said that agencies will be required to allow for the construction and operation of the Mountain Valley Pipeline, a controversial vessel that would ship natural gas from West Virginia to Virginia.

Michelle Nowlin, a law professor at Duke University, said she finds the provisions to be “troubling,” particularly those that put “artificial timelines” on the environmental review process.

“That’s certainly a concern, that corners will be cut,” Nowlin said, pointing to communities that have historically borne the brunt of pollution.

“There’s a possibility of further concentrating harm in those communities, of disparate impact in those communities and of silencing their voices as they attempt to participate in the process,” she said.

“If you have to expedite this review, how much time is going to actually be spent in the communities hearing and understanding their concerns and following up on them?” she added.

Jamie Pleune, an associate professor of law at the University of Utah, likewise said that a shortened timeline could prevent bad projects from getting the scrutiny that they need.

“When you set a maximum timeline, you’re essentially saying, ‘We will issue the permit at the end of this time,’ but there may be some projects that require additional review,” Pleune said.

Christy Goldfuss, who directed the White House’s Council on Environmental Quality during the Obama administration, said that while the changes may not necessarily be what Democrats wanted, they may also bolster clean energy — and will be coupled with additional funding for environmental reviews.

“The reported permitting reform deal serves to put the federal government on a timeline,” she said in a statement. “The reconciliation package also includes funding for agencies to carry out this review. These two pieces combined could have huge impacts on building the clean energy necessary to address climate change, while making sure that the impact on the environment is as minimal as possible.”

Goldfuss added in an interview that the permitting changes are “much more aggressive … than Democrats would have wanted on their own,” but noted that some in the party have also expressed concerns about how long it takes to deploy certain projects.

And supporters of permitting reforms contend that it can be used to help bolster clean energy, too.

“For environmental groups, it’s time for them to reexamine their approach to energy infrastructure,” said Neil Chatterjee, a former Republican commissioner on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Chatterjee, who is now a senior adviser at Hogan Lovells, noted that these groups largely support the build-out of clean energy.

“They’re no longer at a point where they need to block the building of energy infrastructure, they want to see it sited,” he said.

Manchin, meanwhile, appeared to be particularly proud of the pipeline piece of the agreement, touting it in a Tuesday interview on local radio.

“There’s not another project in America today that will bring this much energy … that will bring 2 billion cubic feet back into the marketplace,” he said.

Goldfuss, who is now the senior vice president of energy and environment policy at the liberal Center for American Progress, said that this was an area where Democrats had to cede to Manchin.

“That is just a giant giveaway for the fossil fuel industry that clearly was important to Sen. Manchin,” she said. “This one is just the most egregious of what’s in the two packages combined, from our perspective.”

Green groups oppose the pipeline on environmental grounds, raising concerns about climate change, dependence on fossil fuels and impacts to streams.

Kassie Siegel, director of the Center for Biological Diversity’s Climate Law Institute, also expressed concerns about the proposed new limits to state abilities to nix projects like pipelines.

“The intent seems to be to enshrine the proposal from Trump and industry to avoid consideration of things like climate and harm to endangered aquatic species,” she said. “That’s a huge hit to states’ rights.”

It’s one of several areas where Democrats are giving up ground to Manchin to win his support on a slate of clean energy tax credits and other measures.

The reconciliation package also ties future clean energy leases on public lands and waters to new leases for onshore and offshore drilling. It further mandates that the Interior Department will hold at least a few more lease sales for offshore drilling in the years to come.

Siegel argued that Democrats are having to pay a high price to win Manchin’s approval and should fight against some of it.

“There is real harm that’s going to happen to our most vulnerable communities and to the climate for the concessions that are being made to Manchin to get his vote,” Siegel said.

Source: TEST FEED1

Trump-backed Masters to face Mark Kelly in Arizona Senate race

Venture capitalist Blake Masters is projected to win Arizona’s Republican Senate nomination on Tuesday, setting up a matchup with Sen. Mark Kelly (D).

Polls in the lead up to Election Day showed Masters, who was backed by former President Trump, leading a crowded primary field that included businessman Jim Lamon and Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich.

Masters victory is seen as a win for Trump. Both Masters and Lamon have said they would have objected to the certification of the 2020 presidential election if they were serving in the Senate. 

Masters also had the support of GOP mega donor Peter Thiel.

The Arizona’s Senate race will be one of the more closely watched of the 2022 midterms. The nonpartisan Cook Political Report rates the race as a “toss-up.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Biden will order HHS to consider using Medicaid to support women seeking abortions across state lines

President Biden on Wednesday will sign an executive order directing the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to consider using Medicaid to pay for expenses for those who cross state lines to seek abortions.

The executive order will direct HHS “to consider action to advance access to reproductive healthcare services, including through Medicaid for patients who travel out of state for reproductive healthcare services,” according to a White House fact sheet released on Wednesday.

The executive order will be the second that Biden has signed since the conservative Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade, the landmark abortion ruling, in June. Biden has been under pressure to take more aggressive actions to support abortion access as various states move to restrict the procedure following the ruling.

A senior Biden administration official told reporters that the action would require states where abortion is legal to apply for Section 1115 Medicaid waivers to provide services for women crossing state lines for abortions.

The White House did not specify what costs Medicaid could potentially cover. Another senior administration official told The Hill that HHS would soon provide more information on what a waiver could look like, saying it would help “cover certain costs” and largely target low-income women who receive Medicaid.

Medicaid funds could not be used to pay for abortions themselves because the Hyde Amendment prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for most abortions.

Biden will sign the new order Wednesday afternoon at the first meeting of a reproductive healthcare access interagency task force set up by his previous executive order. Vice President Harris, Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, Attorney General Merrick Garland and other administration officials are scheduled to attend.

Biden is supposed to tune into the meeting virtually, as he is still isolating following a rebound infection of COVID-19.

The latest order will also instruct HHS to consider providing technical assistance and other actions to make sure healthcare providers comply with non-discrimination laws in the wake of the ruling striking down Roe, according to the White House fact sheet.

Additionally, the order directs HHS to improve federal research and data collection in order to evaluate the impact that the striking down of Roe is having on maternal health, the fact sheet said.

The executive order is likely to be well-received by those asking the administration to take more forceful action on abortion access.

However, the Biden administration has thus far resisted calls from some Democrats to declare a public health emergency exists with respect to abortion access.

The first senior administration official said that the White House continues to review options to protect access to abortion services, but suggested that such a declaration would not yield much in the way of additional resources or legal authority.

A number of states have moved to enact restrictions on abortion following the ruling striking down Roe. On Tuesday, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit challenging Idaho’s six-week abortion ban in its first legal action since the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Source: TEST FEED1

Five takeaways from primaries in Arizona, Missouri and beyond

Tuesday’s primaries, in many ways, upended expectations.

In Kansas, voters rejected a proposed amendment that would have opened the door for state lawmakers to restrict – or even ban – abortions. Meanwhile, in Arizona’s GOP gubernatorial primary, Republicans appear poised to break with former President Donald Trump and his candidate of choice.

And in Missouri, a late effort to weaken former Gov. Eric Greitens in the GOP Senate primary proved successful. 

Here are five takeaways from the primaries in Arizona, Michigan, Missouri, Kansas and Washington.

Kansas gives new momentum to abortion rights

Kansas voters became the first in the nation on Tuesday to make a decision on abortion rights since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June. The result: They rejected a proposed amendment that would have paved the way for the Republican-led state legislature to ban the procedure.

The failure of the ballot referendum came as something of a surprise. Recent polling from the Kansas City-based firm Co/efficient showed that 47 percent of Kansans planned to vote in favor of the proposed amendment, compared to 43 percent who said they would vote no.

Kansas isn’t the only state where abortion rights are on the ballot this year. But the sound rejection of the so-called “Value Them Both” amendment — and the stunningly high turnout for a midterm election primary — was a significant victory for abortion rights advocates and an early sign of the political backlash against the Supreme Court’s decision to do away with the precedent set by Roe v. Wade. 

The defeat of the proposed amendment is also likely to be seen by Democrats as a sign that their strategy to home in on abortion rights just might work. 

Facing otherwise tough political headwinds this year, the party and its candidates are hoping that anger over the Supreme Court’s decision and efforts by several states to ban abortions could help motivate their voters in a year in which Republicans believe they have the momentum.

Republicans successfully shut out Greitens

Former Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens spent much of the past year as the apparent frontrunner in the race for the state’s GOP Senate nomination, worrying many Republicans who believed that the many controversies and scandals surrounding the former governor could jeopardize their hold on the seat in November.

Greitens ultimately finished in third place on Tuesday, falling to Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, who took the lead in polling in recent weeks. 

The collapse of Greitens’s Senate prospects came on the heels of an aggressive push to weaken him ahead of the primary. One group, Show Me Values PAC, spent heavily in the final weeks before the Tuesday vote on advertising highlighting allegations of domestic violence against Greitens. 

That effort drew donations from top GOP donors, including Pete Ricketts, the wealthy governor of Nebraska.

Greitens had hoped that a possible endorsement from former President Donald Trump might help push him across the finish line in the primary. But even that didn’t play out the way he had hoped. On Monday, Trump endorsed an unspecified “ERIC,” prompting both Greitens and Schmitt to claim that they had the former president’s support.

Greitens’s loss on Tuesday put an end to the latest chapter in a controversial political career, much to the relief of many top Republicans.

A mixed night for Trump

For a former president who likes to boast about his winning streak, Trump may be dealt at least a couple losses in Tuesday’s primaries. 

In Arizona, Trump-endorsed former local TV anchor Kari Lake is trailing Republican Karrin Taylor Robson in the state’s GOP gubernatorial primary. Among Robson’s notable endorsers: Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey and former Vice President Mike Pence. Still, that race remains too close to call and there’s time for Lake to pull ahead.

Meanwhile, in Washington State, Trump’s picks to oust Reps. Jaime Herrera Beutler (R) and Dan Newhouse (R), two House Republicans who voted to impeach him last year, don’t appear likely to advance to the general elections.

It’s not all bad news for Trump. Blake Masters, his endorsed candidate in Arizona’s GOP Senate primary, is still the favorite to capture the nomination, while Tudor Dixon, whom Trump backed just last week, clinched the Republican nod for governor in Michigan. 

Then there’s Missouri, where Trump vaguely endorsed an “ERIC” in the GOP Senate primary. Eric Schmitt won that race, while Eric Greitens lost. Regardless, Trump will likely tout that as a victory.

Pro-impeachment Republicans dealt differing fates

For the 10 House Republicans who voted last year to impeach Trump for his role in the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, the outlook has been bleak this year. Four have opted not to run for reelection, while one other has already been ousted in a primary.

But in Washington State, two of those House Republicans, Herrera Beutler and Newhouse, appear likely to survive another day. Both are currently sitting in the top two in their districts’ all-party primaries, and if they stay there, they’ll advance to the November general elections. 

For Rep. Peter Meijer (R-Mich.), however, the outlook isn’t so good. The first-term congressman is on track to lose his primary to Republican John Gibbs, a former Trump administration official who has the backing of the former president — and who was also boosted by Democrats.

If Meijer loses — and that appears the likely outcome, as of now — he’ll be the second pro-impeachment House Republican to fall in a primary this year after Rep. Tom Rice (R-S.C.).

And Meijer may also not be the last casualty of Trump’s revenge campaign. Rep. Liz Cheney (Wyo.), one of the former president’s most prominent GOP critics, is facing a Trump-backed primary challenge later this month. 

Progressives fall short

Progressives have had a mixed track record in 2022 defined by a series of high-profile victories and high-profile losses. Tuesday, however, wasn’t a good night for them. 

In Michigan’s 11th District, Rep. Haley Stevens (D), a second-term representative with a moderate reputation, defeated fellow incumbent Rep. Andy Levin (D), who had been endorsed by the progressive heavyweights like Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). 

Meanwhile, in Missouri, another Sanders-backed candidate, Lucas Kunce, lost the Democratic Senate nomination to Trudy Busch Valentine, a philanthropist and heiress to the Busch family beer fortune. 

Of course, there were at least a couple bright spots for the Democratic Party’s left flank. Reps. Cori Busch (D-Mo.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), two members of the so-called “Squad” of progressive House members, easily won their primaries on Tuesday, though neither faced a dire threat to their renominations. 

Source: TEST FEED1

Biden praises Kansas vote to protect abortion rights

President Biden on Tuesday hailed a vote in Kansas rejecting a state constitutional amendment that would have eliminated abortion protections and given the state legislature more power to regulate access to the procedure.

The ballot measure was the first time that voters weighed in on abortion since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and it was considered a bellwether of how Americans would respond to the high court’s decision.

“The Supreme Court’s extreme decision to overturn Roe v. Wade put women’s health and lives at risk. Tonight, the American people had something to say about it,” Biden said in a statement.

“Voters in Kansas turned out in record numbers to reject extreme efforts to amend the state constitution to take away a woman’s right to choose and open the door for a state-wide ban. This vote makes clear what we know: the majority of Americans agree that women should have access to abortion and should have the right to make their own health care decisions,” he added.

The proposed amendment would have said the state constitution does not protect abortion rights, effectively reversing a 2019 state Supreme Court decision.

Biden also used his statement to call on Congress to codify abortion protections after the Supreme Court eliminated the constitutional right to an abortion in June. 

Kansas’ rejection of the abortion ballot measure was met with praise by Democrats and abortion rights advocates while conservatives lamented the vote. It was also met with surprise by many given the state’s red leanings.

“For my money, the most significant result tonight is #Kansas landslide vote against further restrictions on abortion. It’s Red Kansas, for God’s sake. Even if it was a close vote with NO losing, this would have suggested a backlash to Dobbs and the ensuing rush to ban abortion,” Larry Sabato, founder and director of the University of Virginia Center for Politics, tweeted.

Others, however, argued that the ballot measure vote reflected more nuanced views of abortion in the state. 

“With the Kansas abortion amendment vote, just a reminder that there are a sizable number of voters who: -consider themselves pro-life or who would support prohibiting abortion after 15 weeks AND -also believe Roe should be upheld,” Conservative pollster Kristen Soltis Anderson tweeted.

Source: TEST FEED1

Vin Scully, Dodgers broadcaster for 67 years, dies at 94

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Hall of Fame broadcaster Vin Scully, whose dulcet tones provided the soundtrack of summer while entertaining and informing Dodgers fans in Brooklyn and Los Angeles for 67 years, died Tuesday night, the team said. He was 94.

Scully died at his home in the Hidden Hills section of Los Angeles, according to the team, which spoke to family members.

“We have lost an icon,” team president and CEO Stan Kasten said in a statement. “His voice will always be heard and etched in all of our minds forever.”

As the longest tenured broadcaster with a single team in pro sports history, Scully saw it all and called it all. He began in the 1950s era of Pee Wee Reese and Jackie Robinson, on to the 1960s with Don Drysdale and Sandy Koufax, into the 1970s with Steve Garvey and Don Sutton, and through the 1980s with Orel Hershiser and Fernando Valenzuela. In the 1990s, it was Mike Piazza and Hideo Nomo, followed by Clayton Kershaw, Manny Ramirez and Yasiel Puig in the 21st century.

The Dodgers changed players, managers, executives, owners — and even coasts — but Scully and his soothing, insightful style remained a constant for the fans.

He opened broadcasts with the familiar greeting, “Hi, everybody, and a very pleasant good evening to you wherever you may be.”

Ever gracious both in person and on the air, Scully considered himself merely a conduit between the game and the fans.

Although he was paid by the Dodgers, Scully was unafraid to criticize a bad play or a manager’s decision, or praise an opponent while spinning stories against a backdrop of routine plays and noteworthy achievements. He always said he wanted to see things with his eyes, not his heart.

“Vin Scully was one of the greatest voices in all of sports. He was a giant of a man, not only as a broadcaster, but as a humanitarian,” Kasten said. “He loved people. He loved life. He loved baseball and the Dodgers. And he loved his family. I know he was looking forward to joining the love of his life, Sandi.”

Vincent Edward Scully was born Nov. 29, 1927, in the Bronx. He was the son of a silk salesman who died of pneumonia when Scully was 7. His mother moved the family to Brooklyn, where the red-haired, blue-eyed Scully grew up playing stickball in the streets.

As a child, Scully would grab a pillow, put it under the family’s four-legged radio and lay his head directly under the speaker to hear whatever college football game was on the air. With a snack of saltine crackers and a glass of milk nearby, the boy was transfixed by the crowd’s roar that raised goosebumps. He thought he’d like to call the action himself.

Scully, who played outfield for two years on the Fordham University baseball team, began his career by working baseball, football and basketball games for the university’s radio station.

At age 22, he was hired by a CBS radio affiliate in Washington, D.C.

He soon joined Hall of Famer Red Barber and Connie Desmond in the Brooklyn Dodgers’ radio and television booths. In 1953, at age 25, Scully became the youngest person to broadcast a World Series game, a mark that still stands.

He moved west with the Dodgers in 1958. Scully called three perfect games — Don Larsen in the 1956 World Series, Sandy Koufax in 1965 and Dennis Martinez in 1991 — and 18 no-hitters.

He also was on the air when Don Drysdale set his scoreless innings streak of 58 2/3 innings in 1968 and again when Hershiser broke the record with 59 consecutive scoreless innings 20 years later.

When Hank Aaron hit his 715th home run to break Babe Ruth’s record in 1974, it was against the Dodgers and, of course, Scully called it.

“A Black man is getting a standing ovation in the Deep South for breaking a record of an all-time baseball idol,” Scully told listeners. “What a marvelous moment for baseball.”

Scully credited the birth of the transistor radio as “the greatest single break” of his career. Fans had trouble recognizing the lesser players during the Dodgers’ first four years in the vast Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum.

“They were 70 or so odd rows away from the action,” he said in 2016. “They brought the radio to find out about all the other players and to see what they were trying to see down on the field.”

That habit carried over when the team moved to Dodger Stadium in 1962. Fans held radios to their ears, and those not present listened from home or the car, allowing Scully to connect generations of families with his words.

He often said it was best to describe a big play quickly and then be quiet so fans could listen to the pandemonium. After Koufax’s perfect game in 1965, Scully went silent for 38 seconds before talking again. He was similarly silent for a time after Kirk Gibson’s pinch-hit home run to win Game 1 of the 1988 World Series.

He was inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame in 1982, received a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame that year, and also had the stadium’s press box named for him in 2001. The street leading to Dodger Stadium’s main gate was named in his honor in 2016.

That same year he received the Presidential Medal of Freedom from President Barack Obama.

“God has been so good to me to allow me to do what I’m doing,” Scully, a devout Catholic who attended mass on Sundays before heading to the ballpark, said before retiring. “A childhood dream that came to pass and then giving me 67 years to enjoy every minute of it. That’s a pretty large thanksgiving day for me.”

In addition to being the voice of the Dodgers, Scully called play-by-play for NFL games and PGA Tour events as well as calling 25 World Series and 12 All-Star Games. He was NBC’s lead baseball announcer from 1983-89.

While being one of the most widely heard broadcasters in the nation, Scully was an intensely private man. Once the baseball season ended, he would disappear. He rarely did personal appearances or sports talk shows. He preferred spending time with his family.

In 1972, his first wife, Joan, died of an accidental overdose of medicine. He was left with three young children. Two years later, he met the woman who would become his second wife, Sandra, a secretary for the NFL’s Los Angeles Rams. She had two young children from a previous marriage, and they combined their families into what Scully once called “my own Brady Bunch.”

He said he realized time was the most precious thing in the world and that he wanted to use his time to spend with his loved ones. In the early 1960s, Scully quit smoking with the help of his family. In the shirt pocket where he kept a pack of cigarettes, Scully stuck a family photo. Whenever he felt like he needed a smoke, he pulled out the photo to remind him why he quit. Eight months later, Scully never smoked again.

After retiring in 2016, Scully made just a handful of appearances at Dodger Stadium and his sweet voice was heard narrating an occasional video played during games. Mostly, he was content to stay close to home.

“I just want to be remembered as a good man, an honest man, and one who lived up to his own beliefs,” he said in 2016.

In 2020, Scully auctioned off years of his personal memorabilia, which raised over $2 million. A portion of it was donated to UCLA for ALS research.

He was preceded in death by his second wife, Sandra. She died of complications of ALS at age 76 in 2021. The couple, who were married 47 years, had daughter Catherine together.

Scully’s other children are Kelly, Erin, Todd and Kevin. A son, Michael, died in a helicopter crash in 1994.

___

Former Associated Press staffer Stan Miller contributed biographical information to this report.

Source: TEST FEED1