ВИБОРЧА ГАЗЕТА

US Senate Preps for Landmark Climate Legislation

Congressional Democrats appear to be on the cusp of passing legislation that would dedicate $369 billion to combat climate change through a combination of grants, tax cuts, subsidies and other measures aimed at reducing carbon emissions.

In addition to its climate-related elements, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) makes it possible for Medicare, the government-sponsored health insurance program for older Americans, to negotiate certain drug prices with the pharmaceuticals industry, a move expected to lower drug costs for all Americans. It also creates a minimum tax on large corporations, raises taxes on the wealthiest Americans, and will reduce the federal deficit by an estimated $300 billion over 10 years.

In a statement issued Thursday, President Joe Biden praised the legislation and called on lawmakers to pass it quickly.

The bill, Biden said, “makes the largest investment in history in combating climate change and increasing energy security, creating jobs here in the U.S. and saving people money on their energy costs. I look forward to the Senate taking up this legislation and passing it as soon as possible.”

Key provisions

A major element of the bill is a package of rebates, tax credits, and grants to help individual American families reduce their reliance on fossil fuels by subsidizing energy efficient home improvement projects and the purchase of electric vehicles.

The bill would dedicate $60 billion to helping establish clean energy production in the U.S. That includes tax credits to support $30 billion in spending on the domestic production of solar panels, wind turbines, batteries and other critical clean energy components as well as $20 billion in low-cost loans to support the manufacture of electric vehicles.

Other elements of the bill aim to support a broad range of decarbonization efforts across the economy, including $30 billion in grants and loans to states and electric utilities to “accelerate the transition to clean energy.”

The bill also earmarks tens of billions of dollars for “environmental justice” efforts meant to reduce the impact of climate change on disadvantaged communities and billions more toward increasing the climate resilience of farms and rural communities.

A catalyst for global action

“We could not be more excited about this huge breakthrough,” David Kieve, president of EDF Action, an arm of the Environmental Defense Fund, told VOA. “There’s been a shift in the attitudes of the American public in recent years towards an understanding that the jobs of the future are going to be in clean energy. And the only open question is, are they going to be here in the United States?”

Kieve said that in addition to creating those jobs in the U.S., he believes the investments in the bill will put the U.S. “on the fast track” to hitting the administration’s broader climate goals. He said he also expects it to catalyze action in other countries.

“What we’ve heard from other nations for quite some time, is that it’s nice that America has a president who’s saying the right thing about climate change, but do they really have the political will to execute on it?” he said. “When this bill is passed, and goes to President Biden’s desk, we will have answered that question definitively for the rest of the world and other nations will have no excuse but to get in line and follow our lead.”

Big promises

In an effort to push the bill across the finish line, Democrats in Congress have been touting its expected impact on the Biden administration’s pledge to reduce U.S. carbon emissions. While the $369 billion of climate-directed spending falls short of the $555 billion that the administration was seeking last year, many experts say that the IRA will have a major impact.

As negotiations were ongoing last week, Sen. Tom Carper, a Democrat from the state of Delaware who chairs the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works issued a statement that said, “In what would amount to the most ambitious climate bill ever enacted, this legislation would put our nation on track to nearly 40% emissions reduction by the end of the decade, unleash the potential of the American clean energy industry, and create good-paying jobs across the country.”

Experts and activists who have reviewed the legislation have broadly agreed that the bill lives up to the hype.

In a statement calling the legislation “transformative,” Sierra Club President Ramón Cruz said the bill “will be the single largest investment in our communities — including those that have long been disproportionately impacted by climate-fueled disasters — and a healthy and secure future for all of us.”

Energy Innovation: Policy and Technology, a non-partisan energy and climate policy think tank analyzed the legislation and issued a report that read, in part, “We find that the IRA is the most significant federal climate and clean energy legislation in U.S. history, and its provisions could cut greenhouse gas emissions 37-41% below 2005 levels.”

Criticism from the right

Not all analyses of the bill’s climate provisions were positive. The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, argued that the effort to move the country toward greater use of renewable energy is an infringement on Americans’ freedom.

“Energy impacts every aspect of our lives and every sector of the economy. By dictating how we produce and consume energy, this bill would dictate how we live our lives and limit the freedoms we enjoy,” the report argued. “It’s a pretext for control. And there is little to no regard for the high prices incurred by Americans and the costs that will arise for trying to achieve the left’s radical climate agenda. And what’s even worse, this is all pain for no gain.”

Republican Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, who represents West Virginia, a state that relies heavily on fossil fuel for both jobs and energy, also criticized the bill.

“It will hurt our industries in West Virginia, our hard working men and women in the oil and gas business or in the coal business,” she said. “That will also, I think, hamper our energy security in this country.”

Former EPA officials in support

A bipartisan group of former Environmental Protection Administration leaders released a statement Friday in support of the bill’s climate components.

“The legislation meets the moment of urgency that the climate crisis demands, and will position the U.S. to meet President Biden’s climate goals of reducing emissions 50-52% by 2030, while making unprecedented investments in clean energy solutions that will save families hundreds of dollars a year and create new, good paying union jobs across the country,” the former administrators said.

The group included Carol Browner, who ran the EPA under President Barack Obama, and Christine Todd Whitman, who ran the agency under President George W. Bush.

Complicated process

The bill is the product of months of negotiations among Senate Democrats, who had to make a number of concessions to appease centrist members of their party. Keeping all Democrats on board was essential because the Senate is currently divided 50-50 between Democrats and Republicans, with Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris able to cast deciding votes in the instance of a tie. Republicans appear united in opposition to the bill.

Democrats are moving to pass the bill through a process called “budget reconciliation” that makes legislation immune to the filibuster, a rule that allows a minority of senators to block a piece of legislation unless it receives 60 votes in the 100-member body. Under budget reconciliation, the Democrats’ 50 votes, plus Harris’s tie-breaker, would be sufficient to pass the Inflation Reduction Act even if Republicans unanimously oppose it.

If the Senate passes the bill, which could happen within days, it would then go to the House of Representatives, where it is expected to pass and to be sent to Biden for his signature.
…

Pelosi Visit to Taiwan May Prompt More High-Level Visits

The impact of U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s whirlwind visit to Taiwan is beginning to be felt, experts say, as another group of high-profile politicians solidifies plans to drop in on the self-ruled island that China considers a breakaway province. 

While China has been preventing Taiwan from sending its leaders to global forums, “they cannot prevent world leaders or anyone from traveling to Taiwan to pay respect to its flourishing democracy,” Pelosi said in a statement published after she concluded her Taiwan visit Wednesday.

The visit has put China’s leadership in a lose-lose situation, said Ali Wyne, a senior analyst at Eurasia Group.

“If it does not respond, it [the Chinese leadership] worries that it may lose political legitimacy at home and project weakness abroad, inviting other high-profile leaders to visit Taiwan and revealing that China’s alleged ‘red lines’ are not, in fact, inviolate,” he wrote in an emailed response to VOA Mandarin.

Yet if Beijing continues to respond to Pelosi’s visit with provocative rhetoric, military drills and threats to retaliate against the United States, other countries may view China as belligerent or even reckless, according to Wyne.

“It is difficult for Beijing to respond in a manner that conveys the strategic importance that it attaches to reunification without undercutting its diplomatic stature,” Wyne added.

China has started a live-fire military drill over seven swaths of water around the self-governed island, according to Taiwanese officials.

In a statement issued Wednesday, foreign ministers of the Group of Seven leading industrial nations warned China not to escalate tension in the region and emphasized that it is routine for legislators from their countries to travel internationally.

Craig Singleton, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the world is keeping a close eye on these drills.

“Beijing’s rhetoric over the last 24 to 48 hours suggests this will not simply be a one- or two-day crisis. Based on an initial assessment, the already tense situation will likely deteriorate further before eventually stabilizing,” he said in an email to VOA Mandarin.

No-win situation for China

China has long tried isolate Taiwan, blocking exchanges between Taiwanese politicians and officials from other countries, especially high-profile representatives such as Pelosi, whose office puts her second in line for the U.S. presidency, behind Vice President Kamala Harris.

But since Pelosi’s sojourn, Beijing may now be facing a domino effect as other high-profile politicians aim to cement their own ties with Taipei by visiting the island.

The Guardian reported Monday that Britain’s House of Commons foreign affairs committee was planning a visit to Taiwan later this year. A source told the British daily that the trip had been scheduled earlier this year but was postponed because a member of the delegation tested positive for COVID-19.

On Tuesday, after Pelosi arrived in Taiwan, China’s ambassador to the United Kingdom, Zheng Zeguang, addressed those countries considering a visit to Taiwan: “We hope that the other countries will recognize the extreme sensitivity of the Taiwan question, honor their commitment to the one-China principle, exercise prudence in words and actions relating to the Taiwan question, and not be led astray by or dance to the tune of the United States.”

When asked about U.K. lawmakers’ plan to visit Taiwan, Zheng said at a press conference [[ ]] that if the visit transpired, it would lead to “severe consequences” for China’s relations with the U.K., adding that “the U.K. side knows this all too well.”

Yun Sun, a senior fellow and director of the China Program at the Stimson Center, said if Western countries interpret Beijing’s countermeasures to Pelosi’s visit as “overreacting,” China will find itself working against its own interests by inspiring lawmakers from other Western democracies to visit Taiwan.

“I think the current backlash from China, including some military threats, will lead to more democracies thinking they have to align together to stand against China,” she told VOA Mandarin in a phone interview. “Following that line of thinking, I think we will see more parliament members visiting Taiwan to showcase their support for democracy.”

Another worry for Beijing, according to analysts, is that it’s losing the narrative on the “One China” policy because visits such as Pelosi’s bring more international exposure and recognition of Taiwan. The “One China” policy is the diplomatic acknowledgement of China’s position that there is only one Chinese government. The U.S. recognizes and has formal diplomatic ties with China yet maintains a robust unofficial relationship with Taiwan.

China thinks Pelosi’s visit might shake the long-standing policy, which is a cornerstone of U.S.-China relations, said Patrick Cronin, the Asia-Pacific security chair at Hudson Institute.

“They see the visit as hollowing out the ‘One China’ policy and accelerating the gradual independence of Taiwan,” Cronin wrote in an email to VOA Mandarin. “What they don’t say but may also think is that for [Chinese President] Xi Jinping and the CCP [Chinese Communist Party] to control the narrative and policy direction over Taiwan requires demonstrating China’s resolve and power in the face of what they believe to be a declining hegemonic power, the United States.”

Sun from the Stimson Center cautioned that China should be careful not to overact.

“I think the best way for China now is to maintain a strong rhetoric, that is, to put its posture at a more aggressive level but be sure to reduce direct military and security losses,” she said.
…

Women Gubernatorial Hopefuls Break Records with Primary Wins

Even with several U.S. primary elections still to go, women candidates for governor are already shattering records. At least 20 female gubernatorial candidates have won their party’s nomination and will be on the ballot in November, breaking the previous high of 16, which was set in 2018.

“It’s notable because this is an area where women’s underrepresentation has been quite persistent,” says Kelly Dittmar, director of research at the Center for American Women in Politics (CAWP) and an associate professor of political science at Rutgers University-Camden. “This disrupts gendered perceptions about who can and should lead … we’ve had some really stubborn biases about the association between executive office and masculine traits.”

There are currently nine women state governors in the United States, the most ever.

So far this year, there are 13 Democratic and 7 Republican female nominees for governor, as tracked by CAWP. And while being a major political party’s nominee isn’t a guarantee of winning office, the numbers do increase the likelihood that there could soon be a record number of women serving at the highest level in their states

“It’s a powerful and influential political position where we want women’s voices and experiences to be heard. But it’s especially important as we see major policy issues being allocated back to the states,” Dittmar says. “When we think about abortion or voting rights or education — where a lot of our key policy debates are today are at the state level and governors will play a key role in them. And so having women in those positions is only more important now.”

In all, 47 gubernatorial candidates have already been selected ahead of November’s midterm elections. With 36 of the 50 states electing their governors this year, another 25 nominees are still to be selected. Several women — both Democrats and Republicans — are competing for those slots.

There are also more woman vs. woman gubernatorial matchups in 2022 than ever before. In all of American history, there have only been four all-women contests in races for governor. This year, there are already five, which highlights the fact that women don’t all think alike.

“Women are not monolithic in their experiences, in their perspective, and their policy agendas and positions,” Dittmar says. “It’s a good reminder for us not to make assumptions that women are the same in ways that we don’t make that assumption for men who are competing against each other.”

Seeing women in positions of power sends an important message to donors, voters and future potential female candidates about the ability of women to succeed at the highest political levels, says Dittmar. It also helps fulfill the promise of a representative government, one of democracy’s key premises.

But having women in these high public offices isn’t enough when it comes to a representative government, she says.

“We want enough women in these offices that there are a diversity of them,” Dittmar says. “You know, we’ve only ever had three women of color governors in all of U.S. history. We only have one woman of color currently serving as governor. We’ve never had a black woman governor.”
…

Democrats Say They’ve Reached Agreement on US Economic Package

Senate Democrats have reached an accord on eleventh-hour changes to their top-priority economic legislation, they announced late Thursday, clearing their major hurdle to moving the measure through the chamber in coming days.

Democrat Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, a centrist who was seen as the pivotal vote, said in a statement that she had agreed to changes in the measure’s tax and energy provisions and was ready to “move forward” on the bill.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a Democrat, said lawmakers had achieved a compromise “that I believe will receive the support” of all Democrats in the chamber. His party needs unanimity to move the measure through the 50-50 Senate, along with Vice President Kamala Harris’ tie-breaking vote.

Schumer has said he hopes the Senate can begin voting on the energy, environment, health and tax measure on Saturday. Passage by the House, which Democrats control narrowly, could come next week.

Final congressional approval of the election-year measure would be a marquee achievement for President Joe Biden and his party, notching an accomplishment they could tout to voters as November approaches.

Sinema said Democrats had agreed to remove a provision raising taxes on “carried interest,” or profits that go to executives of private equity firms. That’s been a proposal she has long opposed, though it is a favorite of other Democrats, including conservative West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, an architect of the overall bill.

The carried interest provision was estimated to produce $13 billion for the government over the coming decade, a small portion of the measure’s $739 billion in total revenue.

It will be replaced by a new excise tax on stock buybacks, which will bring in more revenue than that, said one Democrat familiar with the agreement who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the deal publicly.

The official provided no other details.

The Senate won’t be in session Friday as Democrats continue their talks. That pause will also provide time for the Senate parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, to decide if any of the bill’s provisions violate the chamber’s rules and should be removed.
…

Biden Pushes Inflation Reduction Act, Amid Divided Opinion

The Biden administration on Thursday pushed Congress to pass its proposed $260 billion Inflation Reduction Act, which the White House says will “lower costs, reduce inflation, and address a range of critical and long-standing economic challenges.”

“My message to Congress is this: Listen to the American people,” Biden said during a virtual roundtable of U.S. business leaders. “This is the strongest bill you can pass to lower inflation, continue to cut the deficit, reduce health care costs, tackle the climate crisis and promote America’s energy security, all while reducing the burdens facing working-class and middle-class families.” 

Economists, politicians and ordinary consumers alike agree that rising prices are a problem — U.S. inflation hit 9.1% in June, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Food price hikes are especially painful for many American families: In the past year those have risen, on average, by about 10%, the highest yearly increase in more than 40 years.

What few can agree on, however, is what needs to be done to bring it back down.

Biden’s supporters say the act will raise government revenues by $313 billion by imposing a 15 percent minimum corporate tax — a move that will affect some of the nation’s wealthiest companies, especially those that paid nothing in federal corporate income taxes on their profits in 2020.

It will also reform prescription drug pricing, which the administration estimates will save the federal government $288 billion a year. The act also invests more than $400 billion in energy security, climate change mitigation and health care.

The country’s largest union umbrella group, the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, supports the act, its president said Thursday during the roundtable with Biden.

“I’m bringing the voice of our 57 unions, 12.5 million members, who believe this bill is going to help us reshape the future and deliver real help to working families by reducing rising energy and health care costs,” said AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler. “This is going to deliver fundamental economic change across America.”

But some economists are not so sure.

A study from the Penn Wharton Budget Model predicts the act would have little impact on inflation, forecasting prices would slightly increase for another two years and then fall.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget reached the opposite conclusion, saying that the act would “very modestly reduce inflationary pressures in the near term while lowering the risk of persistent inflation over time.”

Moody’s Analytics reached a similar conclusion, while the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated the bill would trim U.S. budget deficits by $102 billion over 10 years.

Economist Steve H. Hanke, a professor of applied economics at Johns Hopkins University and founder and co-director of the university’s Institute for Applied Economics, Global Health, and the Study of Business Enterprise, said Thursday that the act is “ill-conceived” and involves the one thing that people seem to dislike more than rising prices: taxes.

“The idea it’s going to do anything with inflation is ridiculous,” he said Thursday during a seminar with the Jewish Policy Center. “It will change the relative prices of different things — exactly how, I don’t know, because I haven’t gone through the 10,000-page thing. And it looks to me like it’s a tax increase bill.”

The U.S. Senate hopes to vote on the act in coming days. Given Democrats’ razor-thin majority in the Senate and the fractious nature of current American politics, Biden needs every Democrat in the upper chamber to vote for it.

Democratic holdout Senator Joe Manchin made news last week when he dropped his opposition to the act, but Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema, the other holdout on Biden’s economic proposal, has yet to indicate whether she will support it.
…

Blinken to Lay Out Strategy for Sub-Saharan Africa During Visit

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken will launch a three-country tour of Africa on Sunday in South Africa. He is expected to deliver a major speech laying out the Biden administration’s strategy for Sub-Saharan Africa. Experts tell VOA that human rights concerns will likely be high on the agenda. VOA’s Senior Diplomatic Correspondent Cindy Saine reports.
…

US Senate Committee Holds Hearing for 3 Women Nominated to African Ambassador Posts

Three career diplomats in the U.S. Foreign Service answered questions Wednesday from senators during a hearing examining their credentials to lead U.S. diplomatic missions in Africa. If confirmed, three of the toughest diplomatic missions abroad will be led by women, who told the lawmakers that serving on the diplomatic front lines is a privilege and that they are committed to doing what they can to further peace and prosperity in the region.

Lucy Tamlyn, who currently heads the U.S. diplomatic mission in Sudan as chargé d’affaires, may soon head south to the Democratic Republic of Congo to serve as ambassador. The DRC is the largest country, by size, in sub-Saharan Africa.

In her testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Tamlyn described the DRC as a country of enormous size, complexity, and promise, and said “the DRC’s dynamic, entrepreneurial, and creative population of over 100 million are eager to engage with the United States.”

Senator Chris Van Hollen, a member of both Foreign Relations and the Appropriations Committee, which has authority over U.S. foreign aid, pointed to the challenges awaiting Tamlyn at the hearing.

“The DRC is an incredibly complicated place with all sorts of rivalries and conflict, especially in the East. My question for you is: what do you think is at the heart of those conflicts and what do you think you can do as U.S. ambassador to try to address them in the long-term interest of stability in the DRC?” Van Hollen, himself the son of a career U.S. Foreign Service officer, asked.

A lack of governance, coupled with the possession of vast natural resources formed the basis of some of most entrenching challenges the DRC has faced, Tamlyn said in response to Van Hollen’s question.

“There’s inevitably a competition, both inside the country as well as outside, for access to those resources. In the absence of strong government providing services to the people, you have instead a whole network of armed groups which provide some form of local governance,” a situation that poses problems, she said.

Tamlyn said it is important to communicate to the country and its people that things could change.

“We want the Congolese people to know that corrupt mineral exploitation deals, illegal logging and environmental devastation is not inevitable, and that there are alternatives,” she said.

The United States is committed to supporting governments and leaders that provide security and services to the people, she said, while vowing to use “all our diplomatic tools, including leveraging visa ineligibilities and sanctions, to help the Congolese fight corruption,” which she said was a common aspiration among the population.

The committee also heard the testimony of two other senior career diplomats nominated to head embassies in Mali and Ivory Coast, both in West Africa.

If confirmed, Jessica Davis Ba will represent the United States in Ivory Coast and Rachna Sachdeva Korhonen will lead the diplomatic mission in Mali.

The State Department currently places Mali on Level 4: Do Not Travel in its Travel Advisory. Ivory Coast and the DRC both are Level 3: Reconsider Travel.

The three senior members of the U.S. Foreign Service fully embraced the assignments awaiting them.

“If confirmed, my husband and our five sons will be going with me,” Davis Ba told the lawmakers, pointing to her husband and eldest son sitting behind her.

Korhonen, whose family emigrated to the United States from India, told the senators that in looking at her, they were looking at “an American dream come true.”

Meanwhile, Tamlyn, whose home in the eastern U.S. state of Rhode Island stands in sharp contrast with the heat in central Africa, said in her testimony that “I feel privileged to have served in countries where we are literally on the front lines, where U.S. diplomacy really matters, and side by side with colleagues who answer the call despite the personal, family, and health sacrifices entailed.”

The DRC, Mali and Ivory Coast are among “some of the most difficult ambassadorships,” former U.S. Ambassador to Chad Christopher E. Goldthwait said in a written interview with VOA.

“These are not glamour posts, but are in the forefront or representing U.S. interests on a continent that suffers from great poverty and instability, but has enormous potential and the fastest population growth on the globe.”

Representing U.S. interests in these three countries and furthering the economic and political development that is at the core of these interests will not be easy, Goldthwait said, but he had no doubt the three senior members of the U.S. Foreign Service are up to the challenge.

“It’s always encouraging to see seasoned career foreign service officers entrusted with some of the most difficult ambassadorships,” he said. 
…

US Senate Approves NATO Membership for Sweden, Finland  

The U.S. Senate approved Sweden’s and Finland’s accession into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization on Wednesday by a vote of 95-1, sending a strong bipartisan message of support for expanding the Western alliance against Russia.   

“The NATO vote is a very important vote — for American security around the world: Finland’s and Sweden’s membership will strengthen NATO even further and is all the more urgent given Russian aggression, given Putin’s immoral and unjustified war in Ukraine. Putin is strengthening the NATO alliance,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, said on the Senate floor Wednesday.   

The United States is one of 30 NATO member countries that will have to approve Sweden’s and Finland’s admission into the more than 70-year-old organization that has guaranteed European security since World War II. The usually lengthy process for admission has been fast-tracked in the U.S. Senate as part of a robust response to Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine earlier this year.   

Prior to the vote, Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Menendez said the Senate vote would send a powerful rebuke to Russian aggression in Ukraine.

The vote would “send a signal to the world that we will unite against those actors who seek to destabilize the supply of food that threatens hunger for millions of people all over the world; who seek to weaponize energy in the middle of an unprecedented heat wave; and who think they can simply invade a neighbor with no consequences,” the New Jersey Democrat said.

But Republican Senator Josh Hawley, who cast the only vote against the ratification, said the approval was not in the interests of U.S. foreign policy. 

“I fear that some in this town have lost sight of that. They think American foreign policy is about creating a liberal world order or nation-building overseas. With all due respect, they’re wrong. As you would pay this, you should be about protecting the United States, our freedoms, our people, our way of life. And expanding NATO, I believe, would not do that,” Hawley said on the Senate floor.   

The Missouri Republican argued the United States cannot afford to focus on security threats in Asia and Europe, and he suggested European allies must pay more for their own defense.   

“We have to prioritize, to focus, and that means we have to do less, in Europe, in order to prioritize America’s most pressing national security interest, which is in Asia, with regard to China,” Hawley said.  

Senator Rand Paul attempted to include an amendment ensuring NATO’s defense guarantees do not replace Congress’ own ability to authorize the use of military force.  That amendment was not approved. The Kentucky Republican voted “present” on allowing Finland and Sweden to join NATO.  

An amendment offered by Senator Dan Sullivan, an Alaska Republican, stating that Sweden and Finland should spend at least 2% of their annual GDP on military defense — in line with a 2006 agreement between NATO members — did pass.    

But a majority of Senate Republicans voted in favor of the admission, with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky warning members of his caucus ahead of the vote not to damage the bipartisan agreement on admitting Sweden and Finland.   

“If any senator is looking for a defensible excuse to vote ‘no,’ I wish them good luck. This is a slam dunk for national security that deserves unanimous bipartisan support,” McConnell said.
…

Biden Seeks to Federally Protect Abortion as States Vote on Issue 

President Joe Biden on Wednesday signed an executive order that the White House said would protect access to abortion care, part of the continuing fallout from a June Supreme Court reversal of its landmark 1973 ruling establishing a right to abortion.

With each of the 50 states now free to write abortion laws as it sees fit, an early test came Tuesday when voters in the Midwestern state of Kansas voted decisively to keep that state’s right to abortion. But several states now outlaw the practice, sometimes even in the case of rape or incest.

“This is just extreme,” Biden said before signing the order, which aims to help people seeking abortions travel to a state where it remains legal. “You know, even the life of the mother is in question in some case — in some states.

“Republicans in Congress and their extreme MAGA ideology are determined to go even further, talking about nationwide bans that would outlaw abortion in every state, under every circumstance, going after the broader right to privacy as well. But as I said before, this fight is not over. And we saw that last night in Kansas.”

This was the second abortion-related executive order that Biden had signed since the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision. The first executive order, last month, aimed to guarantee access to emergency contraception and abortion medication.

Critics said these White House actions were too vague, and too slow.

“What we’re seeing is the federal government figuring out how they can support abortion patients without violating federal law,” said Elizabeth Nash, state policy analyst at the Guttmacher Institute, a research and policy organization that supports abortion rights.

“And so that’s why some of this is so piecemeal,” she said. “And we’re seeing what agencies are going to come up with. And frankly, this is the sort of announcement that we really needed to hear right when Dobbs came down. And so I’m hoping that these agencies can be kick-started into action so that they can catch up. Because we are seeing states ban abortion.”

On Wednesday, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said the Biden administration is working as fast as it can, but “there’s steps and processes that we have to take in order to take actions as big as these.

“But look, there has been an urgency from this president from day one when — when the Supreme Court made this extreme decision to take away a constitutional right,” she said.

Thirteen states immediately banned abortion right after the Supreme Court ruling. In the coming months, four states — California, Kentucky, Michigan and Vermont — will vote on abortion, as Kansas did.

Kansans on Tuesday voted in large numbers, and nearly 59% voted against a proposal to amend the state constitution to remove abortion protections. In this respect, the conservative state echoed national trends: A recent Pew poll found that 61% of U.S. adults say abortion should be legal in all or most cases.

Anti-abortion groups decried the Kansas vote and Biden’s actions.

“Biden and the Democrats make a serious error in assuming Americans nationwide agree with their radical agenda — using the full weight of the federal government to impose abortion on demand up to the moment of birth, illegally forcing taxpayers to fund it, ‘cracking down’ on nonprofits that provide life-affirming alternatives, and threatening to destroy any guardrails of democracy that stand in their way,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America.

No state allows abortion at birth. Most abortions — about 91% of them — happen before the 13-week mark, said the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Research from the Kaiser Family Foundation found that abortions at or after 21 weeks of pregnancy represent just 1% of all U.S. abortions. Those cases, it said, are often the result of serious health risks to the fetus or the pregnant person.

Since the ruling, Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris have urged Congress to enshrine abortion access into federal law. Harris has spent the past few weeks crisscrossing the country to speak about the issue with legislators, health care providers, faith leaders and others.

She said the Biden administration’s policy is clear.

“We trust the judgment of the women of America to make decisions based on what they know is in their best interests,” she said.

“We trust the women of America to make those decisions, if she chooses, in consultation with her faith leader, with her physician, with her loved one. But we understand fully the government should not be making that decision for her.”
…

US Voters Cast Primary Ballots

Voters in multiple U.S. states cast ballots Tuesday in primary elections ahead of the November general elections that will decide control of the U.S. congress.

In the state of Arizona, Karrin Taylor Robson and Kari Lake were about even in the Republican race for governor with three-quarters of the ballots counted early Wednesday.  Lake has the backing of former U.S. President Donald Trump, whose support is being closely watched ahead of the November vote.

The winner will advance to face Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, in the general election.

A U.S. Senate seat will also be on the November ballot in Arizona with incumbent Democrat Mark Kelly facing reelection.  Trump-backed Blake Masters defeated Army veteran Jim Lamon.

The race for Arizona secretary of state featured Mark Finchem, another Trump-backed candidate who was at the January 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol. He defeated three other Republicans to advance.

Voters in the U.S. state of Kansas rejected a constitutional amendment that would have removed abortion protections.

It was the first time U.S. voters decided an abortion-related matter since the U.S. Supreme Court’s June decision overturning a longstanding constitutional right to end a pregnancy.

In another Kansas vote, state Attorney General Derek Schmidt won the Republican nomination for governor.  Trump supported Schmidt, who will go up against Democratic Governor Laura Kelly in the November election.

In the state of Michigan, Republican Tudor Dixon won the party’s nomination to face Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer.  Dixon is among a group of Republican candidates who have supported Trump’s false claims that he won the 2020 presidential election.

Democratic Congresswoman Rashida Talib won her primary election by a wide margin.

Two other Michigan lawmakers, Congresswoman Haley Stevens and Congressman Andy Levin faced off against each other in a Democratic primary due to the fact that the state lost one of its seats in the House of Representatives in the latest round of redistricting.  Stevens prevailed and will face Republican Mark Ambrose in the general election.

In Missouri, Democratic Congresswoman Cori Bush also handily won a spot on the November ballot.

Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt won the Republican race to oppose Democrat Trudy Busch Valentine, an heiress to the Anheuser-Busch beer fortune, in a November election for a seat in the U.S. Senate.

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

US Senate Passes Bill to Help Veterans Exposed to Toxic Burn Pits

A bill enhancing health care and disability benefits for millions of veterans exposed to toxic burn pits won final approval in the Senate on Tuesday, ending a brief stalemate over the measure that had infuriated advocates and inspired some to camp outside the Capitol.

The Senate approved the bill by a vote of 86-11. It now goes to President Joe Biden’s desk to be signed into law. Biden described the legislation as the biggest expansion of benefits for service-connected health issues in 30 years and the largest single bill ever to comprehensively address exposure to burn pits.

“I look forward to signing this bill, so that veterans and their families and caregivers impacted by toxic exposures finally get the benefits and comprehensive health care they earned and deserve,” Biden said.

The Senate had overwhelming approved the legislation back in June, but a do-over was required to make a technical fix. That process derailed when Republicans made a late attempt to change another aspect of the bill last week and blocked it from advancing.

The abrupt delay outraged veterans groups and advocates, including comedian Jon Stewart. It also placed GOP senators in the uncomfortable position of delaying the top legislative priority of service organizations this session of Congress.

A group of veterans and their families have been camping out at the Capitol since that vote. They had endured thunderstorms and Washington’s notorious summer humidity, but they were in the galleries as senators cast their votes.

“You can go home knowing the good and great thing you have done and accomplished for the United States of America,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer told them.

The legislation expands access to health care through the Department of Veterans Affairs for millions who served near burn pits. It also directs the VA to presume that certain respiratory illnesses and cancers were related to burn pit exposure, allowing veterans to obtain disability payments to compensate for their injury without having to prove the illness was a result of their service.

Roughly 70% of disability claims related to burn pit exposure are denied by the VA due to lack of evidence, scientific data and information from the Defense Department.

The military used burn pits to dispose of such things as chemicals, cans, tires, plastics and medical and human waste.

Hundreds of thousands of Vietnam War era veterans and survivors also stand to benefit from the legislation. The bill adds hypertension, or high blood pressure, as a presumptive disease associated with Agent Orange exposure.

The Congressional Budget Office projected that about 600,000 of 1.6 million living Vietnam vets would be eligible for increased compensation, though only about half would have severe enough diagnoses to warrant more compensation.

Also, veterans who served in Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Guam, American Samoa and Johnston Atoll will be presumed to have been exposed to Agent Orange. That’s another 50,000 veterans and survivors of deceased veterans who would get compensation for illnesses presumed to have been caused by their exposure to the herbicide, the CBO projected.

The bill is projected to increase federal deficits by about $277 billion over 10 years.

The bill has been a years-long effort begun by veterans and their families after they had returned from the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and experienced maladies that they suspected were caused by their close proximity to burn pits. It was named after Sgt. First Class Heath Robinson from Ohio, who died in 2020 from cancer he attributed to prolonged exposure to burn pits. His widow, Danielle Robinson, was first lady Jill Biden’s guest at the president’s State of the Union address earlier this year.

Stewart, the former host of Comedy Central’s The Daily Show, also brought increased exposure to the burn pit maladies veterans were facing. He also was in the gallery watching the vote Tuesday. He wept and held his head in his hand as the final vote began.

“I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a situation where people who have already given so much had to fight so hard to get so little,” he said after the vote. “And I hope we learn a lesson.”

The House was the first to act on the burn pits legislation. An earlier version the House approved in March was expected to increase spending by more than $320 billion over 10 years, but senators trimmed some of the costs early on by phasing in certain benefit enhancements. They also added funds for staffing to help the VA keep up with the expected increase in demand for health care and an increase in disability claims.

Some GOP senators are still concerned that the bill will increase delays at the VA because of an increased demand for veterans seeking care or disability compensation.

“What we have learned is that the VA cannot deliver what is promised because it does not have the capacity to handle the increase,” said Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn.

Sens. Jon Tester, D-Mont., and Jerry Moran, R-Kan., led the effort to get the bill passed in the Senate. After passage, Tester told reporters he received a call from Biden, thanking him for “taking a big weight” off his shoulder.

Moran said that when the bill failed to pass last week, he was disappointed but remembered the strength of the protesters who had sat outside in the scorching heat for days.

“Thanks to the United States Senate for demonstrating when there’s something good and a good cause, this place still works,” Moran said. 
…

US House Republicans Who Voted to Impeach Trump Face Primaries

Three Republican U.S. House members who voted to impeach Donald Trump over the Jan. 6 insurrection are being challenged in Tuesday’s primary elections by rivals endorsed by the former president.

The primaries for Reps. Peter Meijer, Jaime Herrera Beutler and Dan Newhouse are the biggest test yet for Republican Party (GOP) incumbents who broke with Trump after a mob of his supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol in a bid to keep him in power. Trump has vowed revenge against the 10 House Republicans who crossed party lines for the impeachment vote.

Of the 10, four opted not to run for reelection in this year’s midterm elections. As for the ones who did, Rep. Tom Rice of South Carolina lost to a Trump-endorsed challenger in June, while Rep. David Valadao of California survived a challenge that same month from a fellow Republican, advancing to the general election. Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming is bracing for defeat in her Aug. 16 primary against a Trump-backed rival.

In other races Tuesday, two Democratic incumbents in Michigan are facing each other in a newly drawn congressional district, and two members of the progressive “Squad” have primary challengers in Missouri and Michigan. In Arizona, GOP voters will decide whether to nominate a major QAnon figure for a congressional seat.

Facing voters after impeachment votes

The three House Republicans facing primary challenges Tuesday for impeaching Trump say they don’t regret their vote.

In Michigan, Meijer voted for impeachment just days after he was sworn into office for his first term. The former president has endorsed Meijer’s opponent, John Gibbs, a businessman and missionary who served in the Trump administration under Housing Secretary Ben Carson.

Gibbs has contended Meijer is not a true Republican because he voted to impeach Trump, and Gibbs chastised Meijer for supporting bipartisan gun control legislation that President Joe Biden signed into law in June.

Meijer, a member of the Army Reserves who served in Iraq, has criticized Biden over the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, as well as his handling of the economy. The congressman’s family is well known in the Midwest as owners of the chain of Meijer grocery megastores, and he has a large fundraising advantage over Gibbs. The winner will face Democrat Hillary Scholten in November in the state’s Democratic-leaning 3rd Congressional District.

In Washington state, the two Republicans who voted for impeachment are competing in crowded primaries, from which the top two vote-getters, regardless of political party, will move on to the general election in November.

Herrera Beutler’s primary against eight challengers, four of whom are Republicans, in Washington state’s 3rd Congressional District will be one of the toughest of her career. Trump is backing Joe Kent, a former Green Beret who has promoted the former president’s lies that the 2020 election was stolen.

Beutler has been in Congress since 2011 and represents an area that has favored Republicans.

In the central part of Washington, Newhouse, a four-term congressman, is facing seven challengers, six of whom are Republicans, in the solidly conservative 4th Congressional District. His rivals include Loren Culp, a former small-town police chief who refused to concede the governor’s race in 2020. Culp has Trump’s backing but has lagged other candidates in fundraising.

Candidate linked to QAnon

Ron Watkins, one of the most prominent figures in the QAnon conspiracy movement, is running for a House seat in Arizona’s sprawling 2nd Congressional District.

He served as the longtime administrator of online message boards that helped seed the conspiracy movement whose adherents believe a group of satanic, cannibalistic child molesters secretly runs the globe.

Watkins no longer runs the message boards and has denied fueling the QAnon movement. He said he is running for Congress because he hopes to “fix the machine from the inside.”

He is considered a long shot in the crowded GOP field, having been outpaced in campaign fundraising by the other candidates.

State Rep. Walter Blackman and Eli Crane, a former Navy SEAL who owns a bottle opener business and was endorsed by Trump, are considered the leading GOP contenders. The winner will take on Democratic U.S. Rep. Tom O′Halleran in November in a district that favors Republicans.

From colleagues to competitors

Two incumbent Michigan Democrats, Reps. Andy Levin and Haley Stevens, are running against each other for a newly drawn 11th Congressional District in suburban Detroit. They’re vying for a left-leaning area, which means the winner of Tuesday’s contest will likely win the seat in November.

Stevens flipped a district in 2018 that was long held by Republicans. Before running for office, she led the auto bailout under President Barack Obama.

Levin also won his first term in 2018, taking over the seat long held by his father, Rep. Sander “Sandy” Levin. He’s been endorsed by Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

Challenging the ‘squad’

Two members of the Squad in Congress are facing primary challenges on Tuesday.

In Michigan, Rep. Rashida Tlaib faces three Democratic challengers as she seeks a third term in office. She’s running in a newly drawn Detroit-area district where the winner is expected to easily carry the 12th Congressional District seat in November. Tlaib’s main competition is longtime Detroit City Clerk Janice Winfrey, who has strong name recognition in the city.

In Missouri, first-term Rep. Cori Bush is facing a challenge in the state’s 1st Congressional District. State Sen. Steve Roberts is betting that Bush, a vocal advocate for defunding the police and moving money to social services and mental health programs, is too liberal even for heavily Democratic St. Louis.

Roberts has twice faced rape allegations, though prosecutors said they didn’t have enough evidence to merit charges. He has accused the Bush campaign of dredging up the allegations to distract from her record.

Bush has touted her accomplishments, including persuading the Environmental Protection Agency to clean up radioactive waste near a St. Louis County creek, pushing for climate change action and standing against evictions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Ten years after Tucson shooting, intern seeks Giffords’ seat

Daniel Hernandez Jr., the hero intern credited with saving Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’ life after an attempted assassination in 2011, is running for her former seat in Congress.

Hernandez, who recently stepped down from the state Legislature to focus on his campaign, faces another former lawmaker in the Democratic primary. However, the once highly competitive district centered in Tucson now favors Republicans after the boundaries were redrawn.

Hernandez was a 20-year-old college student in his first week interning for Giffords when he went to her “Congress on your corner” constituent event. A gunman there opened fire, killing six and injuring 13. Hernandez kept the Democratic congresswoman conscious and applied pressure to her head wound until paramedics arrived.
…

Pelosi Confirms Asia Visit, Doesn’t Mention Taiwan

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi confirmed Sunday she is leading a congressional delegation to Asia but did not mention whether she will defy China by making a stop in Taiwan.

In a statement, Pelosi said she is leading a group of five other Democratic Party lawmakers to Asia “to reaffirm America’s strong and unshakeable commitment to our allies and friends in the region.”

The trip will include stops in Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea and Japan, the statement said. The group already stopped in Hawaii, where it received a briefing from the U.S. military’s Indo-Pacific Command, it added.

U.S. media reports Friday suggested Pelosi was tentatively planning to stop in Taiwan. Pelosi herself has indirectly spoken about such a possibility, even though her office has not confirmed it, citing security protocols.

It would be the highest-level U.S. visit to Taiwan since 1997, when former House Speaker Newt Gingrich led a congressional delegation there.

China had repeatedly warned Pelosi’s trip would be an unacceptable violation of what it sees as its sovereignty over the self-ruled island.

Taiwan and China split in 1949 after a civil war, with the defeated nationalist forces fleeing to Taiwan and setting up a government that later grew into a vibrant democracy.

Since then, China’s Communist Party has vowed to take Taiwan, using force if necessary, even though the island has never been led by the Communist Party.

Chinese leaders strongly object to U.S. shows of support for Taiwan’s government, which they see as illegitimate.

In a Thursday phone call with U.S. President Joe Biden, Chinese President Xi Jinping issued a blunt warning over Taiwan, saying “those who play with fire will perish by it,” according to a Chinese government readout.

China’s foreign ministry has also vowed Beijing would “act strongly” and “take countermeasures” in response to a Pelosi visit.

White House officials said Friday they saw no evidence China’s military was preparing major action against Taiwan.

China announced Saturday it was holding “live-fire” military exercises off its coast facing Taiwan. The drills, which were set to last from 8 a.m.-9 p.m. local time, occurred near the Pingtan islands off Fujian province, according to China’s official Xinhua news agency. The report did not specify what type of weapons were used in the exercises.

On Sunday, a spokesperson for China’s air force said Beijing has the “firm will” and “sufficient capability to defend national sovereignty and territorial integrity.” The spokesperson, who was quoted in state media, also said China had various fighter jets that can circle “the precious island of our motherland.”

China has flown an increasing number of warplanes through Taiwan’s self-declared air defense identification zone in recent years, greatly raising tensions in the Taiwan Strait. In recent weeks, Chinese state media editorials have warned Chinese fighter jets could follow and intercept Pelosi’s plane.

Hu Xijin, a fiercely nationalistic commentator for the Communist Party’s Global Times, even suggested in a tweet that the Chinese military has the right to “forcibly dispel” any U.S. aircraft traveling or escorting Pelosi to Taiwan.

“If ineffective, then shoot them down,” Hu said in the tweet, which was later removed because it violated Twitter guidelines.

Despite China’s warnings, a large, bipartisan chorus of lawmakers had urged Pelosi to not back down, saying China should not be allowed to dictate where U.S. officials visit.

“It would make it look like America can be shoved around,” former House Speaker Gingrich told VOA’s Mandarin Service earlier this week. Gingrich said he supports Pelosi’s trip, which will likely only amount to “an irritation” to U.S.-China ties.

“I think this is at one level a lot of noise about nothing,” Gingrich said. “I think if she holds her ground, and if the Biden administration doesn’t act timidly and almost cowardly, I think everything will be fine.”

Taiwan is one of the most dangerous points of tension in an increasingly fraught U.S.-China relationship.

The United States formally cut official relations with Taiwan in 1979 when it switched diplomatic recognition to China. However, the United States has continued to supply Taiwan with defensive weapons as mandated by the U.S. Congress.

U.S. presidents have long used a policy of “strategic ambiguity” toward Taiwan – essentially leaving their options open in the case of a Chinese invasion of the island.

However, Biden’s recent comments have raised doubts about that approach. Since taking office, Biden on three occasions has said the U.S. is committed to defending Taiwan.

Biden has been cautious, though, on the prospect of a Pelosi visit. Earlier this month, Biden said the U.S. military does not think a visit would be a good idea.

Pelosi’s possible visit comes at a sensitive moment for Xi, who is expected to use a Communist Party Congress later this year to secure a controversial third term as China’s top leader.

Observers have said Xi, China’s most powerful leader in decades, may want to send a tough message on Taiwan ahead of the meeting. But he may also want to preserve stability around a sensitive political moment.

White House National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby said Friday there is “no reason” for increased tension with China because U.S. policy has not changed.

Kirby reiterated that Pelosi “does not need nor do we offer approval or disapproval” for travel. He added: “The speaker is entitled to travel aboard a military aircraft.”
…

House Passes Semiautomatic Gun Ban After 18-Year Lapse

The House passed legislation Friday to revive a ban on semiautomatic guns, the first vote of its kind in years and a direct response to the firearms often used in the crush of mass shootings ripping through communities nationwide.

Once banned in the U.S., the high-powered firearms are now widely seen as the weapon of choice among young men responsible for many of the most devastating mass shootings. But Congress allowed the restrictions first put in place in 1994 on the manufacture and sales of the weapons to expire a decade later, unable to muster the political support to counter the powerful gun lobby and reinstate the weapons ban.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi pushed the vote toward passage in the Democratic-run House, saying the earlier ban “saved lives.”

The House legislation was shunned by Republicans, who dismissed it as an election-year strategy by Democrats. Almost all Republicans voted against the bill, which passed 217-213. It will likely stall in the 50-50 Senate.

The bill comes amid intensifying concerns about gun violence and after a spate of high-profile shootings: the supermarket shooting in Buffalo, New York; the massacre of schoolchildren in Uvalde, Texas; and the July Fourth shootings of revelers in Highland Park, Illinois.

Voters seem to be taking such election-year votes seriously as Congress splits along party lines and lawmakers are forced to go on the record with their views. A recent vote to protect same-sex marriage from potential Supreme Court legal challenges won a surprising amount of bipartisan support.

Bill has president’s backing

President Joe Biden, who was instrumental in helping secure the first semiautomatic weapons ban as a senator in 1994, encouraged passage, promising to sign the bill if it reached his desk. In a statement before the vote, his administration said, “We know an assault weapons and large-capacity-magazine ban will save lives.”

The Biden administration said that for the 10 years the ban was in place, mass shootings declined. “When the ban expired in 2004, mass shootings tripled,” the statement said.

Republicans stood firmly against limits on ownership of the high-powered firearms during an at times emotional debate ahead of voting.

“It’s a gun grab, pure and simple,” said Representative Guy Reschenthaler of Pennsylvania.

Said Georgia Representative Andrew Clyde, “An armed America is a safe and free America.”

Democrats argued that the ban on the weapons makes sense, portraying Republicans as extreme and out of step with Americans.

Representative Jim McGovern of Massachusetts said the weapons ban is not about taking away Americans’ Second Amendment rights but ensuring that children also have the right “to not get shot in school.”

Pelosi displayed a poster of a gun company’s advertisement for children’s weapons, smaller versions that resemble the popular AR-15 rifles and are marketed with cartoonlike characters. “Disgusting,” she said.

The bill would make it unlawful to import, sell or manufacture a long list of semiautomatic weapons. Representative Jerry Nadler of New York, chairman of the chamber’s Judiciary Committee, said it would exempt those already in possession.

Democrats pick battle

For the nearly two decades since the previous ban expired, Democrats had been reluctant to revisit the issue and confront the gun lobby. But voter opinions appear to be shifting, and Democrats dared to act before the fall election. The outcome will provide information for voters about where the candidates stand on the issue.

Democrats had tried to link the weapons ban to a broader package of public safety measures that would have increased federal funding for law enforcement. It’s something centrist Democrats in tough reelection campaigns wanted to shield them from their Republican opponents’ political attacks that they are soft on crime.

Pelosi said the House would revisit the public safety bills in August, when lawmakers are expected to return briefly to Washington to handle other remaining legislation, including Biden’s priority inflation-fighting package of health care and climate change strategies making its way in the Senate.

Congress passed a modest gun violence prevention package just last month in the aftermath of the tragic shooting of 19 schoolchildren and two teachers in Uvalde. That bipartisan bill was the first of its kind after years of failed efforts to confront the gun lobby, including after a similar 2012 mass tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.

That law provides for expanded background checks on young adults buying firearms, allowing authorities to access certain juvenile records. It also closes the so-called boyfriend loophole by denying gun purchases to those convicted of domestic abuse outside marriage.

The new law also frees up federal funding to the states, including for “red flag” laws that enable authorities to remove guns from those who would harm themselves or others.

But even that modest effort at halting gun violence came at time of grave uncertainty in the U.S. over restrictions on firearms as the more conservative Supreme Court is tackling gun rights and other issues.

Biden signed the measure two days after the Supreme Court’s ruling striking down a New York law that restricted people’s ability to carry concealed weapons.
…

Top US Diplomat Travels to Asia, Africa as Global Powers Fight for Influence

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken travels to East Asia and Africa next week seeking to counter the influence of Russia and China in a fight for global influence.

Blinken begins his travels Tuesday on a tour that will take him to Cambodia, the Philippines, South Africa, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda.

During his first stop in Cambodia, he will attend a Southeast Asian regional security forum where both the Russian and Chinese foreign ministers are expected to be in attendance.

When asked if Blinken would hold direct meetings with either Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov or Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs Daniel Kritenbrink said there were no plans for formal meetings at this time.

During a briefing with reporters about Blinken’s trip, Kritenbrink did not rule out the possibility of an informal conversation between Blinken and Wang on the sidelines of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Regional Forum in Cambodia.

Blinken spoke to Lavrov on Friday in the first conversation between the high-level officials since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in late February. Blinken pressed Lavrov to accept a U.S. proposal to secure the release of two Americans detained in Russia —professional basketball star Brittney Griner and former U.S. Marine Paul Whelan.

The State Department said in a statement Friday that Blinken will address the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change, Myanmar and the war in Ukraine during the ASEAN ministers meeting.

Kritenbrink said Blinken would urge Asian nations to increase pressure on Myanmar after its government executed four activists this week.

“This is just the latest example of the regime’s brutality,” he said.

While in the Philippines, the secretary’s next stop, Kritenbrink said Blinken would reaffirm the U.S. commitment to the two countries’ mutual defense treaty, which he called “ironclad.”

Blinken then travels to Africa, part of an increased U.S. diplomatic effort in the region that follows Russia’s outreach to the continent.

USAID chief Samantha Power recently visited Kenya and Somalia, and U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield is planning to travel next month to Ghana and Uganda.

The visit by Blinken is part of the U.S. view that “African countries are geostrategic players and critical partners on the most pressing issues of our day,” according to a State Department release.

Each of the African countries Blinken is visiting — South Africa, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda — is a “significant player on the continent and on the globe,” according to Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Molly Phee.

She told reporters Friday the secretary will deliver a speech on U.S. strategy toward sub-Saharan Africa while in South Africa.

Russia’s war in Ukraine is expected to be a major focus during Blinken’s stops in Africa.

Russia’s Lavrov this week wrapped up a tour of four African nations to strengthen ties with the continent and seek support against Western pressure over Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine.

Most African nations have remained neutral on the Ukraine war, despite pressure from Washington to condemn Russia’s invasion.

During his visit to the continent, Lavrov praised African nations for their independence.

Climate change will be another important topic during Blinken’s tour of Africa, according to Phee, who said the secretary would press Congo on its plan to reopen its rain forest to commercial logging.

While in Rwanda, Blinken will raise the “wrongful detention” of U.S. permanent resident Paul Rusesabagina, according to the State Department. Rusesabagina’s actions saved hundreds of lives during the 1994 genocide and inspired the movie Hotel Rwanda.

“We’ve been very clear with the government of Rwanda about our concerns about his case, his trial and his conviction, particularly the lack of fair trial guarantees in his case,” Phee said.

She said Blinken would also work to ease tensions between Congo and Rwanda. Congo has accused its neighbor of backing M23 rebels, a charge Kigali denies.

Some information in this report came from The Associated Press, Reuters, and Agence France-Presse.
…

US House Speaker Pelosi to Depart on Asia Trip Friday

Media reports indicated U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will depart with a delegation of lawmakers on her trip to Asia late Friday, but whether she plans to go through with a controversial visit to Taiwan is unclear.

During a briefing Friday, Pelosi, as she has repeatedly done in recent days, refused to discuss a departure date for her trip, citing security concerns. But she said the trip was significant because U.S. President Joe Biden had emphasized the Asia-Pacific region in his foreign policy and Congress had a role to play in that.

Since the possible visit to Taiwan was mentioned earlier this month as part of the speaker’s August Asian tour, China has reacted strongly, warning the U.S. government against it.

Taiwan has long been a point of tension in the U.S.-China relationship. China claims the island democracy as part of its territory. While the U.S. nominally has a “one China” policy that recognizes both Taiwan and China as part of the same country, it maintains “strategic ambiguity” in its relations with them.

Since taking office, Biden has suggested several times that the U.S. would defend Taiwan militarily if China attempted to retake the island by force, appearing to deviate from the U.S. tradition of not definitively stating how it would respond to Chinese aggression against Taiwan.

Taiwan was a primary point of discussion during a phone call Thursday between Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping. China’s Foreign Ministry, in a readout of the call, quoted Xi as telling Biden, in reference to the planned trip, “Those who play with fire will perish by it.”

China issued a similar warning Friday during a discussion about Ukraine in a meeting of the U.N. Security Council. China’s Deputy U.N. Ambassador Geng Shuang said that while the U.S. has declared its support for Ukraine’s sovereignty, “it has incessantly challenged the sovereignty of China over Taiwan.”

“China is resolute and firm as rock in its will to safeguard national sovereignty. No one should underestimate the determination and ability of more than 1.4 billion Chinese people to defend its national sovereignty and territorial integrity,” Geng said, also warning the U.S. not to “play with fire.”

Pelosi has been a critic of China’s social policies for many years. When asked about her upcoming Asia trip last week, she said, “It’s important for us to show support for Taiwan. None of us has ever said we’re for independence when it comes to Taiwan. That’s up to Taiwan to decide.”

The Associated Press reported that Taiwan leaders this week said they would welcome a visit from Pelosi. In comments Wednesday, Taiwan Premier Su Tseng-chang said, “We are very grateful to Speaker Pelosi, who has been very supportive and friendly to Taiwan for many years, and we would welcome any friendly foreign guest to visit.”

If she decides to stop there, Pelosi would be the first sitting U.S. House speaker to visit Taiwan since Newt Gingrich went there in 1997. The speaker’s trip includes stops in Japan, South Korea, Malaysia and Singapore — all U.S. allies in the region.

Some information for this report came from The Associated Press.
…

Congress OKs Bill to Aid Computer Chip Firms, Counter China 

The House on Thursday passed a $280 billion package to boost the semiconductor industry and scientific research in a bid to create more high-tech jobs in the United States and help it better compete with international rivals, namely China. 

The House approved the bill by a solid margin of 243-187, sending the measure to President Joe Biden to be signed into law and providing the White House with a major domestic policy victory. Twenty-four Republicans voted for the legislation. The Senate passed the bill Wednesday, 64-33.

“Today, the House passed a bill that will make cars cheaper, appliances cheaper and computers cheaper,” Biden said. “It will lower the costs of everyday goods. And it will create high-paying manufacturing jobs across the country and strengthen U.S. leadership in the industries of the future at the same time.” 

As the vote was taking place, Biden was discussing the economy with CEOs at the White House. During the event, he was handed a note informing him it was clear the bill would pass — a development that produced a round of applause before the tally was final. 

Most Republicans argued that the government should not spend billions to subsidize the semiconductor industry. GOP leadership in the House recommended a vote against the bill, telling members the plan would provide enormous subsidies and tax credits “to a specific industry that does not need additional government handouts.” 

Taxes, regulations

Representative Guy Reschenthaler, a Pennsylvania Republican, said the way to help the industry would be through tax cuts and easing federal regulations, “not by picking winners and losers” with subsidies — an approach that Representative Joseph Morelle, a New York Democrat, said was too narrow. 

“This affects every industry in the United States,” Morelle said. “Take, for example, General Motors announcing they have 95,000 automobiles awaiting chips. So, you want to increase the supply of goods to people and help bring down inflation? This is about increasing the supply of goods all over the United States in every single industry.” 

Some Republicans viewed passing the legislation as important for national security. 

Representative Michael McCaul of Texas, the top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said it was critical to protect semiconductor capacity in the U.S. and that the country was too reliant on Taiwan for the most advanced chips. That could prove to be a major vulnerability should China try to take over the self-governing island that Beijing views as a breakaway province 

“I’ve got a unique insight in this. I get the classified briefing. Not all these members do,” McCaul said. “This is vitally important for our national security.” 

The bill provides more than $52 billion in grants and other incentives for the semiconductor industry as well as a 25% tax credit for those companies that invest in chip plants in the U.S. It calls for increased spending on various research programs that would total about $200 billion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. 

The CBO also projected that the bill would increase deficits by about $79 billion over the coming decade. 

Senate health, climate package

A late development in the Senate — progress announced Wednesday night by Democrats on a $739 billion health and climate change package — threatened to make it harder for supporters to get the semiconductor bill over the finish line, based on concerns about government spending that GOP lawmakers said would fuel inflation. 

Representative Frank Lucas, an Oklahoma Republican, said he was “disgusted” by the turn of events. 

Despite bipartisan support for the research initiatives, “regrettably, and it’s more regrettably than you can possibly imagine, I will not be casting my vote for the CHIPS and Science Act today,” Lucas said. 

Representative Kevin McCarthy, the Republican leader in the House, likened the bill’s spending to “corporate welfare to be handed out to whoever President Biden wants.” 

Leading into the vote, it was unclear whether any House Democrats would join with Senator Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent, in voting against the bill; in the end, none did. 

Democrats urged to step up

Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo talked to several of the most progressive members of the Democratic caucus in a meeting before the vote, emphasizing that the proposal was a critical part of the president’s agenda and that Democrats needed to step up for him at this important moment. 

Some Republicans criticized the bill as not tough enough on China, and GOP leaders emphasized that point in recommending a “no” vote. Their guidance acknowledged the threat China poses to supply chains in the U.S. but said the package “will not effectively address that important challenge.” 

But, as McCaul pointed out, China opposed the measure and worked against it. The bill includes a provision that prohibits any semiconductor company receiving financial help through the bill from supporting the manufacture of advanced chips in China. 

Zhao Lijian, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, commenting before the House vote, said the U.S. “should not put in place obstacles for normal science, technology and people-to-people exchanges and cooperation” and “still less should it take away or undermine China’s legitimate rights to development.”
…

Washington Requests Troops to Aid With Migrant Arrivals From Texas, Arizona 

Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser has requested the deployment of military troops to assist with migrants arriving on buses sent by the Texas and Arizona state governments, according to letters sent by her office to U.S. military and White House officials. 

Bowser, a Democrat, has asked in recent weeks for federal funds to provide shelter and services to migrants arriving on buses from the two Republican-led states, which sought to make a political statement by sending border crossers to Washington. 

“Our ability to assist people in need at this scale is very limited,” Bowser said in a letter to White House officials, adding that nonprofit organizations welcoming migrants in Washington are “overwhelmed and underfunded.” 

Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican running for reelection in November midterm elections, blames U.S. President Joe Biden’s immigration policies for record numbers of migrant arrests at the border with Mexico. 

The governor announced in April the state would bus migrants to Washington, saying “Texas should not have to bear the burden of the Biden administration’s failure to secure our border.” 

Texas has sent more than 150 buses carrying more than 6,000 migrants to Washington since April, according to Abbott’s office. 

Arizona Governor Doug Ducey, another Republican, launched a similar effort in May and has bused more than 1,000 migrants, his office has said. 

About 85% to 90% of the arriving migrants continue to other U.S. destinations by bus or plane, according to two groups working to welcome the migrants in Washington. 

Migrant advocates and Washington city council members have called on Bowser to devote city funds to the reception effort, but the mayor has said the federal government must step in. 

New York City Mayor Eric Adams, another Democrat, has similarly said in recent weeks that migrant arrivals have taxed his city’s shelter system and called on the Biden administration to provide funding. 
…

US Senate Advances Bill to Boost Microchip Production

The U.S. Senate has passed a $280 billion initiative that would boost domestic production of microchips and provide support for a key industry that competes with overseas countries including China. VOA’s Congressional Correspondent Katherine Gypson reports.
…

Key Senate Democrats Agree on $430B Tax, Drugs, Energy Bill 

U.S. Democratic Senator Joe Manchin said Wednesday that he had reached a deal with Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer on a bill to increase corporate taxes, reduce the national debt, invest in energy technologies and lower the cost of prescription drugs. 

Manchin has often been a roadblock to President Joe Biden’s policy goals, including those specifically addressed in the bill. He previously said he wanted to address high U.S. prescription drug costs, but he was concerned more government spending could increase inflation. 

The bill includes $430 billion in new spending on energy and health insurance investments, and it more than pays for itself by raising minimum taxes for big companies and enforcing existing tax laws, Schumer and Manchin said in a statement. 

The measure is substantially smaller than the multitrillion-dollar bill Democrats had envisioned last year. But it still represents a significant advance for Biden’s policy agenda ahead of midterm elections November 8 that could determine whether Democrats retain control of Congress. 

Schumer plans to pass the measure through a Senate maneuver called reconciliation that allows him to proceed with just a 51-vote majority, bypassing normal rules that require 60 of the 100 senators to agree to most legislation. That could allow him to pass the bill with only Democratic votes, if necessary, if every Democrat is on board. 

Manchin and Schumer in a statement said the bill would reduce the nation’s deficit by about $300 billion, lower carbon emissions by about 40% by the year 2030 and allow the government’s Medicare health plan to negotiate prescription drug prices. But they did not provide specifics. 

The new agreement will be paid for by raising the corporate minimum tax on big companies to 15%, ramping up Internal Revenue Service tax enforcement, lowering the price government agencies pay for prescription drugs and closing a loophole that lets some ultra-wealthy pay less tax, Schumer and Manchin said. 

“I have worked diligently to get input from all sides on the legislation my Democratic colleagues have proposed and listened to the views of my Republican friends to find a path forward that removes inflationary policies so that Congress can respond to Americans’ suffering from high prices,” Manchin said.  

Senator Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, another Democrat who has at times blocked Biden’s agenda, declined immediate comment on news of the agreement.  

Crossing McConnell

News of the agreement came hours after the Senate passed sweeping legislation to subsidize the domestic semiconductor chip industry with several Republican votes. 

Last month, top Senate Republican Mitch McConnell promised to block the “chips bill” as it is known, unless Democrats abandoned their plans for a reconciliation bill like the one Manchin and Schumer outlined. The House will vote on the bill on Thursday, but Republicans don’t have the votes to block it on their own. 

Republicans were quick to criticize the move. “I can’t believe that Senator Manchin is agreeing to a massive tax increase in the name of climate change when our economy is in a recession,” Senator Lindsey Graham said. 

McConnell also criticized the bill, saying it would “kill many thousands of American jobs.” 

Schumer said the Senate will take the bill up next week.
…

Senate Advances Key Legislation Addressing US Competition With China

The U.S. Senate passed the CHIPs bill by a vote of 64-33 Wednesday, advancing legislation that lawmakers on both sides of the aisle say will be key in addressing U.S. economic competition with China.

The $280 billion bill provides $52 billion in grants and incentives to domestic producers of semiconductors, a key element in a wide range of products that require microchips but that are often manufactured abroad.

“Today is a very good day for the American people into the future of our country. I believe firmly that when signed into law, this bill will reawaken the spirit of discovery and innovation that made America the envy of the world,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Wednesday ahead of the final vote.

The bill will also provide $200 billion in funding for scientific research over the next 10 years.

“No longer will America always ever be dependent on something offshore that was created here, made in America, invented here. And we will again have the jobs here,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said last week while meeting with United Auto Workers in the midwestern manufacturing state of Michigan.

The CHIPs bill is a bipartisan compromise after lawmakers spent nearly a year and a half trying to reach an agreement on much more ambitious legislation addressing U.S. competition with China. Senator Mark Warner, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said Wednesday’s vote was a good start to address strategic competition overseas.

“This funding sends a message that the U.S. is putting a strong down payment on maintaining our edge in the global technology race — and preventing global supply chains from being weaponized against us or our allies. Over the past few years, China has continued to increase investments in its domestic industries — and particularly in areas that confer long-term strategic influence,” Warner said on the Senate floor Tuesday.

With many Americans concerned about a weak economy and rising inflation, some conservatives criticized the cost of the bill that is projected to add $79 billion to America’s national debt over the next decade. Senator Bernie Sanders, who usually votes with Democrats, said this funding benefits wealthy corporations.

“The crisis is caused by the industry shutting down in America and moving abroad. And today what we are doing is say we are going to give you a blank check to undo the damage that you did,” Sanders, an independent, said on the Senate floor Tuesday.

In a written statement Wednesday, Republican Senator Marco Rubio said the version of legislation that passed removed important safeguards on the funding.

“We need to support American production of semiconductors, but we need to do it in a way that benefits our country and our workers. Corporate interests stripped meaningful safeguards from this package and blocked consideration of others,” Rubio said. “No one should be surprised when we hear stories of Beijing stealing U.S. technology funded by this bill or companies producing more chips in China even as they receive money from the taxpayers.”

But ultimately 17 Republicans voted for the funding, citing concerns about U.S. strategic competition with China.   

“This is about national security, and about making sure we have adequate supply here at home of things that are absolutely indispensable. I wish that were inexpensive, but in this particular situation, it’s not,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters Tuesday.

President Joe Biden is expected to sign the bill into law in the next week, after the House votes on the legislation before leaving for their six-week summer recess.
…

US Justice Department Probing Trump’s Efforts to Overturn Election, Says Washington Post

The U.S. Justice Department is investigating Donald Trump’s actions in its criminal probe of the former president’s attempts to overturn his 2020 election defeat, The Washington Post reported on Tuesday, citing sources. 

The Justice Department has been interviewing former White House officials, including the former chief of staff to former Vice President Mike Pence, who confirmed on Monday he had testified to a federal grand jury investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol and efforts by Trump and his allies to overturn his defeat. 

Prosecutors questioning witnesses before the grand jury have asked about conversations with Trump and his lawyers and others close to him, the Post reported, citing two people familiar with the matter. 

The testimony of Pence’s former Pence chief of staff, Marc Short, the most high-profile official known to have appeared before the grand jury, is a sign the Justice Department’s investigation of the attack on the Capitol and the fake elector plot is heating up. 

Justice Department investigators in April also received phone records of important officials such as Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows, The Washington Post said. 

The Justice Department could not be immediately reached for comment. 

A spokeswoman for Trump did not reply to a request for comment from Reuters. Trump has denied wrongdoing. 

In an interview with CNN earlier this year, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco confirmed the Justice Department had received referrals about slates of alternative fake electors that were sent to the National Archives, and said prosecutors were reviewing them. 

The fake elector plot has featured prominently in multiple hearings of the Democratic-led U.S. House of Representatives committee probing the attack on the Capitol.
…

In Defiant Return Speech, Trump Digs in on Claim of Election Fraud

Former U.S. President Donald Trump on Tuesday repeated his false claim that he won the 2020 election during a wide-ranging policy speech that marked his defiant return to Washington – and hinted at his possible return to politics.

“I always say I ran the first time and I won,” he said, speaking to about 600 well-heeled supporters in a hotel ballroom just a mile from The White House. “Then I ran a second time, and I did much better. We got millions and millions more votes. And you know what? That’s going to be a story for a long time. What a disgrace it was. But we may just have to do it again. We have to straighten out our game. I have to straighten out our country.”

This came more than halfway through a 90-minute speech that was the capstone of the two-day inaugural gathering of Trump’s America First Policy Institute. In attendance were several Trump administration figures and Republican lawmakers who raised objections to the official certification of electoral votes on January 6, 2021. That event certified the victory of President Joe Biden.

VOA asked former House speaker Newt Gingrich what he thought of Trump’s election victory claim, which is at the center of a series of congressional hearings looking at the violent insurrection attempt Trump supporters made at the U.S. Capitol that day.

“It’s amazing that you could take a two-hour speech and figure out the 90 seconds you care about,” Gingrich responded as his security guards ushered him into a waiting car.

The day before, VOA asked White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre whether the Biden administration would be watching Trump’s speech.

“It’s not something that I’m tracking or we’re tracking here,” she said. “I don’t know what he’s coming to talk about. I guess we’ll see when he gets here tomorrow.”

Michael O’Hanlon, director of research in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution, told VOA that Trump’s decision to sow doubt about the election outcome is significant.

“Most of his policy interventions and ideas I’m prepared to live with, because at least he was playing within the rules,” he said. “At least this is what a constitutional democracy with checks and balances and democratic process is supposed to allow for and vet. However, when you stop respecting the outcome of elections, just because it hurts you personally, that is a whole different kettle of fish.”

He continued, “I think it really gets into illegal territory pretty quickly. And so it’ll be fascinating to see if he’s indicted. It’ll certainly be fascinating to see what he says in coming weeks and months.

“But I’m afraid that this is dangerous for our country, this kind of attitude by President Trump and his going against Democrats and Republicans, around the country, around the states within the Congress, within the system of checks and balances, just to serve his own personal, narcissistic political interest.”

The events of January 6, 2021, have been dramatically replayed in meticulous detail in the past month during a series of slickly produced congressional hearings. Those featured an outtake from Trump’s recorded message to the nation a day after the insurrection, in which he finally promised an orderly transition. The day after the January 6 attack, Trump still couldn’t say the election was over.

“I don’t want to say the election’s over,” he said during the outtake. “I just want to say Congress has certified the results without saying the election’s over.”

On Tuesday, he said that part out loud and called the two attempts to remove him from office “impeachment hoax number one, impeachment hoax number two.”

Trump also sketched out what he described as a “law and order” agenda that would take a harder line on immigrants and drug offenders and give law enforcement enhanced power. He also expressed admiration for China’s strict drug laws and its use of the death penalty in drug cases.

“There is no higher priority than cleaning up our streets, controlling our borders, stopping the drugs from pouring in, and quickly restoring law and order in America,” he said, adding: “There’s never been a time like this. Our streets are riddled with needles, and soaked with the blood of innocent victims. Many of our once-great cities from New York to Chicago to L.A., where the middle class used to flock to live the American dream, are now war zones, literal war zones.”

Outside, several dozen protesters gathered to oppose Trump’s appearance. “No Trump, no KKK, no fascist USA,” they chanted, across the street from several dozen supporters who waved large American flags and blew vuvuzelas.

Local police officers stood nearby and watched.
…

In Defiant Return Speech, Trump Digs in on Claim of Election Fraud

…

China Raises Stakes Over Pelosi Trip to Taiwan

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s potential plan to visit Taiwan during her trip to Asia in August has prompted a belligerent response from China, with the spokesman for the Foreign Ministry warning that Beijing would “act strongly to resolutely respond” and “take countermeasures” if Pelosi traveled to the island.

In a news conference on Monday, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian confirmed a report in the Financial Times over the weekend that said China’s warnings were “significantly stronger” over the House speaker’s potential visit than during the previous times it had been unhappy with U.S. policy toward Taiwan.

“The Chinese side has repeatedly made clear to the U.S. side our serious concern over Speaker Pelosi’s potential visit to Taiwan and our firm opposition to the visit,” he said. “We are fully prepared for any eventuality. If the U.S. side insists on making the visit, the Chinese side will take firm and strong measures to safeguard our sovereignty and territorial integrity. The U.S. must assume full responsibility for any serious consequence arising thereof.”

In statements to different news outlets on Monday, Joanne Ou, the spokesperson for Taiwan’s Foreign Ministry, said that while Taiwan always welcomes visits from U.S. lawmakers, the government had not yet received any “definite information” about a visit from Pelosi.

Tense relationship

Taiwan has long been a point of tension in the U.S.-China relationship. China claims the island democracy as part of its territory. While the U.S. nominally has a “one China” policy that recognizes both Taiwan and China as part of the same country, it maintains “strategic ambiguity” in its relations with them.

The U.S. has official diplomatic relations with mainland China only; however, it maintains unofficial relations with the government in Taipei, to which it supplies military aid and weapons.

Since taking office, President Joe Biden has on several occasions suggested that the U.S. would defend Taiwan militarily if China attempted to retake the island by force, appearing to deviate from the U.S. tradition not stating definitively how it would respond to Chinese aggression against Taiwan.

On China’s part, its incursions into the Taiwan’s airspace and waters have become significantly more aggressive in recent years, raising concerns about Beijing’s intentions.

History of contention

While Pelosi’s national and international profile is tied to her leadership of the broader Democratic Party in the House of Representatives, the district in San Francisco that has sent her to Congress every two years since 1986 is nearly one-third Asian American.

Pelosi has been a critic of China’s social policies for many years. When asked about her upcoming Asia trip last week, she said, “It’s important for us to show support for Taiwan. None of us has ever said we’re for independence when it comes to Taiwan. That’s up to Taiwan to decide.”

China’s Foreign Ministry has criticized Pelosi for her complaints about the country’s treatment of minority groups such as the Muslim Uyghurs of the Xinjiang region, accusing her of “smearing” Beijing.

Timing sensitive

Pelosi’s trip to Asia comes at a politically sensitive time for the Beijing regime. Chinese Communist Party senior leaders are about to gather for their annual summer retreat, which comes just months before the National Party Congress. At that meeting, which happens once every five years, President Xi Jinping is expected to seek an unprecedented third term in office.

David Sacks, a research fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, told VOA in an email exchange that the timing of Pelosi’s visit likely has much to do with the vehemence of China’s reaction.

“Xi likely fears that Pelosi’s high-profile visit to Taiwan could cause him to look weak in the eyes of other Party members and appear as someone who does not have a firm handle on one of the most important issues for the Chinese leadership,” Sacks said.

He added, “Facing significant economic headwinds and pushback to his zero-COVID policies and tough lockdowns at home, Xi will at the very least try to avoid another blow on Taiwan and could even find a crisis useful as a way to distract the public or rally public opinion.”

Options unclear

Having raised expectations that its response would be more powerful than any in the past, the Chinese government has raised concerns about exactly what it will do if Pelosi visits Taiwan.

In China, political commentator Hu Xijin, the former editor in chief of the state-run Global Times, suggested that Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) jets might intercept Pelosi’s plane and “escort” it to Taiwan.

This would escalate tensions because while Chinese planes regularly enter Taiwan’s air defense identification zone, they have not violated its territorial airspace.

Other experts doubt that Xi would be willing to risk open conflict.

“I don’t think that Xi Jinping will let PLA fighter jets fly with her if Pelosi really goes (to Taiwan),” Arthur Ding, a professor emeritus of National Chengchi University in Taiwan, told VOA.

More likely, he said, are major economic moves, such as a repudiation of the Phase 1 agreement, reached during the Trump administration, to move toward a relaxation of the tariffs that the U.S. and China have imposed on each other’s exports.

“I think China may (respond) in this regard, instead of suddenly raising this tension through the PLA fighter jets accompanying Pelosi’s aircraft, because that is tantamount to direct provocation by China to the United States,” Ding said.

Biden cautious

Although the Biden administration has no authority to tell Pelosi not to go to Taiwan, the administration has apparently been trying to dissuade her from the journey. Last week, Biden told reporters, “I think that the military thinks it’s not a good idea right now.”

“I think what the president was saying is that maybe the military was afraid of my plane getting shot down or something like that,” Pelosi said Thursday.

National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby said that the NSC had briefed Pelosi on the security situation. However, members of the administration have made it clear that the choice is Pelosi’s to make, not the president’s.

Pelosi urged to go

Numerous current and former U.S. government officials have urged Pelosi to make the trip to Taiwan over Beijing’s objections.

Former Defense Secretary Mark Esper, during an appearance in Taipei last week, said, “I don’t think we should allow China to dictate the travel schedules of American officials.” He also urged the U.S. to reconsider its “One China” policy, saying that the stance had outlived its usefulness.

Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Sunday tweeted an offer to accompany her, writing, “Nancy, I’ll go with you. I’m banned in China, but not freedom-loving Taiwan. See you there!”

Crisis may be inevitable

The discussion of China possibly using military aircraft to intimidate Pelosi speaks to the level of stress in the relationship among China, the U.S. and Taiwan.

There have been three major “Taiwan Strait Crises,” named for the body of water separating the island from the mainland. The first two, in the 1950s, involved armed conflict centered around small islands claimed by Taiwan but located close to the Chinese mainland. The third, in 1995 and 1996, involved China’s firing missiles into waters surrounding Taiwan.

Sacks, of the Council on Foreign Relations, said current tensions over the status of Taiwan seem to be moving toward a breaking point.

“If China were to try to prevent Pelosi’s plane from landing, we would be in a full-blown Taiwan Strait crisis, which would be far more dangerous than previous crises given the political contexts in Washington and Beijing,” he said.

However, he added, “Even if we are able to navigate this trip and it does not cause a crisis, I believe a Taiwan Strait crisis is on the horizon.”
…

Biden Presses Computer Chips Case in Advance of Senate Vote

Calling semiconductors “the building blocks for the modern economy,” President Joe Biden on Monday asked Congress to move quickly and send him a bipartisan bill designed to boost the computer chips industry and high-tech research in the United States. 

The Senate was originally expected to take a critical vote in the evening to advance the legislation, but Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., announced that storms on the East Coast had disrupted travel plans for several senators and that he would be delaying the vote until Tuesday morning. The bill needs support from at least 60 senators to clear procedural hurdles and place it on a path to final passage later this week, giving Biden a signature win on legislation his administration says is necessary to protect national security and help the U.S. better compete with China. 

The bill provides about $52 billion in grants and other incentives for the semiconductor industry as well as a 25% tax credit for those companies that build chip plants in the U.S. Supporters say those incentives are necessary to compete with other nations that are also spending billions of dollars to lure manufacturers. 

The pandemic has underscored how much the United States relies on semiconductor manufacturers abroad to provide the chips used in automobiles, computers, appliances and weapons systems. The Biden administration has been warning lawmakers they need to act before leaving for their August recess to ensure the companies invest in U.S. fabs instead of building the plants elsewhere. 

Biden, who is still recovering from COVID-19, held a virtual roundtable with members of his administration and industry leaders about the merits of the bill. He said that a shortage of semiconductors was the primary driver of rising automobile costs, which are a core component of the inflation gripping the country. 

Biden said the U.S. relies on Taiwan for the production of the most advanced chips and that China was also starting to move ahead of the U.S. on the manufacturing of such chips. 

“America invented the semiconductor. It’s time to bring it home,” Biden said. 

Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo told him that chip manufacturers are finalizing investment plans and that money provided through the bill will be instrumental in their decisions. 

“We know they will expand, because they have to in order to meet demand. There’s no question about that,” Raimondo told Biden. “The question is, where will they expand? And we want them, we need them to expand here in the United States.” 

The leaders of Medtronic, a medical device maker, as well as Cummins Inc. and defense contractor Lockheed Martin, pitched the president on the need for the bill as well. 

“Like others at the table, we are facing a supply chain crisis. We are unable to get the components we need, and semiconductors is always at the top of the list,” said Tom Linebarger, chairman and CEO of Cummins Inc., which makes diesel engines. 

Linebarger said the company is now paying brokers as much as 10 times the regular cost to get the computer chips it needs. The federal government’s investments through the bill would move manufactures from “wringing our hands about where we sit in competition with others to actually moving onto the field and helping U.S. manufacturers compete,” he said. 

Overall, the bill would increase U.S. deficits by about $79 billion over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The bill also authorizes about $200 billion to advance high-tech research in the U.S. over the coming decade. Congress must approve that funding as part of future spending bills, and the CBO did not include that research money in its deficit projection. 

Critics have likened the spending to “corporate welfare” and have said the money would be better spent on other priorities or not at all. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said he doesn’t hear from people about the need to help the semiconductor industry. Voters talk to him about climate change, gun safety, preserving a woman’s right to an abortion and boosting Social Security benefits, to name just a few. 

“Not too many people that I can recall — I have been all over this country — say: ‘Bernie, you go back there and you get the job done, and you give enormously profitable corporations, which pay outrageous compensation packages to their CEOs, billions and billions of dollars in corporate welfare,'” Sanders said. 

Once the Senate has acted, the bill will be taken up in the House. The window for passing the bill is narrow if some progressives join with Sanders and if most Republicans line up in opposition based on fiscal concerns. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has said she’s confident that it will have enough support to pass before lawmakers leave Washington for the August recess. 

 
…