Tag Archives : Build House

Supreme Court denies request to stay Alabama execution

The Supreme Court denied a request Wednesday evening to stay the execution of an Alabama man who will receive the death penalty for killing his ex-girlfriend in 1994.

“The application for stay of execution of sentence of death presented to Justice Thomas and by him referred to the Court is denied,” read the order from the Supreme Court in the case of Joe Nathan James Jr.

James will be executed Thursday evening by lethal injection following the final court order, which follows a request from James’s family to cancel the execution.

The initial trial in James’s case found that he stalked ex-girlfriend Faith Hall after the end of their relationship and eventually shot her three times, killing her.

Hall’s daughters have said that they disagree with Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey’s (R) decision to let James’s execution proceed.

“I just feel like we can’t play God. We can’t take a life,” said Terrlyn Hall, who was a child when her mother died. “We thought about it and prayed about it, and we found it in ourselves to forgive him for what he did. We really wish there was something that we could do to stop it.”

James was first convicted of capital murder in 1996 but retried and resentenced in 1999 after the first conviction was overturned by a state appeals court.

The state appeals court found that the judge in the 1996 trial had wrongly admitted some police reports into evidence.

James’s defense in the 1999 trial argued that the defendant was under emotional duress during the shooting, though James was condemned to the death penalty a second time in that trial.

Source: TEST FEED1

Whitehouse, Cortez Masto introduce bill to empower congressional responses to SCOTUS decisions

Democratic Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.) and Catherine Cortez Masto (Nev.) introduced a bill Thursday aimed at empowering Congress to respond to Supreme Court decisions that reduce constitutional rights or interpret federal statutes.

“Six radical justices enacted a bonanza of right-wing policies during the last term, reshaping American life in wildly unpopular ways over just a matter of days,” said Whitehouse, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Courts Subcommittee, in a statement. 

“The American people are fed up with policymaking by unaccountable Supreme Court justices, and we have a solution.”

The Supreme Court Review Act proposal comes in the wake of several controversial decisions from the higher court. In its most recent term, the Supreme Court issued rulings that rolled back Miranda rights, struck down a New York gun control law and clashed with decades of precedents on religious activity in schools — and overturned the right to abortion established in Roe v. Wade.

The senators said in a press release their bill will create “streamlined procedures through which Congress can exercise its existing power to amend statutes or create federal statutory rights.”

“In the face of an increasingly extreme Supreme Court, the American people deserve accountability and responsiveness from all three branches of government,” said Cortez Masto in a statement.

Source: TEST FEED1

Energy & Environment — Democrats could see a win on climate

Many climate activists and experts see a victory in the deal between Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) — despite some provisions that boost oil and gas. 

This is Overnight Energy & Environment, your source for the latest news focused on energy, the environment and beyond. For The Hill, we’re Rachel Frazin and Zack Budryk. Someone forward you this newsletter? Subscribe here.

Manchin-Schumer deal has big climate investments

The deal crafted by Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) would result in historic investments in combating climate change if the package is signed into law by President Biden.   

Climate activists, who earlier this month were in despair after Manchin seemingly torpedoed an earlier deal, generally have praised the new agreement as a meaningful step in protecting the planet — even if it would still leave plenty of more work to do.   

“It’s going to be the largest climate investment in American history by far,” Leah Stokes, an environmental politics professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara, told The Hill.  

The bill also comes as Democrats have little time to spare. With Republicans favored to win back the House majority in the fall, losing an opportunity to pass meaningful climate legislation with Democrats in the White House and holding power in the House and Senate would be devastating.  

The package contains a series of investments in clean energy and other programs that are expected to help the U.S. reduce its emissions.  

And while the nearly $370 billion in climate and energy investments are pared down from the $555 billion passed by the House last year, they are still expected to make significant cuts to global warming.   

Democrats’ projected cuts are possible: Ben King, associate director of Rhodium Group, which has modeled the potential emissions reductions of past iterations of Democrats’ climate proposals, said his initial reaction was that the Democrats’ projection the package could cut 40 percent of emissions was plausible.   

Combined with additional regulations, he said the U.S. may now be on track to meet Biden’s goal of cutting U.S. emissions at least in half by 2030 when compared to 2005 levels.  

“While we are still analyzing the full text, the deal announced on Wednesday includes a long-term extension of clean energy tax credits in line with what we’ve previously modeled, which means it could plausibly put the U.S. on track to reduce emissions by 40 percent in 2030,” King said in a statement.   

“Additional action by the Biden administration and states can help close the rest of the gap to the target of a 50-52 percent cut in emissions by 2030,” he added. 

Rhodium Group’s modeling has shown that without any legislative action, the U.S. would be expected to reduce its emissions by between 24 and 35 percent.  

Read more here.

THE DEAL’S POLICY SPECIFICS

The bill would provide $30 billion in tax credits for the manufacturing of solar panels, wind turbines, batteries and critical minerals processing. It includes $10 billion in tax credits for clean energy technology manufacturing facilities that make electric vehicles, wind turbines, and solar panels.  

It would create another program to give financing to the oil and gas industry to cut down on their emissions of planet-warming methane and charge them for excess emissions. Methane is 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide over a 100-year period and is frequently released during oil and gas production.  

Other provisions include $30 billion in loans and grants to help states and electric utilities transition to clean energy and $27 billion for a green bank that would provide more incentives for clean energy technology.   

The bill would also expand royalties that companies pay for public lands drilling to include planet-warming natural gas that is burned off or otherwise released into the air.  

And, while not directly related to climate change, the bill also puts $60 billion toward environmental justice — addressing disproportionately high pollution levels faced by people of color and low-income communities.  

What’s the catch? Some of the bill’s provisions would further lock in fossil fuel use and add to planet-warming emissions. 

Specifically, it would require the federal government to hold oil and gas lease sales as a condition for selling leases for renewable energy on public lands and waters. 

In order for the government to allow new wind or solar energy development on federal lands, it will be required to hold onshore drilling lease sales. In order for the government to hold a lease sale enabling new offshore wind energy, it will need to have held a lease sale for new offshore oil and gas. 

The legislation would also reinstate the results of a November lease sale for new offshore drilling that sold the rights to drill on 1.7 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico and was later struck down on environmental grounds. It would also require the Interior Department to hold other lease sales in the near future. 

Read more about the bill here.

Manchin stands by provision Sinema may oppose

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said Thursday he is standing firm on keeping a proposal to close the so-called carried interest tax loophole in the tax and climate deal he reached this week, despite potential opposition from fellow centrist Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.).   

Closing the tax loophole has long been a goal of Democratic tax reformers, but it was dropped out of the House tax bill last year after Sinema indicated she opposed ending the tax break.   

This dynamic has prompted a storm of speculation about whether the Arizona senator will withhold her support for Manchin and Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) Inflation Reduction Act, which became public Wednesday.   

Sinema’s office has so far declined to comment on the legislation. She did not attend a Senate Democratic Caucus meeting Thursday to discuss the deal, according to a senator in attendance. The senator noted that Sinema often misses caucus meetings and that it was not unusual for her to miss the specific meeting Thursday.   

But Manchin on Thursday told reporters that he will insist on keeping the carried interest provision in the bill, arguing that it’s unfair for asset managers to only pay a 20 percent capital gains tax rate on income they earn from the profits of managed investments.   

“I’m not prepared to lose” it, Manchin said. “What we have is a good bill that’s fair with everybody. It’s a give-and-take proposition.  

Any disagreements could pose a threat to the climate and tax deal in the evenly-divided Senate. 

Read more here from The Hill’s Alexader Bolton.

Senate GOP blocks bill for vets exposed to toxins

Veterans’ advocacy groups lashed out on Thursday after Senate Republicans blocked a much-anticipated bill aimed at expanding care for veterans who were exposed to toxins during military service. 

The Sgt. First Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our PACT Act was the product of a year of negotiations between the House and the Senate, and Wednesday’s vote was largely expected to be a victory for veterans in need of care. 

But the majority of GOP senators voted against advancing the bill, infuriating its Democratic sponsors and the veterans who have been pushing for it, who focused their ire on Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) 

“This is total bull****,” Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) said during a press conference in front of the Capitol on Thursday. 

“We had strong bipartisan support for this bill. And at the eleventh hour, Sen. Toomey decides that he wants to rewrite the bill, change the rules, and tank it.” 

Tom Porter, executive vice president of governmental affairs for the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, pointed out that some Republicans who voted against the bill are veterans. 

“How can fellow veterans turn their backs, and stab us in the back like that,” Porter said. 

The Senate voted 55-42 to advance the PACT Act, falling short of the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster. The upper chamber passed the bill last month by an overwhelmingly bipartisan 84-14 vote, and the House passed the bill earlier this month by a vote of 342-88. The Senate needed to vote on it again because of technical changes made in the House. 

An explanation: In floor speeches on Tuesday and Wednesday, Toomey said he opposed the bill because it moves $400 billion from discretionary spending to mandatory spending, which he called a “budgetary gimmick.” 

The Pennsylvania Republican proposed to amend the bill by moving that funding back to discretionary spending, which is subject to annual congressional appropriations. 

After Wednesday’s vote, Toomey said the failed cloture vote allows the upper chamber to amend the bill, adding that it was a “pretty easy fix.” 

“Once that’s done, this bill sails through this chamber and goes to the president and gets signed into law,” he said. 

Read more about what went down here.

CHIPPING AWAY 

The House passed a $280 billion bill on Thursday to strengthen the domestic chip manufacturing industry and finance scientific research in a bid to boost the United States’s competitiveness on the global stage, sending the measure to President Biden’s desk for final approval. 

The legislation, titled the CHIPS and Science Act, cleared the House in a 243-187-1 vote. Twenty-four Republicans supported the measure, and one Democrat voted “present.”  

The Senate approved the measure in a bipartisan 64-33 vote on Wednesday, receiving support from Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). The bill’s passage through both chambers marks a significant congressional achievement and the culmination of more than a year of negotiations over legislation to increase the U.S.’s competitive edge against China.  

What does it do? Lawmakers ultimately came to a consensus on the CHIPS and Science Act, which will allocate $54 billion for chips and public wireless supply chain innovation, including $39 billion that will go towards financial assistance to build, expand and modernize semiconductor facilities in the U.S. It also includes $11 billion for research and development by the Department of Commerce. 

The measure seeks to establish a 25 percent tax credit for investment in semiconductor manufacturing and funnel $81 billion to the National Science Foundation (NSF), $20 billion of which will go towards an NSF directorate. 

Read more here from The Hill’s Mychael Schnell.

WHAT WE’RE READING

• OPEC+ to weigh holding oil output steady or small hike, sources say (Reuters) 
• The air in Boston isn’t as safe as we think (Axios) 
• Why Fungi Might Really Be Magic (When It Comes to Climate Change) (The New York Times) 
• Flash drought intensifies, causing agriculture concerns in the Plains and water shortages in the Northeast (CNN)

And, In celebrity news: Who’s contributing to climate change via private jet? 

That’s it for today, thanks for reading. Check out The Hill’s Energy & Environment page for the latest news and coverage. We’ll see you tomorrow.

VIEW THE FULL VERSION HERE

Source: TEST FEED1

Preventing those who participated in Jan. 6 from being able to serve in public office

The public hearings of the House Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on our U.S. Capitol have made it abundantly clear that the former president was at the center of an illegal scheme to prevent the peaceful transfer of power, including inciting a violent mob to attack the United States Capitol. 

No prior president has attempted such a heinous act, and no one who participated in this effort to usurp power can be trusted with public office. All too clearly, Donald Trump proved that he is not fit to hold office and is a danger to democracy. 

I was in the House Gallery when the Trump-inspired mob of insurrectionists tried to break into the Chamber, and I feared for my life. I managed to get to my empty office, alone, and armed myself with a baseball bat against a possible break-in by the ranting thugs. I also knew some of the U.S. Capitol police who died in the days that followed the attack. This national disgrace is personal to me. 

Fifty-one days after the Jan. 6 attack, as chairman of the  House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, I introduced legislation to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to our Constitution, to ensure that those  who were responsible for or participated in the attack would never again serve in public office. This section of the Constitution prohibits anyone who has engaged in insurrection against the Constitution they swore to protect, or who has provided “aid and comfort” to our enemies, from serving in public office. 

The Jan. 6 Committee has provided ample evidence that Trump, and many of his advisers, including some who later sought pardons, fit the definition of those who have engaged in insurrection and whose actions constitute treason against our nation. 

Ratified in the aftermath of the Civil War, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment explicitly disqualifies any person from public office who, having previously taken an oath as a federal or state officeholder, engaged in insurrection or rebellion. Having lived through the violent rebellion of the Civil War, the framers of the 14th Amendment were concerned that officeholders who had engaged in insurrection might again serve in the very state and federal governments they had previously sought to overthrow. 

The Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol demonstrates that the concerns that prompted ratification of the 14th Amendment are present today.  Some rioters who attempted to impede the constitutional function of our democracy and overturn the 2020 election results are currently candidates for governorships and other high offices. In response to the first invasion of the Capitol since the British attacked during the War of 1812, it is important that we enforce the constitutional provision establishing that any officeholders who violated their oaths of office and engaged in this insurrection cannot be trusted with public office. 

Actions have consequences. Trump’s effort to circumvent the will of the people and destroy our democracy cannot be met with us standing idly by as an authoritarian seeks to get back to the Oval Office. 

Cohen, a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, represents Tennessee’s 9th District. 

Source: TEST FEED1

Twitter reports record high government demands for account info

Twitter reported on Thursday that it received record numbers of government legal demands targeting journalists from July to December of last year.

The tech giant reported an increase of 103 percent increase in overall legal demands related to verified journalists and news outlets, such as requests to remove content or court orders.

It received a total of 47,572 demands regarding 198,931 accounts. About a quarter of those demands, 11,460, were made by governments, 20 percent of which were from the U.S. government.

“We continue to see a concerning trend toward attempts to limit global press freedom, with an increase in government legal demands targeting journalists, as well as an overall increasing number of legal demands on accounts – both represent record highs since reporting began,” Twitter wrote in its transparency report.

Twitter also received about 11,500 requests for information about accounts during the reporting period, a 7 percent drop from the previous six months.

The highest percentage of information requests coming from governments originated from the U.S. government, according to the report.

Twitter said it objected to 29 U.S. requests for account information that would have helped the government determine the identities of anonymous users.

“Of those 29 requests, we filed lawsuits to fight back in two instances and succeeded in convincing courts to apply First Amendment protections in one case. The other case remains pending,” Twitter wrote.

However, it complied with 69 percent of total U.S. information requests, despite narrowing some of those demands by providing only part of the requested information.

The company said that it narrowed or did not disclose information in response to 60 percent of government requests globally.

Source: TEST FEED1

Former DOJ official cooperating with department's probe into Trump pressure campaign: reports

A former Trump Department of Justice (DOJ) official who worked closely with Jeffrey Clark is cooperating with his former employer’s investigation into the former president’s pressure campaign at the DOJ, according to multiple reports.

“We’ve been fully cooperating both with the Department of Justice and the Select Committee, and we’ll continue with that cooperation,” Edward Greims, an attorney for Ken Klukowski, said to CNN. 

Klukowski came to work at the DOJ just 36 days before the end of Trump’s term, joining the staff of Clark, an assistant attorney general who Trump later weighed installing as attorney general so that he could forward an investigation into the former president’s baseless claims of election fraud.

The move comes after the DOJ has executed warrants on both Clark and John Eastman, a Trump campaign attorney who advocated for Vice President Mike Pence to buck his ceremonial duty to certify the election results.

In a prior hearing, the House committee investigating that Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol claimed Klukowski had been working with Eastman prior to joining the department and showed evidence suggesting their relationship continued while Klukowski was working under Clark.

Vice Chair Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) presented a Dec. 28 email from Trump ally Ken Blackwell requesting that Pence receive a briefing from Klukowski and Eastman and warning “to make sure we don’t over expose Ken given his new position.”

“This email suggests that Mr. Klukowski was simultaneously working with Jeffrey Clark to draft the proposed letter to Georgia officials to overturn their certified election and working with Dr. Eastman to help pressure the Vice President to overturn the election,” Cheney said.

Klukowski has denied that characterization.

“The Jan. 6 committee falsely accused me on Thursday of being a go-between in a conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election,” he said in a statement shortly after that hearing. 

“That accusation is false both in its broad outlines and its details. Since the Committee first contacted me, I have cooperated without hesitation, provided it with hundreds of documents, and sat for many hours of recorded depositions.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Tackling climate resilience by building on the Inflation Reduction Act

Anyone concerned by the threat of climate change should be invigorated by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 announced Wednesday by Senate Democrats. The bill represents a potentially important step forward in tackling the climate crisis. By providing tax credits and investments for clean energy projects, the bill has the potential of a 40 percent carbon emissions reduction by 2030.

Yet, while significant and important, this legislation provides only a small amount of relief for those already exposed to the increasingly intense and frequent megadroughts, heat waves, wildfires and flooding caused by climate change. Scientists warn that even if we act urgently and decisively to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, we have already changed the climate and will feel the consequences for decades to come.

In light of this reality, we need a two-pronged approach for addressing climate change. Like every country, the U.S. needs to continue working on reducing carbon emissions to mitigate the future effects of climate change and limit the extent of future damage. In the meantime, steps need to be taken right now to adapt to an already altered climate and alleviate the suffering Americans are experiencing from record-breaking extreme weather events. Most critically, the federal government should embrace a national strategy to build climate resilience and ensure the policies, tools and capacity are in place to implement it.

A multitude of resilience-building efforts are already underway within the federal government to enhance climate resilience, more than under any past administration. For example, FEMA is providing more funding than ever before to help communities with pre-disaster preparedness grants. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has released new sea-level rise projections to help communities improve coastal development plans. The White House Council on Environmental Quality has also developed an online screening tool that governments can use to ensure that disadvantaged and vulnerable communities receive an equitable amount of the funding dedicated to building climate resilience.    

States are also increasingly taking action to build climate resilience. For instance, 18 state legislatures have created “chief resilience officer” positions, to coordinate resilience efforts across state and with local governments. This focus on climate resilience is taking place in both red and blue states. 

And yet, despite the historic nature of these resilience-building efforts at both the federal and state government levels, they are not enough. The scale and pace of intensifying climate change is outstripping actions taken so far. Agencies are still responding to weather events in a piecemeal fashion, with each agency acting incrementally and independently. The U.S. lacks a national climate resilience strategy and plan that could provide clear and consistent directives and the ability to mobilize federal dollars so that they assist communities in preparing for and responding to the climate impacts. 

As a result, opportunities are missed to get ahead of the changing climate. Many highways, dams, bridges and wastewater infrastructure projects are not being designed and built to withstand climate-related risks. Flooded homes can be reconstructed in floodplains where they will continue be at severe risk from the next catastrophic flood. Many ecosystems essential for protecting against coastal erosion, flooding and wildfire are not properly maintained and protected. Many disadvantaged communities, which are the most vulnerable to climate change, are not obtaining resources they are eligible for due to complex and demanding requirements from multiple agencies. Without systemic changes, Americans will experience increase suffering from climate change for many decades to come. 

Several vital steps, outlined in a new report by the Resilience Roadmap project, hosted by the Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy at Duke University, could be taken by the federal government right now to amplify and accelerate the work underway.  

Most immediately, the federal government should focus on better communicating the financial risks that climate change presents to community leaders, investors, businesses and homeowners. Doing so will stimulate policies and investments that are more resilient to climate change.  

Second, federal agencies should expend greater effort partnering with local and tribal governments and community organizations to ensure that federal programs and funds are reaching their intended targets — especially communities that are already vulnerable and marginalized. Wealthy communities are well-positioned to protect their members but disadvantaged communities are extremely vulnerable to floods, heat and wildfires. Focused effort to assist them are urgently needed.

Third, federal agencies should modernize its spending standards and performance measures so that taxpayer dollars can only be invested in infrastructure and programs that are designed and built to withstand future climate threats.

Finally, to address the need for coordination, the current administration needs to develop a national resilience strategy and assign a high-level czar to oversee efforts.

While a lot needs to be done, the good news is that there is bipartisan support for building climate resilience. Polls show that most American support government interventions to address climate change impact, such as requiring that infrastructure be flood resilient. And 21 bipartisan bills have been introduced in Congress that address a wide range of climate resiliency issues from strengthening the electrical grid to wildfire prevention to creating a national resilience strategy.

These efforts are not a replacement for the need to transition to a low-carbon economy. However, while we are trying to prevent the worse impacts of climate change many decades from now, we also need to act immediately to protect Americans from the ravages of the climate change impacts we are experiencing now.

Elizabeth Losos, Ph.D., is a senior fellow at Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions and leads a research program on sustainable infrastructure. She is a co-convenor of the Resilience Roadmap project.

Source: TEST FEED1

On The Money — Recession fears rise as GDP falls… again

The U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) fell for the second time this year, according to new data released by the Commerce Department. The data has intensified fears of a recession, but many experts say that it’s still too soon to make that call.  

We’ll also look at the fallout of the Schumer-Manchin agreement and the mystery of President Biden’s student loan plans. 

But first, get ready, because tomorrow is Beyoncé day. 

Welcome to On The Money, your nightly guide to everything affecting your bills, bank account and bottom line. For The Hill, we’re Sylvan Lane, Aris Folley and Karl Evers-Hillstrom. Someone forward you this newsletter? Subscribe here.

GDP falls for second straight quarter

The U.S. economy appeared to shrink for the second consecutive quarter, according to federal data released Thursday, amid growing concern the U.S. could be slipping into a recession. 

• U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) shrunk between April and June, the Commerce Department reported, marking the second-straight quarter of economic contraction. 
• GDP fell at a yearly pace of 0.9 percent in the second quarter, according to the Commerce Department’s first estimate of economic growth over the previous three months.  
• Put simply, the U.S. economy would shrink by nearly 1 percent if the second quarter’s pace of growth lasted for an entire year. 

“The U.S. economy is struggling,” Scott Hoyt, senior director at Moody’s Analytics, wrote in a Thursday analysis. 

“We now expect growth to struggle to reach potential both this year and next. However, we don’t believe the economy is in a recession,” he continued. 

Behind the decline: A steep decline in business investment and a 3.1 percent surge of imports, which detract from GDP in calculations, were the two major forces behind the second quarter decline. 

Gross private domestic investment — which includes sales of buildings, equipment and intellectual property — fell 13.5 percent in the second quarter after rising 5 percent during the first three months of the year. Housing construction fell 14 percent in the second quarter, and construction of other structures fell 11.7 percent over the year. 

So is this a recession? Two straight quarters of negative economic growth have long been used as a rule of thumb to determine when the U.S. is in recession and is the formal threshold for a recession in other countries. But economists in the U.S. consider a broader range of data when determining if the U.S. is in recession. 

• The U.S. has added 2.7 million jobs since the start of 2022, and consumer spending has continued to increase even amid high inflation.  
• The unemployment rate in June was 3.6 percent, just 0.1 percentage point higher than before the pandemic began, and there were roughly two open jobs for every unemployed American since May. 

But that hasn’t stopped the political jockeying. Sylvan has more here. 
 

Read more on the GDP report:  

• Biden focuses on job growth as US GDP falls for second straight quarter 
• Is the US in a recession? It depends on who you ask 
• Yellen: No signs of recession now despite GDP decline 

LEADING THE DAY

Manchin says he is firm on closing tax loophole; Sinema absent from caucus meeting 

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said Thursday he is standing firm on keeping a proposal to close the so-called carried interest tax loophole in the tax and climate deal he reached this week, despite potential opposition from fellow centrist Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.).   

Closing the tax loophole has long been a goal of Democratic tax reformers, but it was dropped out of the House tax bill last year after Sinema indicated she opposed ending the tax break.   

• This dynamic has prompted a storm of speculation about whether the Arizona senator will withhold her support for Manchin and Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) Inflation Reduction Act, which became public Wednesday. 
• Sinema’s office has so far declined to comment on the legislation. She did not attend a Senate Democratic Caucus meeting Thursday to discuss the deal, according to a senator in attendance. The senator noted that Sinema often misses caucus meetings and that it was not unusual for her to miss the specific meeting Thursday. 
• Some Democrats have fought to close the carried interest loophole for years, arguing it allowed wealthy money managers to effectively pay lower tax rates than working-class Americans. 

Manchin on Thursday told reporters that he will insist on keeping the carried interest provision in the bill, arguing that it’s unfair for asset managers to only pay a
20 percent capital gains tax rate on income they earn from the profits of managed investments.   

“I’m not prepared to lose,” Manchin said. “What we have is a good bill that’s fair with everybody. It’s a give-and-take proposition.  

The Hill’s Alex Bolton has more here. 

Read more on the deal:  

• Manchin-Schumer deal stuns business lobby 
• Manchin says he didn’t pull a fast one on GOP with Schumer deal

STUDENT LOANS

Biden’s student loans plan shrouded in mystery 

President Biden’s next move on student loans has been a mystery, with the White House not communicating with advocates and instead keeping stakeholders in the dark while the president decides whether to forgive student loans on a large scale.  

Biden has said forgiving $10,000 in debt per borrower is on the table but keeps delaying making a final decision. Now, with the student loan pause ending next month and the midterm elections just a few months away, borrowers are unclear about what to expect.  

• Biden in April extended a pandemic moratorium on federal student loan payments and interest accrual until Aug. 31. Biden told reporters last week that “the end of August” is his timeline for making a decision.  
• That follows more than a year of the president saying he will make a decision on student loans, amid pressure from progressives and advocates for a big portion of student loans to be forgiven, ranging from $10,000 to $50,000 to total cancellation.  

The Hill’s Alex Gangitano has more here.

TEE IT UP

Senate Democrats unveil sweeping funding bills, teeing up showdown with GOP 

Senate Democrats unveiled sweeping legislation outlining their plans to fund the government for the coming fiscal year, and Republicans are already drawing battle lines around their non-starters on abortion and other “poison pills.” 

The mammoth package, which consists of all 12 annual appropriation bills, would provide $653 billion in nondefense discretionary spending, up 10.1 percent from the current fiscal year, as well as $850 billion in defense discretionary spending, which is 8.7 percent higher than fiscal 2022. 

• The package includes ambitious plans to advance Democratic-backed priorities spanning policy areas like climate, marijuana, defense and border security. Democrats also tucked in a proposed $21 billion COVID-19 emergency supplemental funding measure. 
• Republicans bristled at the legislation upon its release, with Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), vice chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, writing off the drafts for failing to “appropriately allocate resources to our national defense” and removing legacy riders that passed in the fiscal 2022 government funding omnibus earlier this year. 

Aris has more here.

Good to Know

The Treasury Department is making moves to address the shortage of affordable housing across the U.S. — an issue that has only been exacerbated by pandemic complications, rising interest and soaring inflation.  

The Treasury announced Wednesday that it’s making more money available for affordable housing loans as part of the nearly $2 trillion American Rescue Plan fiscal stimulus package passed in 2021.  

Here’s what else we have our eye on: 

• House Democrats will propose legislation early next month to ban lawmakers, their spouses and senior staff from trading stocks unless they put their assets in a qualified blind trust. 
• The deal crafted by Manchin and Schumer would result in historic investments in combating climate change if the package is signed into law by President Biden, activists say.  
• Coca-Cola Co. announced on Wednesday that it is retiring Sprite’s iconic green bottle and replacing it with a more sustainable, clear one.

That’s it for today. Thanks for reading and check out The Hill’s Finance page for the latest news and coverage. We’ll see you tomorrow.

VIEW THE FULL VERSION HERE

Source: TEST FEED1

Florida DOE to schools: follow Biden transgender protections and risk breaking state law

Florida’s Education Department in a memo sent Thursday to school leaders across the state said recent guidance from the Biden administration to expand Title IX protections for transgender students should be ignored, citing safety concerns and suggesting the guidance may violate Florida law.

Florida Education Commissioner Manny Diaz Jr. in a memo addressed to state superintendents, school boards, private school owners and charter school governing boards, said the federal guidance was non-binding and “should not be treated as governing law.”

“The Department will not stand idly by as federal agencies attempt to impose a sexual ideology on Florida schools that risk the health, safety, and welfare of Florida students,” Diaz wrote in the memo dated July 28.

In June, the Biden administration announced a number of proposed changes to Title IX, including expanding protections for transgender students.

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

The changes, the Department of Education said, “would make clear that preventing someone from participating in school programs and activities consistent with their gender identity would cause harm in violation of Title IX.”

The department specified that there would be some exceptions to that provision. Plans to address the eligibility of transgender students to participate in school sports are still in the works.

On Thursday, Diaz told Florida school officials that they are not required to give transgender students access to facilities like restrooms, locker rooms or dormitories consistent with their gender identity or allow transgender women and girls to compete on girls’ sports teams.

“To the extent that you do any of these things, you jeopardize the safety and wellbeing of Florida students and risk violating Florida law,” Diaz wrote in the memo. A state law enacted last year bars transgender women and girls from participating in school athletics.

Florida is not known for its LGBTQ+ allyship, and state lawmakers earlier this year clashed for months over legislation known to its critics as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill. That measure, officially titled the Parental Rights in Education bill, was signed into law in March by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who has vowed to fight against the promotion of “woke gender ideology” in schools.

Under the law, public school teachers through high school are limited in how they may address topics including sexual orientation and gender identity in the classroom. The measure has been criticized by top education officials including Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, who in a March statement called the bill “hateful.”

Diaz, who was appointed by the state Board of Education to serve as Education Commissioner in April, argued in favor of the measure while serving in the Senate.

Following the June Title IX announcement, Diaz tweeted that the Biden administration is “weaponizing” the federal civil rights law to “push their anti-science, woke insanity on America’s schoolchildren.”

“Make no mistake,” Diaz wrote, “Florida schools will continue to provide high-quality, unbiased education — not indoctrination.”

Source: TEST FEED1

These are the 24 House Republicans who broke with the party to support chips and science bill

Two dozen House Republicans helped pass a $280 billion bill on Thursday to bolster the domestic chip manufacturing industry and subsidize scientific research, bucking GOP leadership’s recommendation to vote against the measure.

The House passed the CHIPS and Science Act in a 243-187-1 vote, with 24 Republicans joining most Democrats in supporting the measure. One Democrat, Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) voted present.

The measure, cleared by the Senate in a bipartisan 64-33 vote on Wednesday, is meant to bolster the United States’s competitiveness with China through a keen focus on the domestic chip manufacturing industry.

The bill provides $54 billion for chips and public wireless supply chain innovation, including $39 billion to build, expand and modernize domestic semiconductor facilities. Additionally, the measure allocates $11 billion for research and development headed by the Department of Commerce.

Late Wednesday night, House Republican leadership announced that it would be whipping against the bill, urging members of the conference to vote against the measure the following day.

Twenty-four Republicans, however, balked at that recommendation, including Reps. Jim Baird (Ind.), Troy Balderson (Ohio), Mike Carey (Ohio), Steve Chabot (Ohio), Liz Cheney (Wyo.), Tom Cole (Okla.), Rodney Davis (Ill.), Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), Mike Garcia (Calif.), Bob Gibbs (Ohio), Anthony Gonzalez (Ohio), Kay Granger (Texas), Trey Hollingsworth (Ind.), Chris Jacobs (N.Y.), Bill Johnson (Ohio), Dave Joyce (Ohio), John Katko (N.Y.), Young Kim (Calif.), Adam Kinzinger (Ill.), Michael McCaul (Texas), David McKinley (W.Va.), Peter Meijer (Mich.), Michael Turner (Ohio) and Fred Upton (Mich.).

The whip announcement came hours after Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) announced a deal on a $369 billion climate, tax and health care package, which Democrats had been negotiating for months.

Last month, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) threatened to tank the semiconductor bill if Democrats went ahead with a reconciliation package.

But the odds of a reconciliation measure coming to fruition looked dim in recent days after Manchin earlier this month said he would not support climate spending or new taxes increases on corporations or wealthy individuals in a reconciliation package, and McConnell ultimately voted for the semiconductor bill.

Hours after that bipartisan vote, however, Schumer and Manchin announced their deal, angering lawmakers in the House GOP conference.

The Republican whip memo referenced the reconciliation package, in addition to concerns regarding inflation and the deficit.

McCaul, ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told reporters ahead of Thursday’s vote that he would support the measure, despite being unhappy with the Schumer-Manchin deal

He called Schumer’s move “a grave disservice” that made the semiconductor bill “a political issue,” but ultimately decided to support the measure for national security purposes.

“I’m gonna vote for what’s right for the country and national security,” he said.

Cole, the vice ranking Republican on the Appropriations Committee, said he voted for the bill to keep China “at bay” and to safeguard the U.S.’s economic and security interests.

“Although this is not a perfect bill and not the one I would have written, it is a step in the right direction toward keeping Communist China at bay and protecting our nation’s economic and security interests,” the Oklahoma Republican said in a statement following the vote.

“At a time when China is becoming increasingly aggressive and dangerously trying to command the world order, the CHIPS and Science Act importantly strengthens America’s global competitiveness by investing in our nation’s semiconductor industry and encouraging manufacturing of those critical pieces of technology domestically. We must secure our industries from foreign adversaries, and that is exactly what this legislation achieves,” he added.

Johnson, McKinley and Meijer also referenced China in their statements explaining their support for the bill.

Eight Republican members of the Ohio congressional delegation supported the bill, likely because of an investment Intel is making in the Buckeye State.

The semiconductor company announced in January that it would invest $20 million to build two new chip factories in Ohio, but it delayed those plans as a way to protest for Congress to pass a chips bill. The company said “the scope and pace” of the building in Ohio hinged on congressional funding.

Balderson appeared to reference that project in a statement regarding his vote for the measure.

“My vote in favor of the CHIPS Act was a vote to support a one-in-a-lifetime investment in Ohio; protect critical national security interests; and provide opportunities for the people I represent by bringing good-paying jobs back to America,” he wrote.

“This bill was far from perfect. But my constituents sent me to Washington to tend to the serious business of representing their interests — and to get the job done. As a result of this investment, the future is brighter for kids in Ohio today,” he added.

Katko, who is retiring at the end of this term, said the legislation “has the potential to bring transformational investments to my district in central New York, and will take long overdue steps to shore up our domestic supply chain for semiconductors.”

Rep. Chris Jacobs (R-N.Y.), who is also retiring at the end of his term, said in a statement that the bill will make it possible for the U.S. to “‘re-shore’ chip manufacturing and bolster domestic production,” arguing that the U.S. has an “overdependence on China.”

Kim in a statement said the legislation will “expand opportunities for all Americans and protect our national security,” among other provisions, writing that the U.S. “must be able to keep our country running.”

Upton, who is not seeking reelection this year, said the bill represents “a big win to bring production and jobs from overseas back home to the United States,” adding in a statement that it is “a matter of national security.”

Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.), who is the granddaughter of the founder of Qualcomm, a semiconductor company, voted present to avoid a conflict of interest, according to her communications director.

“The CHIPS-plus package is a big win for the country, and especially for the San Diego region, which will benefit immensely from increased investments in innovation and American manufacturing. After consulting with the House Ethics Committee, Congresswoman Jacobs voted ‘present’ in order to maintain the highest level of transparency and ethical standards and to prevent a personal conflict of interest regarding the content of the bill,” Jacobs’s communications director told The Hill in a statement.

Source: TEST FEED1