Tag Archives : Build House

Give Biden the Darwin Award

Ronald Reagan said the world is divided into the smart and the dumb, the lazy and the energetic, providing eight possible combinations, of which, by far, the most dangerous is the dumb/energetic. 

When I first came to Washington (yes, a half-century ago), we were led by serious smart/energetic politicians. Major social justice legislation was working its way through Congress in the 1960s and ’70s, driven by political leaders such as Wilbur Mills, Russell Long, Pat Moynahan and Lyndon Johnson. They enacted some of the most progressive and effective social justice legislation in the last century. They worked tirelessly, read all the studies, understood the economics, the financial issues, and the most likely outcomes, debated real policy and not sound bites and thin ideology, and enacted monumental programs. 

The same was true with environmental protection, worker safety, infrastructure, and most other areas. Newspapers such as the Washington Post were led by real journalists, like Meg Greenfield and Jodie Allen, who understood public policy and engaged in fierce and useful debate on the issues. The current crop would not even be considered for their research assistants.

All of this brings us to the current messes in the economy, energy, education, defense and foreign policy. People keep asking, “Why is all this happening? “Where are they leading us?” My conclusion is that our leaders are incompetent, highly effective manipulators who resist any serious discussion and have no idea what they are doing other than staying in power and enriching themselves. My mother taught me that arguing “You’re stupid” is weak sauce — but today, except for tough outliers like Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), they do appear stupid, or cynical to an Olympian level.

Take the incredible nonsense that is the Biden administration’s environmental and energy policy. The one question to ask the president, any member of the administration or Congress or State government, or any member of the working media who has uttered the phrases “climate crisis” or “existential threat” is this: “Have you read AR6 and, if so, what is your opinion and are you willing to debate the details?” 

The first reaction almost certainly would be, “What is AR6?” First, explain that AR6 is the United Nations’ 3,949-page report, “Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis,” often called the “settled science,” they so often reference. Then, for example, mention that it has great charts on things such as dramatic increases in sea water temperature since 1850, and ask a few softball questions like: “How, exactly, did they measure sea water temperature in 1850?” Spoiler alert: The intrepid sailors crossing the oceans, lacking GPS, used sextants for fixing a location and dipped wooden buckets into the water to measure temperature at that point and roughly estimate what ocean current they were in. It was a crude type of navigation tool and highly inaccurate. 

And yet, the dramatic graphs and shrill rhetoric about changes in ocean temperature and projections of catastrophe are based in part upon that very type of “data.” And the clincher is that this database is held by an academic center in the United Kingdom and not fully available for public review. The HadSST4.0 database also has gone through periodic “cleaning,” “scrubbing,” and “bias adjustment,” only a portion of which is reliably recorded. But, don’t worry — policies that are destroying your entire economy and way of life are based upon that “data.” The U.N. report and its dramatic conclusions are replete with just this kind of “science.”

Oh, BTW/AOC, nowhere in AR6 does it say the world will end in 10 years, 100 years, or even 1,000 years. It raises serious issues that need to be addressed soon, but it is not the “existential crisis” that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and other climate activists insist demands a radical, precipitous shift from fossil fuels to inadequate and unreliable solar and wind.

And yet, the energetic/ignorant officials in the administration and Congress are enthusiastically destroying the strongest energy and industrial system on earth, hurting the poor and everyone else by driving up the prices of food and energy, and creating food shortages that are starving hundreds of millions in Africa and the third world. Now that is a real “existential crisis,” right now. And it will have no positive impact on the environment since China, India, Russia and much of the developing world cannot and will not follow the (energetic/dumb) U.S. and EU into cultural and national security suicide and lurch from fossil fuels, until more practical solutions are developed.

Another example is taxing and spending. Ask any current political leader this trick question: “Would you prefer that all of the country, rich and poor, got much poorer, or would you prefer a country where all of the country, rich and poor, got richer?” Nearly all serious economic research lays out those as the only two choices; there is actually no middle ground. You either raise taxes, increase government spending, have explosive inflation, crush investment and make everyone poorer, or you lower taxes, increase investment, raise government revenue, lower unemployment and inflation and make everyone, even the rich, much richer. Our current energetic/dumb and perhaps cynical leadership today chooses option one — they call it “equity.” Most people would prefer option two, called “prosperity.”

So, this year the political question comes down to option one (the energetic/dumb path we’re on) or option two (shift to energetic/a little smarter). It is a Darwinian choice. For America, it is truly existential.

Grady Means is a writer (GradyMeans.com) and former corporate strategy consultant. He served in the White House as a policy assistant to Vice President Nelson Rockefeller. Follow him on Twitter @gradymeans1.

Source: TEST FEED1

CEOs average pay in 2021 was 324 times higher than employees: report

CEOs of the top 500 companies in the U.S. earned 324 times more money in 2021 than their employees, with executive compensation climbing $2.8 million dollars in the past year on average as worker wages declined, according to an AFL-CIO report.

While the report found that real worker wages fell 2.4 percent in 2021 after adjusting for inflation, the average compensation for the top CEOs in the nation last year was $18.3 million, a more than $5 million increase over the past decade.

CEO pay, which includes salary, stocks, bonuses and nonequity incentives, rose 18.2 percent last year, much faster than the 7.1 percent rate of inflation.

Meanwhile, workers earned on average $58,260 last year, a roughly $1,300 increase annually over the past decade, according to the report.

The disparity between the average worker’s pay and CEO compensation shows how inequality has ballooned during the pandemic.

At Amazon, where workers unionized for the first time this year at a Staten Island location, CEO Andrew Jassy earned more than $212 million in 2021. That was 6,474 times the median pay of the average Amazon worker, according to the AFL-CIO report.

Apple CEO Tim Cook earned more than $98 million last year, 1,447 times higher than his employees’ median pay. Apple workers also unionized for the first time at a store location near Baltimore last month.

Netflix, which just reported better-than-expected earnings and slowed subscriber loss in its second quarter results, has a slightly smaller disparity. CEO Reed Hastings collected more than $40 million in 2021, about 200 times higher than the median employees’ pay.

Other CEOs at the top of the list include executives at Expedia, JPMorganChase, Intel, Etsy and Adobe.

Source: TEST FEED1

Wisconsin Assembly speaker says Trump pressed him to decertify 2020 election last week

The speaker of the Wisconsin State Assembly said former President Trump called him last week to try to convince Republicans in the state to decertify Wisconsin’s 2020 presidential election results. 

Speaker Robin Vos told the Milwaukee-based ABC affiliate WISN that Trump called him after the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that most ballot drop boxes were not allowed, only permitting those placed in election offices. 

“It’s very consistent,” Vos said. “He makes the case, which I respect. He would like us to do something different in Wisconsin. I explained it’s not allowed under the Constitution. He has a different opinion, and then he put out the tweet.” 

Trump posted on his social media platform Truth Social on Tuesday that Vos should act on the ruling. 

“So what’s Speaker Robin Vos doing on the Great Wisconsin Supreme Court Ruling declaring hundreds of thousands of Drop Box votes to be illegal? This is not a time for him to hide, but a time to act!” Trump said. “I don’t know his opponent in the upcoming Primary, but feel certain he will do well if Speaker Vos doesn’t move with gusto. Robin, don’t let the voters of Wisconsin down!” 

Vos told WISN that the state court’s ruling does not invalidate the ballots placed in drop boxes during the 2020 election but just says that they cannot be used in the future. 

“I think we all know Donald Trump is Donald Trump,” Vos said. “There’s very little we can do to control or predict what he will do.” 

Trump did not immediately return a request from The Hill for comment.

Trump since losing the 2020 election has pressured lawmakers and officials around the country to back claims that he actually won the election.

Investigations by various states and groups have not found any evidence that widespread fraud led to Trump’s loss to President Biden. Other more far-fetched claims have also been put in public view by various Trump allies.

A mob of Trump’s supporters overwhelmed police and invaded the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, interrupting the certification of the Electoral College vote by Congress.

A House panel is now investigating Trump’s involvement in that effort, laying the case that the mob was spurred on by the president to riot at the Capitol. Its latest hearing will be Thursday night.

Trump is considering another run for the White House, which could be announced in the weeks to come.

Source: TEST FEED1

Ohio remapping dysfunction should set an example

The Ohio Supreme Court provided a win for anti-gerrymandering on Tuesday, when it rejected a congressional map drawn by Republican lawmakers. Ohio legislators now have 30 days to provide an acceptable map. If they fail to do so, the Ohio Redistricting Commission will be charged with this task. 

Partisan gerrymandering has been ubiquitous during the 2022 mapping period, with both parties guilty. The Princeton Gerrymandering Project grades every state’s congressional map across several metrics, including competitiveness, geography and partisan fairness. 

In Illinois, a Democrat-control legislature drew a map that not only fails across the three metrics, it cannot pass the eye test, with Districts 13, 15, 16 and 17 particularly egregious. Districts are drawn that weave through the state avoiding particular voters to ensure that 14 of the 17 districts are likely to support Democrat candidates.

In Texas, a Republican-control legislature drew a map that fails on partisan fairness and geography, packing Democratic voters into districts around Dallas, Austin and Houston, effectively using the Voting Rights Act to justify their nefarious actions. 

What is making partisan gerrymandering more difficult to execute are the plethora of computational tools available that expose it. Entities like the Princeton Gerrymandering Project, FiveThirtyEight and the Institute for Computational Redistricting all provide data analysis and insights that benefit voters and expose gerrymandering perpetrators. This has also made it easier for the courts to assess proposed maps and keep partisan gerrymandered maps from becoming law. 

The Ohio congressional map situation is a mess. The 2022 midterms will be held with the 2012 maps, giving Republicans an advantage, with a new 2024 map forthcoming by the end of this summer. What further complicates this situation is that Ohio lost one congressional district after the 2020 Census.

The Ohio situation should be a warning to other states of the unintended consequences of partisan gerrymandering. Voters should be outraged, and the best way to show such anger is to not vote for the legislators involved running to retain their seats, and their power. 

When computational tools were unavailable to expose gerrymandering, partisan gerrymandering was easier to hide and perpetuate. That is no longer the case. 

To level the mapping playing field across the nation requires federal laws to define how congressional maps should be drawn. Whether they involve independent commissions or standards defined by fairness metrics, a common set of principles must be applied so that no one party gains an advantage. Unfortunately, the very people who can put forth such legislation are also the very people who have the most to lose from it.

Such laws would serve both party’s best interests. Most importantly, partisan gerrymandering affects all voters, every Republican and Democrat, effectively devaluing the impact of votes by how maps are drawn. 

Ohio will continue to be under the microscope as its 2024 congressional map is drawn. Court challenges to other 2022 maps around the nation will invariably lead to court rulings that demand new maps be drawn. Such legal actions waste time and taxpayer money. Drawing and defending partisan gerrymandered maps should not be in the job description of legislators, given the obvious conflict of interest. 

In an ideal world, maps will be drawn to serve the best interests of voters. With partisan gerrymandering, they are drawn to serve the selfish interests of politicians.

It is disappointing that three of the seven Ohio Supreme Court justices, all Republican, supported gerrymandering by voting to accept the proposed partisan gerrymandered map. More disappointing is that a ruling by the Ohio Supreme Court was required to stop partisan gerrymandering in Ohio.

Lawmakers are capable of doing better. The question is, are they willing to do better?

Sheldon H. Jacobson, Ph.D., is a founder professor of computer science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He is the founding director of the Institute for Computational Redistricting, with a mission to provide transparent approaches for redistricting grounded in computational methods.

Source: TEST FEED1

Secret Service turned over just one text after records request: report

The Secret Service provided only one text exchange to the Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general for a month’s worth of records requests for 24 Secret Service personnel, CNN reported on Wednesday. 

CNN obtained a letter from the Secret Service to the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, revealing that Inspector General Joseph Cuffari requested in June 2021 that the Secret Service provide text messages for two dozen personnel from Dec. 8, 2020, to Jan. 8, 2021. 

The letter’s revelation comes in the aftermath of Cuffari informing the committee that the Secret Service had deleted text messages from Jan. 5 and Jan. 6, 2021, as “part of a device-replacement program” after the OIG had requested electronic communications records. 

The committee subpoenaed the Secret Service for texts, but the agency was not able to provide the committee with texts from those two days, Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-Fla.), a committee member, told MSNBC. It did provide other records. 

Ronald Rowe, the assistant director for the Office of Intergovernmental and Legislative Affairs for the Secret Service, said in the letter that the agency submitted a conversation between former US Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund and former Secret Service Uniformed Division Chief Thomas Sullivan, in which Sund requested assistance on Jan. 6. 

Rowe said the agency advised that it did not have any additional records that satisfy the inspector general’s request for text messages, CNN reported. 

The Secret Service, Office of the Inspector General and House Jan. 6 select committee did not immediately return requests from The Hill for comment. 

The Secret Service has maintained that the texts were not deleted with malicious intent. 

The agency said in the letter that it was still seeking to determine if any relevant information was deleted during the replacement program, but it is “currently unaware” of text messages that the inspector general requested that were “not retained,” CNN reported. 

The Secret Service is also interviewing the 24 personnel to determine if the messages were stored in locations the agency has not yet searched. 

The letter states that the agency provided more than 10,000 pages of documents in its initial response to the subpoena.

Source: TEST FEED1

Despite vitriol from his own party, Joe Manchin proves he was right once again

Do you know who is polling higher than any other Democratic senator right now? It’s the guy who was accused by a former presidential campaign chief of “single-handedly destroying humanity.”

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) currently sits at 57 percent approval in West Virginia. He has climbed to this impressive number for a Democrat in a deep red state by defying President Biden and almost all his party on everything from the multi-trillion-dollar spending boondoggle ironically called “Build Back Better” and blowing up the filibuster to federalizing voting laws earlier this year and climate change legislation this week. In a related story, Biden sits at 16 percent approval in the Mountain State. 

The growing buzz lately is that Democratic lawmakers do not want Biden to seek a second term. Given that the president is at 33 percent approval overall and sits in the 20s among independents, the nervousness and quiet panic occurring in the Blue Team huddle is understandable. And it’s not just lawmakers who would prefer not to see “Biden: The Sequel” in 2024, but Democratic voters themselves, with almost two-thirds saying no thanks to Biden pursuing a second act, according to a recent poll.

The names tossed around as possible Biden replacements as the party nominee are mostly those whom Biden bested in 2020: Vice President Kamala Harris, Transportation Sec. Pete Buttigieg, Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and even former Rep. and current Texas gubernatorial candidate Beto O’Rourke (no, really). The most logical choice, arguably, would be Manchin, who has clearly shown an ability to woo Republican and independent voters.

“No matter what spending aspirations some in Congress may have, it is clear to anyone who visits a grocery store or a gas station that we cannot add any more fuel to this inflation fire,” Manchin said in a July 13 statement while calling inflation “a clear and present danger to our economy.”

In making this argument, the senator sounds like a former president who finished his two terms in the White House as the most popular president to exit the White House since Harry Truman: Bill Clinton, who left the Oval Office with a 65 percent approval rating and won reelection four years earlier quite comfortably despite struggling mightily in his first two years in office. 

Much of Clinton’s success hinged on his decision to pivot to the middle by signing welfare reform and overseeing budget surpluses.

So what Manchin is saying here makes perfect sense if political logic and fiscal sanity is your thing: Inflation is a cruel tax on everyone, especially those in the low and middle classes whose budgets are already stretched thin. So, what’s his party’s solution? To spend more money, of course. 

“When we’re having this discussion, it’s important to dispel some of those who say, well it’s the government spending [fueling inflation] — no, it isn’t,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) argued recently, and she was serious. “The government spending is doing the exact reverse, reducing the national debt. It is not inflationary.” 

If you believe this, then you also lament that the $5.5 trillion Build Back Better bill did not pass, because in Pelosi’s universe, injecting this kind of money into the economy would have lowered inflation from the current 41-year-high of 9.1 percent. 

Democrats can still gain some small legislative victories ahead of the midterms, which are less than 110 days away. For example, prescription drug reform and health care subsidies are two areas that are supported by a solid majority of American voters. But as far as any additional massive spending, Manchin and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) have rightly put on the brakes. 

No matter: Here’s what Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign chairman John Podesta had to say about Manchin’s most recent opposition to climate change legislation last week. 

“It seems odd that Manchin would choose as his legacy to be the one man who single-handedly doomed humanity,” Podesta declared. 

“Rage keeps me from tears,” Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) tweeted last week regarding Manchin’s veto.

“History will not be kind to those who stand in the way of action,” wrote Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), also on Twitter. “If there is anyone left to write it.” 

The headlines have been no better. 

The Washington Post: “White House sidelined as Manchin again crushes Biden’s policy ambitions.”

The Guardian: “’A modern-day villain:’ Joe Manchin condemned for killing US climate action.”

The New York Times: “Biden Concedes Defeat on Climate Bill as Manchin and Inflation Upend Agenda.”

At least The Times mentioned inflation in its headline, because Manchin said it is the number one reason why he did what he did. 

And therein lies the rub: President Biden and his party have lost the trust of the average American voter when it comes to economic prognostications. Things in this department went south once we were told repeatedly in 2021 that rising inflation was simply transitory, nothing to be terribly concerned about.

When that proved false, the president’s handlers decided to create” #PutinPriceHike” in blaming the February 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine for rising inflation, even though it had been rising since February 2021 to levels not seen since the early 1980s. 

So, when we hear from those in power that climate change legislation will reduce health and electricity costs, cut the deficit and strengthen the economy, it’s easy to be skeptical. The skeptics include Sen. Joe Manchin, the voice of reason in a party that is increasingly veering to the left. 

This isn’t Bill Clinton’s Democratic Party anymore. And, therefore, it isn’t Manchin’s either. But instead of attacking the West Virginia senator, it might be a good exercise to stop and ponder why he’s so popular outside Washington.

Joe Concha is a media and politics columnist.

Source: TEST FEED1

Not the best Middle East defense

In advance of President Biden’s visit to the Middle East, his administration and its Israeli counterparts talked up the creation of a variously named “Middle East Air Defense Alliance.” The concept is a response to the threat that Iranian ballistic and cruise missiles and drones pose to countries across the region, including Israel, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq and others.  

The initiative gained widespread attention in late June in a Wall Street Journal article quoting unnamed American and regional officials. Then, Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz, U.S. National Security Council spokesman John Kirby and others explicitly discussed the idea. Some Gulf states have denied or downplayed the story, either because they do not want to antagonize Iran or because they remain overtly hostile to Israel, even if some maintain close ties behind closed doors. 

On its face, the idea makes sense. The Iranian missile and drone threat is real and growing. The Abraham Accords opened the door to broader, deeper and more open cooperation between Israel and its Arab neighbors. The recent inclusion of Israel in U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) facilitates greater coordination and information sharing among American and regional armed forces. The United States can and should help its Middle Eastern allies and partners defend themselves more effectively.  

Regrettably, the Biden administration introduced this initiative in a context that threatens to leave the proposed alliance as little more than a symbolic gesture at best. At worst it could further undermine Middle Eastern security.  

First, the initiative appears entirely defensive. Without parallel discussions on deterring Iranian missile and drone attacks, Tehran has little reason to reduce its investment in missile and drone forces or to stop using them to menace its neighbors. On the contrary, the focus on defense could spur Iran to increase its development and deployment of these weapons to overwhelm its neighbors’ augmented defenses.  

Second, and more importantly, the push for a regional air defense cooperative comes as the United States zealously pursues a return to the Iran nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA. Contrary to its advocates’ inflated and insistent claims, the agreement’s limited and temporary restrictions will leave Iran at the nuclear weapons threshold no later than the end of this decade. Long before then, in October 2023, the terms of the JCPOA lift the United Nations’ missile embargo on Iran. More immediately, a return to the Iran nuclear deal will provide the regime access to hundreds of billions of dollars, some of which undoubtedly will go toward more capable missiles and drones. This isn’t theoretical speculation: In the years after the deal’s conclusion in 2015, Iran’s “defense” budget jumped by over 30 percent.  

In other words, the Biden administration is advancing a policy that enables and funds the Iranian missile threat while offering to help U.S. partners and allies defend themselves against that same threat. The United States looks like a drug dealer offering to open a rehab center.  

There is a better way. The president could have used his trip to announce that the JCPOA’s time has passed and that he is committed to developing another plan with Iran’s neighbors to genuinely ensure that the Islamic Republic never develops or acquires nuclear weapons. An improved policy would not only defend against Iranian missiles and drones but also deter Iran from even contemplating their use. Such a policy would exact a price from Tehran for its attacks on American troops, contractors and allies and for its seizure of American and other foreign hostages. The United States would again enforce its own sanctions to prevent Chinese and others’ oil purchases from financing Iranian missiles, terrorism and aggression.  

The president still has an opportunity to lead America away from a policy of weakness and appeasement to a policy of strength and deterrence. Even after his trip, if President Biden were to change course, he would find a coalition of capable, committed Middle Eastern allies who are eager to work with the United States to guarantee a more secure and stable region that serves American interests. Such a policy would bolster America’s partnerships in the Middle East, would be far more likely to succeed, and would create greater regional security at a time of growing threats elsewhere around the globe.  

Jonathan Schachter is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. 

Source: TEST FEED1

Ivey wins Maryland House primary that drew interest of pro-Israel groups

Glenn Ivey, the former state’s attorney general for Prince George’s County, Md., early Wednesday was projected to win the Democratic primary for Maryland’s fourth congressional district.

Ivey faced off against former Rep. Donna Edwards (D-Md.), who represented the district from 2008-2017, in the primary.

The race garnered national attention as a result of outside money infiltrating the intraparty contest. Edwards had the support of the pro-Israel group J Street, while the American Israel Political Action Committee supported Ivey.

The seat is currently represented by Rep. Anthony Brown (D-Md.), who is running for Maryland Attorney General. Ivey has the upper hand going into the general election given the district’s heavy Democratic lean. 

Source: TEST FEED1

The Hill's Morning Report – Sweating Democrats ponder: What if?

In Washington, call it a summer of chaos. At nearly every turn, Democrats are stymied while trying to declare progress in an election year.

Eager to nudge President Biden’s domestic wish list through the Senate? Not enough Democrats.

Fortify marriage and contraception rights in statute to checkmate a conservative Supreme Court? The House began taking action on Tuesday, but the 50-50 Senate is a question mark.

Executive action? In courts, opponents challenge federal authority and the president’s pen.

Congressional investigations — are they seismic or a sideshow? The public is impatient, distracted and in some cases assertively skeptical about headlines and news coverage.

“Democrats start with the question of, ‘Are we allowed to do this or not?’ And I think Democratic voters will forgive you if you try, and later on it turns out a court strikes it down,” former Republican-turned-Democratic-adviser Kurt Bardella told The Washington Post. “What they won’t forgive is if you keep asking them to keep you in power, but you don’t do anything with it, or at least try to do something with it.”

On the theory that reacting to perceived setbacks is a form of offense, the House on Tuesday overwhelmingly approved legislation that would protect same-sex and interracial marriages amid concerns that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Roe could jeopardize other constitutional precedents. The vote was 267-157, and 47 Republicans crossed the aisle to join every Democrat (The Hill and The Associated Press). Among GOP members who voted yes: Liz Cheney (Wyo.) Tom Emmer (Minn.), Burgess Owens (Utah), Scott Perry (Pa.), Elise Stefanik (N.Y.), Ann Wagner (Mo.) and Michael Waltz (Fla.).

The Hill: Analysis of the 47 House Republicans who supported Tuesday’s marriage equality protection measure.

It was a direct response to a separate opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas last month that advocated rescinding high court decisions that prohibit states from banning gay marriage and contraception rights.

It is unclear whether the House-passed measure will come to a vote in the Senate, where at least 10 Republicans would need to join every Democrat to overcome a filibuster. The bill calls for the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, which former President Clinton signed into law in 1996. Still on the books, it recognizes marriage as “only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife.” The law defines a spouse as “a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.”

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said Monday that the chamber should vote on enshrining those two rights (NBC News). On Tuesday, he said marriage protections and access to contraception were Democratic priorities, but “we have more priorities than we have time” (The Wall Street Journal).

Meanwhile, the White House wants to salvage what it can of Biden’s reform agenda after Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said he wants to wait before considering climate and tax provisions. The president, short on votes and time, has urged House and Senate allies to try to pass remaining pieces to send to his desk before the fall (The Hill).

Biden will be in Massachusetts today to talk about climate change at the site of a former coal-fired power plant that shuttered in 2017 but has since been reborn as an offshore wind power facility. He will not declare a national climate emergency during his trip, as had been urged by climate activists and Democrats, but the idea remains under consideration, according to the White House (The Hill and The Associated Press).

Amid Democrats’ frustrations and recriminations about major policy promises that some now declare “dead,” Biden’s Senate allies are reluctant to say that the president or Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) bungled the overall legislative strategy, reports The Hill’s Alexander Bolton. The public second-guessing may grow louder this summer.

Related Articles

▪ The Hill: Republicans want to rein in the president’s power to cancel student loan debt, arguing such plans are “wildly inflationary.”

▪ The Hill: The Senate on Tuesday voted to take up legislation to provide $52 billion in subsidies and tax credits for the computer chip industry to boost semiconductor competition with China.

▪ The Associated Press: Most major nations lag in action on climate-fighting goals. 

LEADING THE DAY

➤ MORE CONGRESS

The back-and-forth between the Secret Service and the Jan. 6 committee reached a crescendo on Tuesday as the law enforcement agency revealed that messages shared by agents around the attack were purged and that it has no new texts to hand over to the panel for its probe.

The development prompted the National Archives to call for the U.S. Secret Service to investigate the erasure of messages by agents on Jan. 5 and Jan. 6. According to the Office of Inspector General (OIG) for the Department of Homeland Security, the messages were replaced “as part of a device replacement program” (The Washington Post). 

The agency is now tasked with looking into if the erasing of those messages was done for nefarious purposes. 

“If it is determined that any text messages have been improperly deleted (regardless of their relevance to the OIG/Congressional inquiry of the events on January 6, 2021), then the Secret Service must send NARA a report within 30 calendar days of the date of this letter with a report documenting the deletion,” Laurence Brewer, chief records officer for the U.S. government, wrote in a letter to the custodian of records at DHS (The Hill).

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said Tuesday during an Aspen Security Forum interview that “the Secret Service remains committed to cooperating fully with the committee.”

The protective service, responsible for former President Trump’s movements throughout Jan. 6, was subpoenaed by the committee for text messages, which could also shed light on testimony made by former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, who told investigators that Trump physically attempted to grab the wheel of his motorcade car upon hearing it would not be going to the Capitol following the rally on the Ellipse.

The New York Times: Secret Service says some missing Jan. 6 texts are unlikely to be recovered. 

The committee was thrown for another loop on Tuesday, as Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) tested positive for COVID-19 and will not appear in-person at this week’s prime-time public hearing that will feature two former Trump White House aides.

According to the panel, Thompson has mild symptoms and is working remotely. Thursday’s hearing is set to go ahead as planned (Axios). 

Elsewhere on the committee’s radar, the jury of 12 individuals and two alternates was set for Stephen Bannon’s contempt of Congress trial, which finally got underway and allowed the prosecution to lay its case against the former White House chief strategist’s defiance of a congressional subpoena. 

“It wasn’t optional, it wasn’t a request, and it wasn’t an invitation,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Amanda Vaughn said in her opening statement about the subpoena, adding that Bannon “decided he was above the law” (The Washington Post).

M. Evan Corcoran, a Bannon lawyer, maintained that the former Breitbart News CEO was still negotiating with the House committee when the contempt charge came down and the House voted on it. Bannon himself denounced the proceedings as a “show trial” upon exiting the courthouse. 

▪ The Hill: Senate confirms J. Michelle Childs, possible future Supreme Court pick, to D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. 

▪ Financial Times: Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) plans to lead a congressional delegation to Taiwan in August, a rare event for a House leader and unsettling to Beijing.

▪ Bloomberg News: China warns U.S. ahead of Pelosi’s Taiwan visit, says move would have “grave impact.”

➤ POLITICS

Trump on Tuesday earned a big intraparty win on Wednesday night as Dan Cox, a first-term state delegate, won the Maryland GOP gubernatorial primary on Tuesday, defeating Kelly Schulz, who was supported by outgoing Gov. Larry Hogan (R).

With 80 percent of precincts reporting, Cox pulled 56 percent backing to just 40 percent for Schulz, who was Mr. Hogan’s secretary of commerce (The Hill). Cox is perhaps best known for having attended the infamous Jan. 6 rally on the Ellipse and labeled former Vice President Mike Pence a traitor on Twitter at the time. 

Now, he is the GOP standard-bearer in the deep blue state and enters the general election as the underdog against the to-be-determined Democratic nominee.

As of this morning, political neophyte Wes Moore leads the Democratic race for governor over Tom Perez, the former Labor secretary and chairman of the Democratic National Committee, taking 36.7 percent to 27.4 percent for Perez. Maryland Comptroller Peter Franchot sits in third with 19.1 percent. Sixty-one percent of precincts have reported.

However, a potential winner will not be known for days or potentially weeks as mail-in ballots cannot start being tabulated until Thursday morning. More than 200,000 mail-in ballots remain outstanding on the Democratic side (The Washington Post).

▪ The Hill: Early takeaways from the Maryland primaries.

▪ The Washington Post: Who is Dan Cox?

▪ The Hill: Maryland state Del. Neil Parrott was projected to win the GOP primary for Maryland’s 6th Congressional District on Tuesday, setting up a rematch with incumbent Rep. David Trone (D-Md.). 

▪ The Baltimore Sun: Rep. Anthony Brown (D-Md.) wins Democratic nod for Maryland attorney general, defeating former Judge Katie Curran O’Malley.

On the 2024 scene, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) predicted on Tuesday that Trump will face GOP competition if he seeks the presidency in 2024. 

“I think we’re going to have a crowded field for president. I assume most of that will unfold later and people will be picking their candidates in a crowded primary field,” he told reporters (The Hill).

Until then, the former president is attempting to keep hold of his grip on the GOP through a number of key endorsements. The Hill’s Julia Manchester lays out the seven foremost examples in the coming weeks that will serve as a test of Trump’s standing in the party, headlined by a number of those taking place in Arizona and Alaska.

▪ Axios: McConnell pledges he’s “all in” on Colorado Senate race.

▪ The New York Times: Former New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio (D) on Tuesday posted a Twitter video saying he is abandoning his bid for a House seat after a poor showing and is leaving electoral politics.

IN FOCUS/SHARP TAKES

➤ ADMINISTRATION

The Justice and Treasury departments point to U.S. banking, investment and tax laws as impediments to U.S. efforts to seize assets of Russian oligarchs as punishment for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The Justice Department told senators on Tuesday that the government wants to amend the definition of racketeering under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act to add violations of sanctions and export controls because existing laws allow owners of assets such as trust funds to remain anonymous and can obscure the wealth and holdings of Russian elites. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has said the U.S. is vulnerable to being the money laundering capital of the world because of its finance and tax laws (The Hill).

U.S. and Africa: Biden on Wednesday announced the United States on Dec. 13-15 will host the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit in Washington with representatives from the African continent.

White House turnstile: Anita Dunn, Democratic communications adviser to the president, is interviewing candidates who could help overhaul the West Wing messaging and press operations, including hiring a new communications director, reports NBC News. The White House is preparing for evolving political imperatives next year if Republicans do well in the midterms, as analysts expect, and ahead of the 2024 presidential contest. 

📝 Introducing NotedDC, The Hill’s curated commentary on the beat of the Beltway. Click here to subscribe to our latest newsletter. 

OPINION

■ In a nasty era, insisting on basic politeness is a revolutionary idea, by former Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels (R), contributing columnist, The Washington Post. https://wapo.st/3RL97Ue 

■ What abortion sanctuaries can learn from the immigrants’ rights movement, by Julie Dahlstrom and Katie Watson, opinion contributors, The Hill. https://bit.ly/3OmgQW1

WHERE AND WHEN

The House will meet at 10 a.m.

The Senate convenes at 10 a.m. to resume consideration of the nomination of Gregory Williams to be district judge for the District of Delaware.

The president will receive the President’s Daily Brief at 9:30 a.m. Biden will travel to Somerset, Mass., to speak at 2:45 p.m. about the climate crisis and clean energy. Somerset is a community along the coast of Massachusetts with a growing sector for wind energy. Biden will return to the White House this evening.

The vice president has no public events scheduled.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo co-host a virtual supply chain ministerial forum at 9 a.m. at the State Department.

First lady Jill Biden will be in New Haven, Conn., to visit a Horizons National summer learning program at Albertus Magnus College that uses American Rescue Plan funding. She will be joined by Education Secretary Miguel Cardona (NBC NECN).

Economic indicator: The National Association of Realtors at 10 a.m. will report on existing home sales in June. Analysts want to gauge how much the housing market is cooling amid rising mortgage rates and higher 2022 home prices.

🖥  Hill.TV’s “Rising” program features news and interviews at http://thehill.com/hilltv, on YouTube and on Facebook at 10:30 a.m. ET. Also, check out the “Rising” podcast here.

ELSEWHERE  

➤ INTERNATIONAL

Russian President Vladimir Putin made his first trip outside of the former Soviet Union’s borders to Iran on Tuesday, where he was met by a notable delay prior to a meeting with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. 

Upon entering their sit down, Putin was left alone for 50 seconds in front of the cameras and was seen fidgeting and looking uneasy. Reuters and other media outlets noted the maneuver was similar to what Putin has done to world leaders in the past, including in 2020 in Moscow when Erdoğan was left waiting for about two minutes by the former KGB officer.

Putin also met with Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Iranian supreme leader, as part of his travels to Tehran.

The Wall Street Journal: Putin says Russia will honor gas commitments, but warns of new Nord Stream curbs.

Russia plans to annex additional Ukrainian territory, according to “ample evidence” gathered by the U.S., White House spokesman John Kirby said on Tuesday. Russia’s annexation timeline is unclear, he added (The Hill).

The White House on Tuesday welcomed Ukrainian first lady ​​Olena Zelenska, the spouse of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Zelenska and Jill Biden met to discuss how the U.S. could provide help with mental health issues faced by women and children living through Russia’s war in Ukraine.

The discussion came on the eve of Zelenska’s scheduled speech to Congress later today where she is expected to update lawmakers on the security, economic and humanitarian conditions in the war-torn nation (The Washington Post).

▪ Niall Stanage, The Hill’s The Memo: Cracks grow in U.S. response to Ukraine.

▪ David Ignatius, columnist, The Washington Post: There are too many wild cards to forecast the Ukraine war. 

➤ PANDEMIC & POX  

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Tuesday endorses Novovax’s COVID-19 vaccine for adults, calling the new vaccine an “important tool” in the ongoing pandemic that “provides a more familiar type of COVID-19 vaccine technology,” compared with messenger RNA vaccines, such as those made by Pfizer and Moderna (The Hill and The New York Times). 

The Wall Street Journal: How long will a prior COVID-19 infection protect you as BA.5 spreads? The window between infections might be shrinking.

🦠 Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker (D) tested positive for COVID-19 on Tuesday and is experiencing mild symptoms. Pritzker recently attended a Florida Democratic Party convention in Tampa. Rep. Val Demings (D-Fla.), who’s running for the Senate, also tested positive for the virus following the conference (CBS News). … The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced that it is ending its monitoring program for COVID-19 cases on cruise ships. In a brief statement published on its COVID-19 guidance for cruise ship travel, the agency said its “COVID-19 Program for Cruise Ships is no longer in effect” (The Hill). 

Total U.S. coronavirus deaths reported as of this morning, according to Johns Hopkins University (trackers all vary slightly): 1,024,900. Current average U.S. COVID-19 daily deaths are 352, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

➤ TECH 

A judge on Tuesday fast-tracked Twitter’s lawsuit attempting to force Elon Musk to complete his $44 billion purchase of the company, setting up the five-day trial for October. Lawyers for the social media giant argued in Delaware Chancery Court that Twitter is being harmed daily without a resolution to the dispute with the Tesla founder. Musk’s legal team argued the expedited timeline would not give him enough time to evaluate data they’ve received about the prevalence of fake accounts on the platform (The Hill).

➤ ECONOMY

The U.S. is being buoyed by one key marker against continued rising inflation abroad: a stronger dollar. While Americans are experiencing less bang for their buck domestically, the increased strength of the dollar means that foreign goods have become more affordable and travel internationally is currently cheaper. As The Hill’s Sylvan Lane details, the short-term benefits for many consumers also come with longer-term threats of lower corporate profits, fewer U.S. exports and a global economic slowdown that could bounce back to the U.S. … Amid increased fears of a recession, thousands of small-business owners are descending on Washington this week seeking congressional support for the futures of mom-and-pop stores across the country (The Hill). 

THE CLOSER

And finally … Comic-Con International in San Diego kicks off with a preview today. Gizmodo published a deep-dive slideshow about the famous comic book convention (which formally starts on Thursday and runs through Sunday) and reports the celebrities scheduled to make appearances (Dwayne Johnson, Keanu Reeves, William Shatner), upcoming film and streaming series teasers, industry reveals, and panels of insiders scheduled to dissect entertainment details that fans savor during the lively extravaganzas. 

Conventiongoers, who come from all over the world, must show proof of vaccination or proof of a negative COVID-19 test and wear masks. It’s one gathering where mask wearing fits the moment (Gizmodo).

Stay Engaged

We want to hear from you! Email: Alexis Simendinger and Al Weaver. Follow us on Twitter (@alweaver22 & @asimendinger) and suggest this newsletter to friends!

Source: TEST FEED1

Mozilla urges Congress to pass antitrust law in full page ad

Mozilla, the company behind the Firefox browser, took out a full page ad in The Washington Post Wednesday to urge Congress to pass a key antitrust bill that aims to rein in the power of tech giants. 

The ad is an open letter to Congress calling for lawmakers to immediately pass the American Innovation and Choice Online Act, a bipartisan bill sponsored by Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). 

“Our vision for the internet is one that’s private, secure, interoperable, open, accessible, transparent, and balances commercial profit and the public good. But the anticompetitive practices of the biggest tech companies have made it virtually impossible for the billions of people around the world to adopt better tech alternatives,” the open letter of the ad states. 

The proposal would “restore the open nature of the web putting you back in control of your software,” it continues. 

More than 4,000 people co-signed the letter, according to the ad. 

The bill advanced out of the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this year with bipartisan support, but it has since been stalled in the Senate without being called for a vote. 

Mika Shah, co-acting general counsel at Mozilla, told The Hill the onus is on lawmakers hesitant to back the bill to take charge to revamp what she called outdated competition laws that are hurting small and medium sized companies as well as consumers.

“When companies talk about hurting them, really at the end of the day that means hurting consumers, because companies are creating products for people. And so this is hurting people, people are not getting the benefit of what we could have with better tech, better choices,” Shah said. 

“I am going to be very disappointed if Congress doesn’t just take that action to pass a law that has so much support and so much impact on the internet,” Shah added. 

The proposal defines a covered platform by market value and user base in a way that would likely apply to Meta, Google, Apple and Amazon. It would limit companies from giving preference to their own products and services over competitors’. 

The legislation has faced fierce pushback from the companies and industry groups.

A House version of the bill also advanced out of committee with bipartisan support last year, but has not been called for a vote.

Source: TEST FEED1