ВИБОРЧА ГАЗЕТА

US Supreme Court to Take Up Biden Vaccine Mandate Cases 

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Wednesday to take up disputes over the Biden administration’s nationwide vaccine-or-testing COVID-19 mandate for large businesses and a separate vaccine requirement for health care workers.

The brief court order said the court would hear oral arguments January 7 in the two cases, with rulings likely to follow in short order.

The court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, delayed action on emergency requests in both cases that sought an immediate decision. The workplace mandate is currently in effect nationwide, while the health care worker mandate is blocked in half the 50 U.S. states.

The challenges reached the high court as the highly transmissible omicron variant surges and public health officials brace for a surge of cases in the United States.

An appeals court on Friday allowed the workplace mandate, which covers 80 million American workers, to go into effect, prompting businesses, states and other groups challenging the policy to ask the Supreme Court to block it.

The other case concerns whether the administration can require health care workers at facilities that treat federally funded Medicare and Medicaid patients to receive shots while litigation continues.

The Biden administration asked the court to allow the policy to go into effect in 24 states in which it was blocked by lower courts. It is also blocked in Texas in a separate case not before the justices.

President Joe Biden in September unveiled regulations to increase the adult vaccination rate as a way of fighting the pandemic, which has killed more than 800,000 Americans and weighed on the economy.

Among the challengers are 27 mostly Republican-led states, various individual businesses and business groups, and two groups of religious entities, including the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. Business challengers include the National Federation of Independent Business, a trade group that represents small businesses.

Last week the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati lifted a November injunction that had blocked the workplace rule from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which applies to businesses with at least 100 workers.

The health care worker rule, also challenged by mostly Republican-led states, required more than 2 million unvaccinated health care workers to receive a first vaccine dose by December 6.

Medicare and Medicaid are federal programs that provide health care for people who are elderly, disabled or living on low incomes.
…

Biden Announces New Effort to Fight Omicron Coronavirus Surge

U.S. President Joe Biden laid out a new concerted effort Tuesday to combat the surging omicron variant of the coronavirus, dispatching federal health care workers to short-handed hospitals, pre-positioning the national stockpile of medical equipment around the country and offering 500 million free COVID-19 test kits to Americans.

Biden detailed his attack plan in a White House address as the number of new coronavirus cases in the U.S. is markedly increasing again, with 143,000 recorded on Monday, along with another 1,300 deaths. Nearly three-fourths of the new cases are linked to the highly transmissible omicron variant. 

But Biden said that fully vaccinated people, and especially those who have gotten booster shots, can safely celebrate the upcoming Christmas and New Year’s holidays with family and friends. 

“We should all be concerned about omicron, but not panicked,” he said. 

He warned, however, “If you’re not fully vaccinated, you have reason to be concerned.” Biden said the 40 million unvaccinated people in the United States “have an obligation, quite frankly, a patriotic duty, to your country” to get inoculated. 

Moreover, he emphasized, “Your choice [whether to get vaccinated] can be a choice between life and death. Please get vaccinated. It’s the only responsible thing to do.” 

But even with the growing omicron threat, he said the United States is not returning to the earliest days of the coronavirus pandemic in March 2020, when thousands of businesses and schools were shut down. 

“Absolutely no,” Biden said. 

He told Americans, “I know you’re tired. I know you’re frustrated. We’ll get through this. There’s no challenge too big for America.” 

The government’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said about 204 million Americans, or 61%, are fully vaccinated, up from less than 1% at the beginning of 2021. But only 60.8 million people so far have gotten booster shots that health experts say provide the most protection against the omicron variant.

Biden said about 40 million Americans have not gotten any vaccination shots, many of them objecting to the government’s effort to get more people inoculated, saying it violates their freedom to make their own medical choices.

The president, however, said vaccine mandates he has imposed on government workers and the military, and is hoping to require at large companies with 100 or more employees that could affect 84 million workers, are “not to control your life, but to save your life.” 

Among some groups of people, getting vaccinated remains controversial — often, according to surveys, those who voted for former President Donald Trump in his unsuccessful 2020 reelection bid against Biden. 

Trump, a coronavirus victim while president, was booed by some supporters at an appearance in the southwestern state of Texas over the weekend when he told them he had gotten a booster shot.

Biden, who also has gotten a booster shot, said it was “one of the few things” he and his predecessor agree on, the need to get a booster shot in the arm.

The White House said the actions Biden announced Tuesday “will mitigate the impact unvaccinated individuals have on our health care system, while increasing access to free testing and getting more shots in arms to keep people safe and our schools and economy open.”

Biden said he is mobilizing an additional 1,000 military doctors, nurses and other health care workers to send to hospitals that need them in January and February. The White House said emergency medical response teams have been dispatched to six states with a shortage of health care workers. 

The U.S. is also expanding hospital bed capacity on an emergency basis ahead of the expected surge of the omicron variant cases, the White House said, while deploying hundreds of ambulances and emergency medical teams to transport patients to open beds.

A White House fact sheet on Biden’s address said the government has hundreds of millions of N-95 face masks, billions of gloves, tens of millions of hospital gowns and more than 100,000 ventilators in its strategic national stockpile, “all ready to ship out, if and when states need them.”

It said there are now 20,000 free COVID-19 testing sites across the U.S., and that the government is buying a half-billion at-home, rapid test kits for distribution to Americans who want them, starting next month.

The White House said that in recent months the government had added 10,000 vaccination sites across the country and now has 90,000. It plans to add new pop-up vaccination sites at some scattered spots across the U.S. and said private pharmacies are adding workers to administer more vaccinations.

 
…

Biden Urges Vaccination, Offers Free Tests Amid Omicron Variant Surge

President Joe Biden urged people to not panic as he announced on Tuesday an updated three-pronged plan to fight an expected rise in COVID-19 cases after the emergence of the highly transmissible omicron variant. He also pleaded with the millions of unvaccinated Americans to get their shots. VOA’s Anita Powell reports from the White House.
…

Pentagon Issues Rules Aimed at Stopping Rise of Extremism

Warning that extremism in the ranks is increasing, Pentagon officials issued detailed new rules Monday prohibiting service members from actively engaging in extremist activities. The new guidelines come nearly a year after some current and former service members participated in the riot at the U.S. Capitol, triggering a broad department review. 

According to the Pentagon, fewer than 100 military members are known to have been involved in substantiated cases of extremist activity in the past year. But it warns that the number may grow given recent spikes in domestic violent extremism, particularly among veterans.

Officials said the new policy doesn’t largely change what is prohibited but is more of an effort to make sure troops are clear on what they can and can’t do, while still protecting their First Amendment right to free speech. And for the first time, it is far more specific about social media.

The new policy lays out in detail the banned activities, which include advocating terrorism, supporting the overthrow of the government, fundraising or rallying on behalf of an extremist group, or “liking” or reposting extremist views on social media. 

The rules also specify that for someone to be held accountable, commanders must determine two things: that the action was an extremist activity, as defined in the rules, and that the service member “actively participated” in that prohibited activity. 

Previous policies banned extremist activities but didn’t go into such great detail. They also did not specify the two-step process to determine whether someone was accountable.

What was wrong yesterday is still wrong today, one senior defense official said. But several officials said that as a study group spoke with service members this year, they found that many wanted clearer definitions of what was not allowed. The officials provided additional details about the rules on condition of anonymity because they were not made public.

Extremists in the ranks 

The military has long been aware of small numbers of white supremacists and other extremists among the troops. But Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and other leaders launched a broader campaign to root out extremism in the force after it became clear that military veterans and some current service members were present at the January 6 insurrection.

In a message to the force on Monday, Austin said the department believes that only a few service members violate their oath and participate in extremist activities. But, he added, “even the actions of a few can have an outsized impact on unit cohesion, morale and readiness — and the physical harm some of these activities can engender can undermine the safety of our people.” 

The risk of extremism in the military can be more dangerous because many service members have access to classified information about sensitive military operations or other national security information that could help adversaries. And extremist groups routinely recruit former and current service members because of their familiarity with weapons and combat tactics. 

The number of substantiated cases may be small compared with the size of the military, which includes more than 2 million active-duty and reserve troops. But the number appears to be an increase over previous years, where the totals were in the low two digits. But officials also noted that data have not been consistent, so it is difficult to identify trends. 

The new rules do not provide a list of extremist organizations. Instead, it is up to commanders to determine if a service member is actively conducting extremist activities based on the definitions, rather than on a list of groups that may be constantly changing, officials said.

Membership prohibited 

Asked whether troops can simply be members of an extremist organization, officials said the rules effectively prohibit membership in any meaningful way — such as the payment of dues or other actions that could be considered “active participation.” 

Pentagon spokesman John Kirby told reporters that “there’s not a whole lot about membership in a group that you’re going to be able to get away with.” He added, “In order to prove your membership, you’re probably going to run afoul of one of these criteria.” 

Kirby also said that commanders will evaluate each case individually, so simply clicking “like” on one social media post, for example, might not merit punishment depending on all the circumstances involved.

He also noted that the Pentagon does not have the ability or desire to actively monitor troops’ personal social media accounts. Those issues would likely come up if reported to commanders or discovered through other means. 

The regulations lay out six broad groups of extremist activities and then provide 14 different definitions that constitute active participation. 

Soon after taking office, Austin ordered military leaders to schedule a so-called “stand-down” day and spend time talking to their troops about extremism in the ranks.

The new rules apply to all the military services, including the Coast Guard, which in peacetime is part of the Department of Homeland Security. They were developed through recommendations from the Countering Extremist Activities Working Group. And they make the distinction, for example, that troops may possess extremist materials but can’t attempt to distribute them, and while troops can observe an extremist rally, they can’t participate, fund or support one.

The rules, said the officials, focus on behavior, not ideology. So service members can have whatever political, religious or other beliefs they want, but their actions and behavior are governed. 

In addition to the new rules, the Pentagon is expanding its screening of recruits to include a deeper look at potential extremist activities. Some activities may not totally prevent someone from joining the military but require a closer look at the applicant. 

The department is also expanding education and training for current military members, and, more specifically, those leaving the service who may be suddenly subject to recruitment by extremist organizations. 

More than 650 people have been charged in the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol, including dozens of veterans and about a half dozen active-duty service members. 

 
…

White House Says Democrats ‘Need to Work Together’ on Biden Safety Net Legislation   

U.S. President Joe Biden’s administration says it is looking to push ahead with work on a social safety net spending bill after a key Democrat in the Senate said he could not support it. 

White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters at a briefing Monday that the administration is ready to “work like hell” with West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin and other members of the Democratic caucus in order to achieve its goal. 

“What’s most on the President’s mind is the risk of inaction,” Psaki said.  “And if we do not act to get this legislation done and the components in it, not only will costs and prices go up for the American people, but also we will see a trajectory in economic growth that is not where we want it to be.” 

Manchin has been a focal point in talks within the Democratic Party as leaders pushed to get the $2 trillion package passed by this week.  The legislation includes plans to expand health care for older Americans, provide universal pre-kindergarten classes, authorize new funding to combat climate change and offer more financial support for low-income Americans. 

Manchin has expressed opposition to the amount of spending, and in a radio interview Monday he reiterated that in his view the bill included too much spending without enough restrictions on incomes or work requirements for recipients. 

Earlier Monday, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said the Senate would vote “very early in the new year” on a revised version of the bill already approved by the House of Representatives. 

Manchin’s vote is essential for Democrats in the politically divided Senate as they try to pass one of the key elements of Biden’s legislative agenda.  None of the 50 Republicans in the 100-member chamber supports the plan. 

Democrats had hoped to push through the legislation on a 51-50 vote before Christmas, with Vice President Kamala Harris providing the tie-breaking vote.   

Some information for this report came from the Associated Press and Reuters.
…

US Climate Leadership Imperiled as Build Back Better Act Is Derailed

When the Biden administration and congressional Democrats revealed the climate change elements of the Build Back Better Act, environmentalist groups in the United States and around the world celebrated. The proposed $555 billion investment in renewable energy and other climate-friendly efforts would have been the largest in history, and it came with a promise that America would lead the way toward a greener future. 

On Sunday, though, that leadership role seemed to be suddenly snatched away, with the announcement by Senator Joe Manchin, a Democrat from West Virginia, that he would not support the bill.

Manchin has long made it known that he disagrees with some elements of the package, but he had been negotiating with his fellow Democrats as well as President Joe Biden as recently as a few days ago. White House officials reacted angrily to the announcement, which Manchin made in a Sunday morning television appearance, saying that his withdrawal of support amounted to a betrayal of a commitment he had made to the president. 

Manchin’s home state of West Virginia is disproportionately reliant on the fossil fuel industry for jobs and energy. A primary goal of the climate elements of the Build Back Better Act is to create economic incentives for American energy companies to transition away from fossil fuels. 

The $555 billion in climate spending in the bill was considered crucial to the U.S. being able to achieve its Nationally Determined Contribution – the reduction in emissions the U.S. pledged when it rejoined the Paris Climate agreement early this year. The pledge was to reduce total emissions to between 50% and 52% of 2005 levels by 2030. 

Blow to U.S. climate leadership 

John Noël, a senior climate campaigner with Greenpeace USA, called failure to pass the Build Back Better Act a “devastating” blow to the Biden administration’s ability to take a global leadership role on climate issues.

“It’s definitely hard for other countries to take us seriously when we talk such a big game on emissions cuts and try to show leadership, and then go back home and things are at a gridlock at the legislative level,” he told VOA. 

Michael Mehling, deputy director of the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told VOA that another about-face on climate policy by the U.S. risks creating a sense of pessimism about the possibility of progress. 

“The [European Union], for instance, has had so much historical whiplash from the U.S. joining the Kyoto Protocol, leaving the Kyoto Protocol, joining the Paris agreement, and leaving the Paris agreement … that this may sort of hit a groove that creates excessive pessimism.” 

Progress still possible 

Mehling, however, cautioned against assuming that all is necessarily lost.

“As always, with these kinds of Beltway politics, we’ll see the Senate regroup and the Democrats regroup in January, and there will probably be another version,” Mehling said. “That’s probably going to tone it down some more, make some more cuts. But it’s probably not all or nothing.” 

He also pointed out that there is still a lot that the Biden administration can do to address emissions by using executive orders and regulatory action rather than legislation. For example, he noted that the Environmental Protection Agency is preparing to issue stricter emissions requirements for cars and light trucks. 

Noël, of Greenpeace, agreed, saying that Biden has alternatives. 

“Now that we know that Manchin is not going to cooperate, not going to do anything to help the Biden administration meet its greenhouse gas emissions goals and climate goals via legislation, that gives Biden a mandate to go all in on executive actions and do whatever it takes within his authority to constrain an out-of-control fossil fuel industry,” Noël said. 

Manchin’s concerns 

Manchin listed a number of reasons for his objections to the Build Back Better Act. Some were fiscal in nature. He said that he is concerned that the bill will add to the national debt and pointed out that many of the programs in the proposal have artificial “sunset” dates that make cost estimates come into line with Democratic promises that the bill would be fully paid for. 

Manchin argues that his colleagues don’t really plan on allowing provisions in the bill to expire, and that the true cost is therefore being hidden. 

Additionally, he has expressed concern about some of the nonclimate elements of the proposal, including a permanent expansion of a refundable child tax credit, implemented during the pandemic, that provides millions of American households with monthly checks worth several hundred dollars per child. 

Electrical grid worry 

However, some of Manchin’s stated concerns left experts puzzled. For example, the West Virginia Democrat claimed that the Build Back Better Act would “risk the reliability of our electric grid” by trying to transition to renewable energy more rapidly. He pointed to power outages in Texas and California over the past few years, saying similar crises would result from implementing the Build Back Better Act. 

Historically, objections to the transition to renewable energy have included the concern that the intermittent nature of some renewable power, like solar and wind, might mean power isn’t available when Americans need it most.

Experts disagreed sharply, arguing that the climate portions of the bill would make large investments in strengthening the U.S. electrical grid. 

“The Build Back Better Act would provide some key provisions like transmission support that would improve the reliability of the grid,” said Rob Gramlich, president of Grid Strategies, a consulting firm that works on electricity transmission issues.

“Utilities in the industry have shown they can operate perfectly reliably with high penetration of wind and solar energy in the system, and Build Back Better advances wind and solar energy to get closer to climate goals,” Gramlich told VOA. “That shouldn’t, in any way, harm reliability.” 

Coal country support 

Manchin, as a senator from West Virginia, represents a constituency that has historically relied on the fossil fuel industry for many of its jobs. The state has large coal mining and natural gas extraction industries, which wield significant political power. 

Chris Hamilton, president of the West Virginia Coal Association, said his organization is grateful that Manchin blocked the bill. 

“We are fully supportive of the senator’s actions and his strong opposition to the Build Back Better legislation,” Hamilton told VOA. “We think that this provides a lot of relief to a lot of West Virginia workers, particularly those that work within the fossil fuel industries.” 

Manchin also has deep personal connections to the coal industry. He owns between $1 million and $5 million in shares of Enersystems, a coal brokerage that he founded. The company is now run by his son. Enersystems has paid him nearly $5 million over the past decade. 

When asked about this apparent conflict of interest, Manchin has historically protested that his assets are held in a blind trust. However, his Senate financial disclosure forms expressly name Enersystems. 

Republicans praise Manchin 

Republicans in Congress were quick to praise Manchin on Sunday for his decision to block the Biden administration’s top legislative priority. 

“President Biden’s mega-spending bill is dead and Joe Manchin put the nail in the coffin,” Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse said in a statement. “With a divided country, a 50-50 Senate, and blowout inflation, the American people don’t want to upend this country with nakedly partisan legislation.” 

Manchin has the ability to single-handedly scuttle the Build Back Better Act because the 100-member Senate is split 50-50 between Democrats and Republicans. Democrats have control because Vice President Kamala Harris has the authority to cast tie-breaking votes.

But because most Senate business requires a 60-vote majority to overcome the delaying tactic known as the “filibuster,” Democrats have only a small number of opportunities to pass legislation with a simple majority. The Build Back Better Act takes advantage of one of those, in a process called “budget reconciliation.” 

 
…

Biden Welcomes Puppy to White House; No Word on Promised Cat

President Joe Biden has welcomed a new addition to the family, a puppy named Commander.

Biden shared a photo Monday on his official Twitter account with a caption that said, “Welcome to the White House, Commander” as well as a brief video of him tossing a ball to Commander and walking the leashed dog into the White House.

No other details about the dog were provided. 

The puppy appears to be a German shepherd, the breed of Biden’s other two dogs, and was a gift to him from his family, according to CNN, which first reported on the puppy’s arrival after it was seen scampering around the White House South Lawn on Monday. 

His name appears to be a play on Biden’s status as commander in chief of the U.S. armed forces.

Biden brought his other dogs to the White House shortly after he took office in January.

Champ died in June at age 13.

Major, who was much younger than Champ, was involved in several biting incidents during his relatively short tenure at the executive mansion and was returned to Biden’s home in Delaware.

Biden’s wife, Jill, had said in April that a cat would soon be joining the family at the White House, but a feline has not yet shown up or been announced. 

 
…

Trump Sues New York Attorney General, Seeking to End Civil Probe

Former President Donald Trump sued New York Attorney General Letitia James on Monday, seeking to end a yearslong civil investigation into his business practices that he alleges is purely political.

In the lawsuit, filed two weeks weeks after James requested that Trump sit for a Jan. 7 deposition, Trump contends the probe into matters including his company’s valuation of assets has violated his constitutional rights in a “thinly-veiled effort to publicly malign Trump and his associates.”

The lawsuit describes James, a Democrat, as having “personal disdain for Trump” and points to numerous statements she’s made targeting him in recent years, including her support of “die-in” protests against him, her boast that her office sued his administration 76 times and tweets during her 2018 campaign that she had her “eyes on Trump Tower” and that Trump was “running out of time.”

“Her mission is guided solely by political animus and a desire to harass, intimidate, and retaliate against a private citizen who she views as a political opponent,” the former president’s lawyers wrote in the lawsuit, filed on behalf of Trump and his company, the Trump Organization.

James had announced a run for New York governor in late October, but earlier this month, she suspended that campaign and cited ongoing investigations in her decision to instead seek reelection as state attorney general.

Trump, a Republican, seeks a permanent injunction barring James from investigating him and preventing her from being involved in any “civil or criminal” investigations against him and his company, such as a parallel criminal probe she’s a part of that’s being led by Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr.

Trump is also seeking a declaratory judgment stating that James has violated his free speech and due process rights and that her investigation constitutes “impermissible state action” to “retaliate against, injure and harass a political opponent,” in violation of the Constitution.

In a statement, James said: “The Trump Organization has continually sought to delay our investigation into its business dealings and now Donald Trump and his namesake company have filed a lawsuit as an attempted collateral attack on that investigation.”

“To be clear, neither Mr. Trump nor the Trump Organization get to dictate if and where they will answer for their actions. Our investigation will continue undeterred because no one is above the law, not even someone with the name Trump.”

News of the lawsuit, filed in federal court in Albany, was first reported by The New York Times.

James has spent more than two years investigating whether the Trump Organization misled banks or tax officials about the value of assets — inflating them to gain favorable loan terms or minimizing them to reap tax savings.

Last year, James’ investigators interviewed one of Trump’s sons, Trump Organization executive Eric Trump. Her office went to court to enforce a subpoena on the younger Trump and a judge forced him to testify after his lawyers abruptly canceled a previously scheduled deposition.

Trump’s lawsuit didn’t explicitly mention James’ request for his testimony, aside from a brief reference. But it’s clear he won’t be showing up Jan. 7, James’ requested date, to answer questions voluntarily. As with Eric Trump, James’ office will now likely have to issue a subpoena and go to a judge to order the former president to cooperate.

It is rare for law enforcement agencies to issue a civil subpoena for testimony from a person who is also the subject of a related criminal probe, in part because the person under criminal investigation could simply invoke the Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. It is unlikely that Trump’s lawyers would allow him to be deposed unless they were sure his testimony couldn’t be used against him in a criminal case.

The Manhattan district attorney’s office is conducting a parallel criminal investigation into Trump’s business dealings. Although the civil investigation is separate, James’ office has been involved in both. Earlier this year, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. gained access to the longtime real estate mogul’s tax records after a multiyear fight that twice went to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Vance, a Democrat who is leaving office at the end of the year, recently convened a new grand jury to hear evidence as he weighs whether to seek more indictments in the investigation, which resulted in tax fraud charges in July against the Trump Organization and its longtime CFO Allen Weisselberg.

Weisselberg pleaded not guilty to charges alleging he and the company evaded taxes on lucrative fringe benefits paid to executives.

Both investigations are at least partly related to allegations made in news reports and by Trump’s former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, that Trump had a history of misrepresenting the value of assets.

James’ office issued subpoenas to local governments as part of the civil probe for records pertaining to Trump’s estate north of Manhattan, known as Seven Springs, and a tax benefit Trump received for placing land into a conservation trust. Vance later issued subpoenas seeking many of the same records.

James’ office has also been looking at similar issues relating to a Trump office building in New York City, a hotel in Chicago and a golf course near Los Angeles. Her office also won a series of court rulings forcing Trump’s company and a law firm it hired to turn over troves of records.
…

Schumer Announces Early 2022 Vote on Biden Safety Net Legislation

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Monday the Senate will vote “very early in the new year” on President Joe Biden’s social safety net spending plan, expressing a need to push forward after a key Democrat said he could not support it.

In a letter to Democratic colleagues, Schumer cited frustration and disappointment among members of his caucus as Senator Joe Manchin’s opposition to the roughly $2 trillion package scuttled hopes of Democratic leaders to get the legislation approved before the December 25 Christmas holiday. 

“However, neither that delay, nor other recent pronouncements, will deter us from continuing to try to find a way forward.We simply cannot give up.We must and we will keep fighting to deliver for working families,” Schumer said. 

The House of Representatives has already approved a version of the bill.Schumer said the Senate will vote on a “revised version” of that legislation “and we will keep voting on it until we get something done.” 

Schumer’s letter comes a day after Manchin, who discussed the legislation at length with Biden last week, told the Fox News cable network’s “Fox News Sunday” show, “If I can’t go home and explain it to the people of West Virginia, I can’t vote for it. And I cannot vote to continue with this piece of legislation.”

“I just can’t,” Manchin said. “I’ve tried everything humanly possible. I can’t get there. This is a ‘no’ on this legislation.”

Manchin has expressed concerns about the size and scope of the package.His vote is essential for Democrats in the politically divided Senate as they try to pass one of the key elements of Biden’s legislative agenda.None of the 50 Republicans in the 100-member chamber supports the plan to expand health care for older Americans, provide universal pre-kindergarten classes, authorize new funding to combat climate change and offer more financial support for low-income Americans.

Democrats had hoped to push through the legislation on a 51-50 vote before Christmas, with Vice President Kamala Harris providing the tie-breaking vote.

The White House said Manchin last week offered a framework for a compromise on the legislation and “promised to continue conversations in the days ahead, and to work with us to reach that common ground.”

White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in a statement Sunday that if Manchin’s comments “indicate an end to that effort, they represent a sudden and inexplicable reversal in his position, and a breach of his commitments to the President and the Senator’s colleagues in the House and Senate.”

She rebuffed Manchin’s claims that the legislation would add to the surge in consumer prices in the United States, the highest in nearly four decades, or add to the country’s long-term debt, now more than $29 trillion, because the new spending would be paid for with higher taxes on corporations and wealthy individuals.

One of the key Senate architects of the legislation, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, reacted angrily to Manchin’s refusal to support fellow Democratic colleagues and vote for it. Sanders said Manchin “doesn’t have the guts” to take on special business interests who would be impacted most by the legislation.

Sanders told the Cable News Network’s “State of the Union” show he wants the Senate to vote on the measure anyway, even if it is headed to defeat, to force Manchin to publicly account for his vote.

“He’s going to have a lot of explaining to do with the people of West Virginia,” Sanders said. “Let him vote ‘no’ and explain it to the world.” 

Some information for this report came from Reuters. 
…