ВИБОРЧА ГАЗЕТА

2021 Saw Blinken Facing Coups and Conflicts, Repairing Key Alliances

The Biden administration came into office vowing “America is back,” with Secretary of State Antony Blinken pledging to work closely to boost ties with allies. But unexpected crises, coups and conflicts in Ethiopia, Haiti, Myanmar, Sudan and Ukraine have also commanded the top U.S. diplomat’s attention in 2021. VOA’s Senior Diplomatic Correspondent Cindy Saine reports.

Produced by: Rob Raffaele
…

Impeachment, Insurrection and Billions in Spending: 2021 was Tumultuous Year on Capitol Hill

From insurrection and impeachment to infrastructure and COVID relief funding, 2021 was one of the most significant years on Capitol Hill in decades. Lawmakers had to deal with the impact of a global pandemic while trying to pass an ambitious legislative agenda during the first year of a new presidency. VOA’s Congressional Correspondent Katherine Gypson has more on a historic year in the U.S. Congress.

Produced by: Katherine Gypson
…

Harry Reid, Former US Senate Majority Leader, Dies at 82

Harry Reid, the former Senate majority leader and Nevada’s longest-serving member of Congress, has died. He was 82. 

Reid died Tuesday, “peacefully,” surrounded by family, “following a courageous, four-year battle with pancreatic cancer,” Landra Reid said of her husband in a statement.

“Harry was a devout family man and deeply loyal friend,” she said. “We greatly appreciate the outpouring of support from so many over these past few years. We are especially grateful for the doctors and nurses that cared for him. Please know that meant the world to him.” 

Funeral arrangements would be announced in the coming days, she said.

The combative former boxer-turned-lawyer was widely acknowledged as one of the toughest dealmakers in Congress, a conservative Democrat in an increasingly polarized chamber who vexed lawmakers of both parties with a brusque manner and this motto: “I would rather dance than fight, but I know how to fight.” 

Over a 34-year career in Washington, Reid thrived on behind-the-scenes wrangling and kept the Senate controlled by his party through two presidents — Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Barack Obama — a crippling recession and the Republican takeover of the House after the 2010 elections. 

He retired in 2016 after an accident left him blind in one eye.

Reid in May 2018 revealed he’d been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and was undergoing treatment.

Abrupt and underestimated 

He was known in Washington for his abrupt style, typified by his habit of unceremoniously hanging up the phone without saying goodbye.

“Even when I was president, he would hang up on me,” Obama said in a 2019 tribute video to Reid.

He was frequently underestimated, most recently in the 2010 elections when he looked like the underdog to tea party favorite Sharron Angle. Ambitious Democrats, assuming his defeat, began angling for his leadership post. But Reid defeated Angle, 50% to 45%, and returned to the pinnacle of his power. For Reid, it was legacy time. 

“I don’t have people saying, ‘He’s the greatest speaker,’ ‘He’s handsome,’ ‘He’s a man about town,'” Reid told The New York Times in December that year. “But I don’t really care. I feel very comfortable with my place in history.” 

Nevada born 

Born in Searchlight, Nevada, to an alcoholic father who killed himself at 58 and a mother who served as a laundress in a bordello, Reid grew up in a small cabin without indoor plumbing and swam with other children at a pool at a local brothel. He hitchhiked to Basic High School in Henderson, Nevada, about 65 km from home, where he met the woman he would marry in 1959, Landra Gould. At Utah State University, the couple became members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 

The future senator put himself through George Washington University law school by working nights as a U.S. Capitol police officer. 

At age 28, Reid was elected to the Nevada Assembly and at age 30 became the youngest lieutenant governor in Nevada history as Governor Mike O’Callaghan’s running mate in 1970. 

Elected to the U.S. House in 1982, Reid served in Congress longer than anyone else in Nevada history. He narrowly avoided defeat in a 1998 Senate race when he held off Republican John Ensign, then a House member, by 428 votes in a recount that stretched into January. 

After his election as Senate majority leader in 2007, he was credited with putting Nevada on the political map by pushing to move the state’s caucuses to February, at the start of presidential nominating season. That forced each national party to pour resources into the state, which still had only six votes in the Electoral College despite having the country’s fastest growth over the past two decades. Reid’s extensive network of campaign workers and volunteers twice helped deliver the state for Obama. 

In 2016 Obama lauded Reid for his work in the Senate, declaring, “I could not have accomplished what I accomplished without him being at my side.” 

Legislative battles 

The most influential politician in Nevada for more than a decade, Reid steered hundreds of millions of dollars to the state and was credited with almost single-handedly blocking construction of a nuclear waste storage facility at Yucca Mountain outside Las Vegas. He often went out of his way to defend social programs that make easy political targets, calling Social Security “one of the great government programs in history.” 

Reid championed suicide prevention, often telling the story of his father. He stirred controversy in 2010 when he said in a speech on the floor of the Nevada legislature it was time to end legal prostitution in the state. 

Reid’s political moderation meant he was never politically secure in his home state, or entirely trusted in the increasingly polarized Senate. Democrats grumbled about his votes for a ban on so-called partial-birth abortion and the Iraq war resolution in 2002, something Reid later said was his biggest regret in Congress.

He voted against most gun control bills and in 2013 after the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, dropped a proposed ban on assault weapons from the Democrats’ gun control legislation. The package, he said, would not pass with the ban attached. 

Reid’s Senate particularly chafed members of the House, both Republicans and Democrats. When then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, muscled Obama’s health care overhaul through the House in 2009, a different version passed the Senate and the reconciliation process floundered long enough for Republicans to turn it into an election-year weapon they used to demonize the California Democrat and cast the legislation as a big-government power grab. Obama signed the measure into law in March 2010. But angered by the recession and inspired by the small-government tea party, voters the next year swept Democrats from the House majority.

Reid hand-picked a Democratic candidate who won the election to replace him in 2016, former Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto, and built a political machine in the state that helped Democrats win a series of key elections in 2016 and 2018. 

On his way out of office, he repeatedly lambasted Donald Trump, calling him at one point “a sociopath” and “a sexual predator who lost the popular vote and fueled his campaign with bigotry and hate.” 

Target of organized crime

As head of the Nevada Gaming Commission investigating organized crime, Reid became the target of a car bomb in 1980. Police called it an attempted homicide. Reid blamed Jack Gordon, who went to prison for trying to bribe him in a sting operation that Reid participated in over illegal efforts to bring new games to casinos in 1978. 

Following Reid’s lengthy farewell address on the Senate floor in 2016, his Nevada colleague Republican Dean Heller declared: “It’s been said that it’s better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both. And as me and my colleagues here today and those in the gallery probably agree with me, no individual in American politics embodies that sentiment today more than my colleague from Nevada, Harry Mason Reid.” 

 
…

Biden Signs $768.2 Billion Defense Spending Bill into Law

President Joe Biden signed the National Defense Authorization Act into law Monday, authorizing $768.2 billion in military spending, including a 2.7% pay raise for service members, for 2022. 

The NDAA authorizes a 5% increase in military spending and is the product of intense negotiations between Democrats and Republicans over issues ranging from reforms of the military justice system to COVID-19 vaccine requirements for soldiers. 

“The Act provides vital benefits and enhances access to justice for military personnel and their families and includes critical authorities to support our country’s national defense,” Biden said in a statement. 

The $768.2 billion price tag marks $25 billion more than Biden initially requested from Congress, a prior proposal that was rejected by members of both parties out of concerns it would undermine U.S. efforts to keep pace militarily with China and Russia.

The new bill passed earlier this month with bipartisan support, with Democrats and Republicans touting wins in the final package. 

Democrats applauded provisions in the bill overhauling how the military justice system handles sexual assault and other related crimes, effectively taking prosecutorial jurisdiction over such crimes out of the hands of military commanders. 

Republicans, meanwhile, touted success in blocking an effort to add women to the draft, as well as the inclusion of a provision that bars dishonorable discharges for service members who refuse the COVID-19 vaccine. 

The bill includes $7.1 billion for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative and a statement of congressional support for the defense of Taiwan, measures intended to counteract China’s influence in the region. 

It also includes $300 million for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, a show of support in the face of Russian aggression, as well as $4 billion for the European Defense Initiative. 

In his statement, the president also outlined a number of provisions his administration opposes over what he characterized as “constitutional concerns or questions of construction.” 

Those planks include provisions that restrict the use of funds to transfer or release individuals detained at the Guantanamo Bay detention center, which the Biden administration is moving to close. Biden’s statement said the provisions “unduly impair” the executive branch’s ability to decide when and where to prosecute detainees and where to send them when they’re released and could constrain U.S. negotiations with foreign countries over the transfer of detainees in a way that could undermine national security. 

The law also has provisions barring goods produced by forced Uyghur labor in China from entering the U.S., and it begins to lay out plans for the new Global War on Terror Memorial, which would be the latest addition to the National Mall. 

 
…

The Year in US Foreign Policy 

President Joe Biden came into office at a time when U.S. standing in the world had reached a record low point. Across 60 countries and areas surveyed by Gallup’s U.S. Leadership Poll during the last year of Donald Trump’s presidency, median approval of U.S. leadership stood at 22%.

Six months into Joe Biden’s presidency, American global standing had largely rebounded. According to Gallup’s August poll across 46 countries and territories, median approval of U.S. leadership stood at 49%.

Biden entered the presidency with a very low bar, said Thomas Schwartz, a historian of U.S. foreign relations at Vanderbilt University. “Outside of a very few countries, most significantly Israel and Saudi Arabia, Donald Trump was so disliked by most foreign leaders that simply not being Trump was an immediate advantage,” he said.

However, not being Trump could take Biden only so far, said Schwartz. Despite inheriting the deadline to withdraw from Afghanistan from his predecessor, Biden’s disastrous execution of the exit gravely damaged America’s credibility internationally and reputation for competence domestically.

“Terrorism has intensified, and the Taliban takeover has led to sanctions that have put Afghanistan in a position where it has an acute humanitarian crisis that could well lead to mass famine,” said Michael Kugelman, a senior associate for South Asia at the Wilson Center. “And I think that this very precipitate, chaotic U.S. withdrawal is seen as links to those outcomes.”

The tumultuous withdrawal betrayed Western and other allies, including the increasingly educated women of Afghanistan who will suffer the most under the Taliban, said Kenneth Weinstein, Walter P. Stern distinguished fellow at the Hudson Institute. It will make it harder for American presidents to ask our allies to sacrifice for common goals in the future, he added.

Weinstein pointed to the administration’s handling of the southern border as another failure. As the crisis grew, Weinstein said, the U.S. has returned to “watered-down versions of Trump administration policies that the Biden-Harris campaign denounced as inhumane in 2020.”

Is America back?

Following years of “America First” under Trump, Biden delivered a diametrically opposed message that America was back, returning to multilateralism and diplomacy as the main instruments of foreign policy, rejoining multilateral organizations, returning to withdrawn agreements and bringing more engagement on global issues including pandemic recovery and climate change.

“If the measure of success is global engagement and the baseline is 2020, then President Biden’s first year in office has been nothing short of restorative,” said Leslie Vinjamuri, director of U.S. and the Americas Program at Chatham House.

Responding to a question from VOA, White House press secretary Jen Psaki listed several achievements, saying the U.S. has reclaimed leadership on some of the biggest global challenges, including the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change, while restoring alliances, resolving trade disputes with European countries, and elevating partnerships in the Indo-Pacific through the Quad (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue) involving the U.S., Australia, India, and Japan, and AUKUS, the trilateral security partnership that includes the U.S., Australia and U.K.

AUKUS will provide Australia with nuclear-powered submarines and promote cutting-edge three-nation collaboration on cyber, artificial intelligence and quantum technologies. “The deal could change the security dynamic of the Indo-Pacific if we can actually deliver the subs before their due date of 2042,” said the Hudson Institute’s Weinstein.

However, AUKUS’s launching blindsided France, a close ally, and scuttled the $66 billion conventional submarine deal Paris had underway with Australia. It was widely seen as another foreign policy blunder and an example of a disconnect between the administration’s messaging and policies.

The administration has shown very little regard for traditional allies and does not back its rhetoric with action that would be discernibly different or better than some of the isolationism seen under Trump, said Dalibor Rohac, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. Rohac pointed also to the continuation of the European Union travel ban and tariffs months into the administration as other illustrations of the disconnect.

“Whether the president can bridge the gap between rhetoric and action is the most important question facing him today,” Rohac said.

China and Russia

Managing strategic competition with Beijing, a key doctrine of the Trump administration, remains the defining framework of the U.S.-China relationship under the current administration.

Biden met with Chinese President Xi Jinping virtually in November to discuss “ongoing effort to responsibly manage” a relationship that threatens to spiral out of control between two rivals competing in areas of trade, geopolitical influence and, more recently, military might.

The biggest thorn in this troubled U.S.-China relationship is the issue of Taiwan, a democratic self-governing island that Beijing considers a breakaway province.

“The United States is asking China not to escalate pressure on Taiwan. China is asking the United States not to fiddle around with and test the limits of the One China policy,” said Robert Daly, director of the Wilson Center’s Kissinger Institute on China and the United States, describing a key point in the Biden-Xi meeting. “Both countries are guilty as charged, and neither is in a position where it’s going to reconsider its policies.”

Meanwhile, Russia is not staying on the sidelines. In recent weeks President Vladimir Putin has mobilized tens of thousands of troops along the Ukrainian border. He says he wants to prevent NATO’s eastward expansion — the main focus of the Biden-Putin virtual summit in December.

“What we’re seeing here is some behavior from the Russian Federation to remind the United States that it’s still there, it still has interests that it wants to pursue and that those interests can’t be ignored,” said Andrew Lohsen, fellow in the Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Moscow recently outlined demands for a sweeping new security arrangement with the West, including a guarantee that NATO will not only cease expanding farther east but also will roll back all military activity in Ukraine and elsewhere in Eastern Europe, Central Asia and the Caucasus. It also included a ban on sending U.S. and Russian warships and aircraft to areas within striking distance of each other’s territory.

Russia wants Washington and Moscow “to sit down and draw up the world like it’s 1921 instead of like it’s 2021,” said Max Bergmann, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. The tough demands appear certain to be rejected by the U.S. and its allies, who insist that Moscow does not dictate NATO’s expansion.

The administration says it will continue to hold high-level talks with both Moscow and Beijing, not only to avoid conflict but also to collaborate on areas of common interest, such as the pandemic, climate change and regional issues like Iran.

So far, Biden’s two-track strategy of deterrence and diplomatic engagement has not led to grave setbacks or negative consequences, said Leslie Vinjamuri of Chatham House. “But defending the rules-based order in the context of power shifts and technological change — and in a world where the leading powers embrace radically different value systems — is a tall order and the future is uncertain,” she said.

Moreover, Putin’s threats to Ukraine and Xi’s crushing of democracy in Hong Kong, intimidation of Taiwan and allegedly genocidal policies toward the Uyghurs has fed the narrative of an administration too weak to stand up forcefully for American interests and values against aggressive adversaries, said Vanderbilt University’s Thomas Schwartz. “Iran’s continuing defiance and move toward acquiring a nuclear weapon strengthen this portrait,” he said.

Other unsolved problems include North Korea, where the administration appears in no hurry to push for a deal unless Kim Jong Un commits to winding down his nuclear weapons program, and simmering tensions between Israel and Hamas. More than one year following the Abraham Accords that normalized diplomatic relations between Israel and two of its Arab neighbors, the administration has reestablished ties with Palestinians severed under Trump but has made little progress in advancing the broader Middle East peace process.

Democracies vs autocracies

The administration frames relations with rivals in the context of a global struggle, drawing a fault line between democracies and autocracies.

“We’ll stand up for our allies and our friends and oppose attempts by stronger countries that dominate weaker ones, whether through changes to territory by force, economic coercion, technical exploitation or disinformation,” Biden said in remarks at the U.N. General Assembly in September. “But we’re not seeking — say it again, we are not seeking — a new Cold War or a world divided into rigid blocs.”

A “Cold War mentality” is exactly what China and Russia accuse Washington of fostering. Their leaders were excluded from the Summit for Democracy where Biden hosted more than 100 countries on December 9-10. Xi and Putin held their own virtual meeting a week after the democracy summit.

While activists applaud the summit’s goals of “strengthening democracy and defending against authoritarianism,” combating corruption and promoting human rights, some analysts warn of overreach.

If Biden pushes his democracy-vs.-autocracy framing too far, there’s a danger of losing collaborative ground on global issues such as climate change with China and arms control with Russia, said Stacie Goddard, Mildred Lane Kemper professor of political science at Wellesley College. “Those are the types of global issues where you really do need that type of cross-ideological cooperation,” she said.
…

Trump Asks US Supreme Court to Block Release of White House Records

Former President Donald Trump on Thursday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to block the release of White House records sought by the House of Representatives committee investigating the deadly Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

Trump’s request came two weeks after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the former president had no basis to challenge Democratic President Joe Biden’s decision to allow the documents to be handed over. That decision will remain on hold until the Supreme Court acts.

Biden had previously determined that the records, which belong to the executive branch, should not be subject to executive privilege, which protects the confidentially of some internal White House communications, and that turning them over to Congress was in the best interest of the nation.

Trump’s lawyers say in their court filing that the House Select Committee’s request is “exceedingly broad” and an “unprecedented encroachment on executive privilege.”

The appeals court ruling was another blow to the Republican former president and his allies, who have waged an ongoing legal battle with the committee over access to documents and witnesses.

The committee has asked the National Archives, the U.S. agency housing Trump’s White House records, to produce visitor logs, phone records and written communications between his advisers.

The panel has said it needs the records to understand any role Trump may have played in fomenting the violence.

Trump has argued that he can invoke executive privilege based on the fact that he was president at the time even though he is no longer in office.

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan on Nov. 9 rejected Trump’s arguments, saying he had not acknowledged the “deference owed” to Biden’s determination that the committee could access the records. adding: “Presidents are not kings, and Plaintiff is not President.”

The Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority that includes three justices appointed by Trump, but it has not always been receptive to his requests.

In February, the court rejected  his request to block disclosure of his tax records as part of a criminal investigation in New York and in 2020 also turned away attempts by Trump and his allies to overturn  that year’s presidential election, which he lost to Biden.
…

US Supreme Court to Take Up Biden Vaccine Mandate Cases 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Biden Announces New Effort to Fight Omicron Coronavirus Surge

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“Absolutely no,” Biden said. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 
…

Biden Urges Vaccination, Offers Free Tests Amid Omicron Variant Surge

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

Pentagon Issues Rules Aimed at Stopping Rise of Extremism

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Extremists in the ranks 

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

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

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

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

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

Membership prohibited 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 
…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

US Climate Leadership Imperiled as Build Back Better Act Is Derailed

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

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

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

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

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

Blow to U.S. climate leadership 

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

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

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

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

Progress still possible 

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

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

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

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

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

Manchin’s concerns 

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

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

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

Electrical grid worry 

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

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

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

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

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

Coal country support 

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

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

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

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

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

Republicans praise Manchin 

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

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

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

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

 
…

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

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

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

No other details about the dog were provided. 

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

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

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

Champ died in June at age 13.

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

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

 
…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Schumer Announces Early 2022 Vote on Biden Safety Net Legislation

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Some information for this report came from Reuters. 
…

Centrist US Lawmaker Announces Firm Opposition to Biden Safety Net Legislation

A centrist U.S. Democratic lawmaker, Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia, said Sunday he is definitively opposed to President Joe Biden’s roughly $2 trillion social safety net spending plan, likely dooming its passage without further sharp revisions in its scope and cost. 

Manchin’s vote was essential in the politically divided Senate for passage of one of the key elements of the Democratic president’s legislative agenda. None of the 50 Republicans in the 100-member chamber supports the plan to expand health care for older Americans, provide universal pre-kindergarten classes, authorize new funding to combat climate change and offer more financial support for low-income Americans. 

Democrats had hoped to push through the legislation on a 51-50 vote before Christmas, with Vice President Kamala Harris providing the tie-breaking vote. The House of Representatives has already approved a version of the bill. 

But Manchin, who discussed the measure at length last week with Biden, told the “Fox News Sunday” show, “If I can’t go home and explain it to the people of West Virginia, I can’t vote for it. And I cannot vote to continue with this piece of legislation.” 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Johnny Isakson, Former Georgia Republican US Senator, Dies 

Johnny Isakson, an affable Georgia Republican politician who rose from the ranks of the state legislature to become a U.S. senator known as an effective, behind-the-scenes consensus builder, died Sunday. He was 76.

Isakson’s son John Isakson told The Associated Press that his father died in his sleep before dawn at his home in Atlanta. John Isakson said that although his father had Parkinson’s disease, the cause of death was not immediately apparent. 

“He was a great man and I will miss him,” John Isakson said. 

Johnny Isakson, whose real estate business made him a millionaire, spent more than four decades in Georgia political life. In the Senate, he was the architect of a popular tax credit for first-time home buyers that he said would help invigorate the struggling housing market. As chairman of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, he worked to expand programs offering more private health care choices for veterans.

Isakson’s famous motto was, “There are two types of people in this world: friends and future friends.” That approach made him exceedingly popular among colleagues. 

“Johnny was one of my very best friends in the Senate,” Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, said Sunday. “But the amazing thing about him was that at any given time, approximately 98 other Senators felt the same way. His infectious warmth and charisma, his generosity, and his integrity made Johnny one of the most admired and beloved people in the Capitol.” 

In 2015, while gearing up to seek a third term in the Senate, Isakson disclosed that he had been diagnosed with Parkinson’s, a chronic and progressive movement disorder that had left him with a noticeably slower, shuffling gait. Soon after winning reelection in 2016, he underwent a scheduled surgery on his back to address spinal deterioration. He frequently depended on a cane or wheelchair in later years. 

In August 2019, not long after fracturing four ribs in a fall at his Washington apartment, Isakson announced he would retire at year’s end with two years remaining in his term. 

In a farewell Senate speech, he pleaded for bipartisanship at a time of bitter divisions between Republicans and Democrats. He cited his long friendship with U.S. Rep. John Lewis, an Atlanta Democrat and civil rights hero, as an example of two men willing to put party aside to work on common problems.

“Let’s solve the problem and then see what happens,” Isakson said. “Most people who call people names and point fingers are people who don’t have a solution themselves.”

Lewis, who died last year, saluted Isakson on the House floor in 2019, saying, “We always found a way to get along and do the work the people deserve.” 

After the speech, Lewis walked over to hug a hobbling Isakson, saying, “I will come over to meet you, brother.” 

An Atlanta native, Isakson failed in his first bid for elected office: a seat on the Cobb County Commission in 1974. Two years later, he was elected to the Georgia House of Representatives, becoming the only Republican to beat a Democratic incumbent in Georgia the same year Jimmy Carter was elected president. Isakson served 17 years in the state House and Senate. Always in the minority in Georgia’s General Assembly, he helped blaze the path toward the GOP ascendancy of the 2000s, fueled by Atlanta’s suburban boom. By the end of Isakson’s career, some of those same suburbs were swinging back toward Democrats.

“As a businessman and a gifted retail politician, Johnny paved the way for the modern Republican Party in Georgia, but he never let partisan politics get in the way of doing what was right,” Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp said in a statement. 

Isakson suffered humbling setbacks before ascending to the Senate. In 1990, he lost the race for governor to Democrat Zell Miller. In 1996, Guy Millner defeated him in a Republican primary for Senate before Millner lost to Democrat Max Cleland. 

Many observers chalked up the loss to Isakson not being tough enough on abortion. In the primary race, Isakson ran a television advertisement in which he said that while he was against the government funding or promoting abortion, he would “not vote to amend the Constitution to make criminals of women and their doctors.” 

“I trust my wife, my daughter and the women of Georgia to make the right choice,” he said.

He later changed his mind on the contentious issue.

Isakson’s jump to Congress came about in 1998, when U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich decided not to seek reelection. Isakson won a 1999 special election to fill the suburban Atlanta seat. 

He finally made it to the U.S. Senate in 2004 when he defeated Democrat Denise Majette with 58% of the vote. He served with Georgia senior Sen. Saxby Chambliss, a close friend and classmate from the University of Georgia. 

Isakson was viewed as a prohibitive early favorite to succeed Republican Sonny Perdue in the governor’s mansion in 2010. But he opted instead to seek a second term in the Senate. While there, he developed a reputation as a moderate, although he rarely split with his party on key votes. 

He was a lead negotiator in 2007 on immigration legislation that President George W. Bush backed but ultimately abandoned after it met strong resistance from the right. Chambliss and Isakson were booed at a Georgia Republican Party convention that year over their immigration stance. 

Isakson supported limited school vouchers and played a major role in crafting Bush’s signature education plan, the No Child Left Behind Act. He also pushed an unsuccessful compromise bill on the politically charged issue of stem cell research that would have expanded research funding while also ensuring that human embryos weren’t harmed.

That deal-making approach has fallen out of favor for many voters, but Isakson’s lineage remains a presence in Georgia politics. State Attorney General Chris Carr was the former senator’s chief of staff. “When I was a young man just getting started in politics, I wanted to be like Johnny Isakson,” Carr said Sunday. 

Democratic Georgia Sen. Raphael Warnock said “all of Georgia” grieves Isakson’s death. Warnock, who took over Isakson’s old seat after defeating Republican Kelly Loeffler in a January runoff, had a special connection to Isakson, who attended an annual service in honor of the late Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta. The church’s pulpit was King’s and later became Warnock’s. Warnock also has continued Isakson’s tradition of an annual barbecue lunch for all senators. 

Isakson’s “model of public service is an example to future generations of leaders on how to stand on principle and make progress while also governing with compassion and a heart for compromise,” Warnock said Sunday. 

Isakson graduated from the University of Georgia in 1966 and joined his family-owned company, Northside Realty in Cobb County, a year later. It grew to one of the largest independent residential real estate brokerage companies in the country during his more than 20 years at the helm. Isakson also served in the Georgia Air National Guard from 1966 to 1972. 

He is survived by his wife, Diane, whom he married in 1968; three children and nine grandchildren. 

 
…

Biden Pledges Fight for Voting Rights, Police Reform 

President Joe Biden pledged Friday to fight for stalled voting rights and police reform legislation, addressing graduates of South Carolina State University amid the harsh reality that months of talks with lawmakers have failed to move the measures closer to becoming law.

Biden spoke at the historically Black school a day after conceding that his nearly $2 trillion social and environmental bill was unlikely to become law this year, as he had hoped, due to continued disagreement among fellow Democrats. Republicans unanimously oppose the spending.

Wearing a black gown as he delivered the December commencement address, the president bemoaned GOP opposition that has kept voting rights bills from advancing in the 50-50 Senate following passage by the Democratic-controlled House. He blamed “that other team, which used to be called the Republican Party,” for refusing to even allow the bills to be debated.

“But this battle’s not over,” Biden said. “We’re going to keep up the fight until we get it done.”

‘Sacred right to vote’

Biden’s vow to keep pushing to protect what he called “the sacred right to vote” comes as the NAACP and similar groups have grown frustrated with the White House over the lack of progress on the issue. Voting rights is a priority for Democrats heading into next year’s midterm elections after Republican-controlled legislatures passed a wave of restrictive new voting laws.

Biden pledged similar advocacy for police reform, another issue important to the Black community after a series of killings of Black men by police, including George Floyd’s death last year after a Minneapolis police officer kneeled on his neck for about nine minutes.

The House passed a sweeping police reform measure earlier this year in response to Floyd’s killing, but months of negotiations among a bipartisan group of senators failed to produce a bill.

Biden vowed to keep pressing for police reform, too.

“The fight’s not over,” he said at the alma mater of House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, the highest-ranking Black member of Congress and South Carolina’s only Democrat in the delegation. Clyburn, who sat on stage with Biden, accepted his degree — earned 60 years earlier — from the president, a longtime friend.

Pitch to students

In his speech, Biden at times sounded more like a candidate as he used the appearance before a predominantly Black audience to stress how his administration is working to improve their economic and educational standing, from increasing funding for historically Black colleges and universities to fighting housing discrimination.

Black voters, in South Carolina and other states, were a crucial part of the coalition that helped Biden win election as president.

He also touched on the infrastructure bill he recently signed into law, including the promise of thousands of new jobs, but avoided discussing his centerpiece social welfare and environmental bill. That measure remains bottled up in the Senate, largely because of opposition from a fellow Democrat, Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia, and facing an uncertain fate next year, when Democrats need accomplishments to show as they campaign for reelection in the November midterms.

Biden also pledged to help stamp out hate and racism, referenced the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol carried out in hopes of subverting his election, and talked about his appreciation for historically Black colleges and universities. He noted that key members of his team had graduated from historically Black schools, including Vice President Kamala Harris, a Howard University alum.

“You can defeat hate, but you can’t eliminate it,” Biden said. “It just slides back under a rock and, when given oxygen by political leaders, it comes out ugly and mean as it was before. We can’t give it any oxygen. We have to step on it.”

He did not discuss legislative strategy, including how he would turn hard Democratic opposition to the $2 trillion plan into support. All he offered was the promise to keep fighting — the same advice he gave the graduates.

Biden told them their “secret power” is the ability to understand the injustices and complications of the world, with the enduring legacies of racism leaving Black Americans at a disadvantage in home ownership and economic mobility.

Why the delay for Clyburn?

There were no December ceremonies when Clyburn graduated in 1961, so he received his diploma by mail. Instead of addressing this year’s graduates, as had been planned, Clyburn joined the procession of students on stage to receive his degree from Biden, whom he invited to deliver the commencement address.

The president visited at a fraught time for his agenda, with the future of his $2 trillion social and environmental spending package in doubt. While Democrats had hoped to make progress on the bill before Christmas, continued disagreements among lawmakers have all but halted negotiations, and Biden himself has signaled Democrats should shift their focus to passing a voting rights bill — another heavy lift in the evenly divided Senate.

On Friday, Senate Democrats huddled privately, as they have for weeks, discussing with parliamentary experts ways to adjust the chamber’s filibuster rules so they can push past Republican opposition and pass voting and election bills ahead of the 2022 midterms. No decisions have been reached, but senators insist they’re making progress.

Biden and Clyburn had been planning a gathering in South Carolina, Clyburn told reporters this week, and they figured Friday’s ceremony would suffice. The meeting was significant for both, in that it was Biden’s first time as president in South Carolina, where Clyburn’s public support is credited with boosting Biden to the Democratic presidential nomination.

On the cusp of South Carolina’s first-in-the-South primary, after struggling through less than stellar performances in other early nominating contests, Biden secured a public endorsement from Clyburn, an awaited signal for many Black voters that Biden would be the candidate to stand up for their interests.

Biden subsequently bested chief rival Bernie Sanders on Super Tuesday and claimed the nomination before defeating Republican incumbent Donald Trump in the general election. 
…

US Senate Parliamentarian Deals Democrats Blow on Immigration

Democrats must drop an effort to let millions of immigrants remain temporarily in the U.S. from their expansive social and environment bill, the Senate parliamentarian decided Thursday, dealing the latest blow to a longtime priority of the party, migrant advocates and progressives.

The opinion by Elizabeth MacDonough, the Senate’s nonpartisan arbiter of its rules, all but certainly means Democrats will ultimately have to pull the proposal from their 10-year, roughly $2 trillion package. The measure carries health care, family services and climate change initiatives, mostly paid for with higher taxes on corporations and the rich, that are top priorities for President Joe Biden.

When the Senate considers the overall legislation — which is currently stalled — Democrats are expected to try reviving the immigration provisions, or perhaps even stronger language giving migrants a way to become permanent residents or citizens. But such efforts would face solid opposition from Republicans and probably a small number of Democrats, which would be enough for defeat in the 50-50 chamber.

MacDonough’s opinion was no surprise — it was the third time since September that she said Democrats would violate Senate rules by using the legislation to help immigrants and should remove immigration provisions from the bill. Nonetheless, it was a painful setback for advocates hoping to capitalize on Democratic control of the White House and Congress for gains on the issue, which have been elusive in Congress for decades.

MacDonough’s finding was the second defeat of the day inflicted on Democrats’ social and economic package. Biden was also forced to concede that Senate work on the massive overall bill would be delayed until at least January after his negotiations stalled with holdout Senator Joe Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat who wants to further cut and reshape the legislation.

“We will advance this work together over the days and weeks ahead,” the president said in a statement.

Democrats’ latest immigration proposal would have let an estimated 6.5 million immigrants in the U.S. since at least 2010 without legal authorization apply for up to two five-year work permits. The permits would let them hold jobs, avoid deportation and in some instances travel abroad without risking their residency here. Applicants would have to meet background checks and other requirements.

Immigration advocates and their Democratic Senate allies have said they will continue seeking a way to include provisions helping migrants in the legislation, but their pathway is unclear.

“Disappointed. And we’re considering what options remain,” Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, told reporters about the parliamentarian’s ruling.

‘Substantial policy changes’

Democrats are using special rules that would let them push the overall bill through the Senate by a simple majority vote, not the 60 votes legislation usually needs to end debate and move forward. GOP opposition means the immigration provisions Democrats want would not survive as a free-standing bill.

But under those same rules, such bills can’t have provisions that are driven more by policy changes than by cuts or increases in the federal budget.

The parliamentarian makes that call. Her opinion said Democrats had failed that test because the disputed language would have changed a program that currently awards work permits sparingly into one where it would be mandatory to issue the permits to migrants who qualify for them.

“These are substantial policy changes with lasting effects just like those we previously considered and outweigh the budgetary impact,” MacDonough wrote. Earlier this year, she rejected two Democratic proposals that would have each created a chance for permanent legal status for 8 million migrants.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the bill’s immigration provisions would end up costing the government around $111 billion over 10 years, largely because of federal benefits immigrants would qualify to receive by gaining legal status.

The rejected plan would have created no new pathway for those getting work permits to remain in the U.S. permanently. But the budget office estimated last month that of 6.5 million migrants who would ultimately get the temporary permits, around 3 million would later gain permanent residency because their new status would remove some obstacles in that process.

Many progressives and migrant supporters have long urged Democrats to vote to overrule the parliamentarian, whose opinion is advisory and whose decisions senators seldom overturn. Advocates resumed pressuring the party to do so after MacDonough’s ruling.

“This is a fight about racial justice,” said Greisa Martinez Rosas, executive director of United We Dream, an immigrant rights group. Citing the strong support Democrats usually receive from Hispanic voters, she said advocates would accept no excuses for inaction.

“It’s time for Democrats to deliver on their promises; they must disregard today’s recommendation” by the parliamentarian and add citizenship provisions to the bill, she said.

Overturning the ruling

It seems unlikely that Democrats would have the unanimous support they would need to overturn MacDonough’s opinion. Manchin, one of Congress’ more conservative Democrats, has said he would not vote to overturn a ruling of the parliamentarian “on every issue.”

Even so, top Democrats signaled Thursday evening that they would try.

“We strongly disagree with the Senate parliamentarian’s interpretation of our immigration proposal, and we will pursue every means to achieve a path to citizenship” in the social and environment bill, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Durbin and four Latino Democratic senators said in a statement. They added, “We stand with the millions of immigrant families across the country who deserve better and for whom we will not stop fighting.”

The latest proposal fell well short of Biden’s initial plan this year to give the 11 million immigrants in the U.S. without legal authorization a way to seek permanent residency and even citizenship.

Even so, it would have been Congress’ most sweeping move in decades to help migrants in this country. A 1986 immigration overhaul helped an estimated 2.5 million immigrants win permanent residency.
…

Despite Control of Congress, Democrats’ Agenda Appears Stalled 

Heading into what analysts expect to be their last year with unified control of Congress and the presidency for the foreseeable future, it remains unclear whether the Democratic Party will be able to capitalize on the opportunity to see key legislative priorities enacted into law. 

This week, just as Democratic lawmakers were celebrating a pair of significant victories on Capitol Hill, two members essential to their tenuous hold on the Senate majority signaled that they will block the party’s two biggest legislative priorities. That raised questions about how the Democrats will spend the remainder of the 117th Congress. 

On Wednesday, reports began to emerge that talks between the White House and West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin over President Joe Biden’s signature Build Back Better social and climate spending package had broken down. Democrats cannot afford to lose a single vote on the package, meaning that without Manchin’s support, the measure is as good as dead, given lockstep Republican opposition in the evenly-divided chamber. 

Also Wednesday, Arizona Democratic Sen. Kyrsten Sinema said that she would not support an effort to alter Senate rules to allow the body’s Democrats to pass the Freedom to Vote Act, a package of voting rights measures, suggesting that that bill may also be doomed. 

Senate rules stymie Democrats 

The Democrats control 50 of the Senate’s 100 seats, and can rely on Vice President Kamala Harris to cast a deciding 51st vote in the event of a tie. However, because of the Senate’s filibuster rule, which requires a 60-vote majority to cut off debate on a subject, the Democrats are significantly constrained in their ability to pass legislation without significant Republican assistance. 

In the past few days, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer worked out an agreement with Senate Republicans to temporarily waive Senate filibuster rules in order to raise the nation’s debt limit and avoid a government default. Shortly thereafter, he brought the annual National Defense Authorization Act to the floor, where it passed on an overwhelmingly bipartisan basis, 88-11. 

There is one well-known road around the filibuster: a process called budget reconciliation that allows a bill that fits certain parameters to be exempt from the filibuster. The Build Back Better Act is written in the form of a budget reconciliation bill, but that protection is only useful if the Democrats can retain all 50 of their members, meaning that Manchin’s refusal to support it is fatal to its chances of passage. 

No carve-out for voting 

Democratic senators pushing the voting rights legislation had hoped to convince the party to come together on a vote that would narrowly change the filibuster rules — something that can, ironically, be done with a simple majority — to allow the voting rights bill to pass with 51 votes. 

On Wednesday, however, Sinema’s office issued a statement indicating that while she supports the Freedom to Vote Act, she is not inclined to change the filibuster rule in order to pass it. The statement suggested that to do so would only invite wild swings in federal law in the future, whenever a party gains unified control of Congress and the White House. 

On Thursday, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, criticized the suggestion that Democrats might do away with the filibuster in order to pass their agenda.

“Entire generations of statesmen would have seen … these unhinged proposals as Armageddon for our institutions,” he said.

So, now what? 

Experts are divided on exactly what the current impasse means for the remainder of the 117th Congress. Some, like Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, say they expect little legislative activity to take place. Sabato told VOA he expects Democrats to focus on tasks like filling vacant seats on federal courts, which they can do with a simple majority. 

“Judicial appointments are the one area where they really have been successful,” Sabato said. “They’ll fill every possible judgeship, as long as they maintain the 50-50 Senate. As long as they can do that, they’ll get something done that will have long-lasting effects.” 

Sabato said there is faint hope that there could be some bipartisan move toward regulating major social media firms, but he pointed out that while both parties are angry at companies like Facebook and Twitter, the parties don’t agree on the changes they would like to see implemented.

And in an election year when Republicans hope to take control of Congress, he added, there may be little incentive to cooperate.

“They could reach a compromise, but again, if Republicans are confident of gaining control of Congress — which they have every reason to be — why would they compromise when they have a good chance of getting everything they want when they’re in charge?” 

Biden can point to one major bipartisan victory, a $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill, which was signed into law last month, and addressed a long wish list of projects around the country sought by lawmakers of both parties. Since then, however, attracting Republican support or maintaining Democratic party unity on other major planks of Biden’s agenda has proved elusive. 

A more hopeful outlook 

William A. Galston, a senior fellow in the Brookings Institution’s Governance Studies program, told VOA that he still holds out hope that Democrats and Republicans in Congress will be able to find some common ground in the first half of 2022, before the looming midterm elections make cooperation a practical impossibility. 

“One possibility is that they will turn to issues that are less visible right now, but which may have a greater prospect of bipartisan support and therefore, success on the floor of the Senate,” Galston said. “There have been a number of bills, for example, dealing with supply chain issues. And it is at least possible that pieces of larger bills could be peeled off, the ones that are most likely to get support across party lines.” 

In particular, he pointed to a piece of legislation that passed the Senate following the cooperative efforts of Schumer and Republican Sen. Todd Young, of Indiana. The bill, called the United States Innovation and Competition Act of 2021, creates a Directorate for Technology and Innovation in the National Science Foundation.

Part of the new directorate’s mission would be to “to improve national competitiveness in science, research, and innovation” in order to support the goal of the administration’s national security strategy. 

“That would put us in a substantially better position to address some key looming challenges, including our competition with China,” Galston said. The bill has not progressed in the House of Representatives, he noted. However, he said, “I suspect very strongly that if the White House and leaders in both chambers got together, they could figure out how to unstick that bill.” 
…

US Senate Democrats Lack Unanimity on Biden’s Social, Climate Package

Democrats in the U.S. Senate appear to have one key holdout in their push to pass a major social and environmental bill before next week’s Christmas holiday.

The Associated Press, Reuters and other news organizations reported Wednesday that based on information from people familiar with ongoing negotiations, Senator Joe Manchin is objecting to a piece of the legislation that extends an expiring child tax credit program for one year.

He told reporters Wednesday that he has “always been for child tax credits” and that reports about his opposition to including them in the legislation were “a lot of bad rumors.”

Manchin has expressed his opposition to the total size of the package of programs advocated by President Joe Biden. Democrats initially pursued a $3.5 trillion plan before cutting it to about $2 trillion to try to ease passage.

The proposals include expanding health care programs, universal prekindergarten, clean energy investments, and cutting prescription drug costs. Democrats want to pay for them with tax increases on big corporations and the wealthy.

With only a narrow majority in the Senate, and Republicans opposed to the package, Democrats need all members of their caucus to support it.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer had set a goal of getting approval by the Dec. 25 Christmas holiday.

White House deputy press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters during a briefing Wednesday that the Biden administration is still hopeful of meeting that goal.

“We are optimistic that we will get this done before Christmas, and that is our focus, that is our hope, and that’s what we’re working towards,” Jean-Pierre said.

She said Biden and Manchin have had “two great conversations” this week.

When asked Wednesday if he believes the bill will be passed before the end of the year, Biden told a reporter: “I hope so. It’s going to be close.”

The child tax credit up for extension is an expanded program that sent families monthly checks beginning in July. Most received $300 for each child under the age of 6, and $250 for children ages 6-17.

Without an extension, the program would revert to its previous form, a credit of $2,000 per child when filing annual tax returns instead of receiving monthly checks.

Senate Democrats are also considering whether to prioritize voting rights legislation, which Republicans also opposed, as the year comes to a close.

“If we can get the congressional voting rights done, we should do it,” Biden told a reporter when asked about the issue Wednesday. “If we can’t, we got to keep going. There’s nothing domestically more important than voting rights. It’s the single-biggest issue.”

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

US Senate Passes $770 Billion Defense Bill, Biden’s Signature Next

The U.S. Senate voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday for a version of the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, that authorizes $770 billion in defense spending — $25 billion more than requested by President Joe Biden —sending the measure to the White House for the president’s signature. 

The vote was 89-10, with strong support from both Democrats and Republicans for the annual legislation setting policy for the Department of Defense. The House of Representatives passed it by 363-70 last week. 

Biden is expected to sign the bill, but the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment on its passage on Wednesday. 

The NDAA is closely watched by a broad swath of industry and other interests because it is one of the only major pieces of legislation that becomes law every year and because it addresses a wide range of issues. 

The NDAA has become law every year for six decades. 

Authorizing about 5% more military spending than last year, the fiscal 2022 NDAA is a compromise after intense negotiations between House and Senate Democrats and Republicans after being stalled by disputes over China and Russia policy. 

It includes a 2.7% pay increase for the troops, and more aircraft and Navy ship purchases, in addition to strategies for dealing with geopolitical threats, especially Russia and China. 

The NDAA includes $300 million for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which provides support to Ukraine’s armed forces, $4 billion for the European Defense Initiative and $150 million for Baltic security cooperation. 

On China, the bill includes $7.1 billion for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative and a statement of congressional support for the defense of Taiwan, as well as a ban on the Department of Defense procuring products produced with forced labor from China’s Xinjiang region. 

It also includes an overhaul of the military justice system to take decisions on whether to prosecute cases of rape, sexual assault and some other major crimes out of the hands of military commanders. 

The change was a partial victory for activists because it did not strip military commanders of the authority to prosecute all felonies. It came after advocates led by Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand waged a yearslong effort to change the system in response to the thousands of cases of sexual assault among service members, many of which are never prosecuted. 

The bill does not include some provisions included in earlier versions, notably one that would have required women to register for the military draft. The proposal had faced stiff opposition from a handful of socially conservative Republican lawmakers who thought it would erode traditional gender roles, threatening to stymie the entire NDAA. 

 
…

US House Votes 222-208 to Refer Contempt Charges Against Top Trump Aide

The U.S. House of Representatives has approved a resolution that calls on the Justice Department to formally charge Mark Meadows, former President Donald Trump’s chief of staff, with criminal contempt of Congress for refusing to testify to the special committee investigating the January 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol by Trump’s supporters. 

The resolution passed the Democratic-led House late Tuesday night by a vote of  222-208, with just two Republicans joining all Democrats voting in favor. The two Republicans, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois and Liz Cheney, serve on the special committee with seven Democrats that voted unanimously Monday to recommend that Meadows face criminal charges.  

Meadows handed over 6,600 pages of records taken from personal email accounts and about 2,000 text messages to the nine-member House of Representatives committee investigating the violence by hundreds of Trump supporters at the Capitol 11 months ago. The trouble happened as lawmakers were certifying that Democrat Joe Biden had defeated Trump in his reelection bid.     

Meadows initially agreed to testify about his role before January 6 in trying to help Trump claim a second four-year term in the White House and his actions that day. Protesters, urged by Trump to “fight like hell” to keep him in office, stormed the Capitol, smashed windows and fought with police. Last week, Meadows changed his mind about testifying, citing Trump’s assertion of executive privilege to keep documents secret to inhibit the investigation.  

“If you’re making excuses to avoid cooperating with our investigation, you’re making excuses to hide the truth from the American people about what happened on January 6th,” Mississippi Representative Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, the chairman of the special committee, told lawmakers during a debate before Tuesday night’s vote. 

Meadows served in the U.S. House of Representatives as a Republican from North Carolina from 2013 to 2020 before becoming Trump’s chief of staff. He is the first former congressman to be held in contempt since 1830.  

Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio condemned the resolution during the full House debate and defended his former colleague. “This is as wrong as it gets,” Jordan told lawmakers. “You all know it. But your lust for power, your lust to get your opponents, is so intense you don’t care.” 

Ahead of Monday’s committee vote, Cheney detailed text messages sent to Meadows as the January 6 attack on the Capitol unfolded with prominent conservative media figures and one of Trump’s sons urging Meadows to encourage Trump to do more to halt the actions of his supporters.

Cheney said the messages show Trump’s “supreme dereliction” and raised questions about whether through his inaction he sought to interrupt the congressional task of certifying the presidential election result showing that he lost. 

“These texts leave no doubt,” Cheney said. “The White House knew exactly what was happening at the Capitol.”    

The House committee has already held another former Trump aide, Steve Bannon, in contempt of Congress for his refusal to comply with a subpoena to testify. Bannon was later indicted and, if convicted, could face up to a year in prison.    

The investigative panel late Sunday issued a 51-page report that showed Meadows was deeply involved in trying to keep Trump in office even though the former president had lost five dozen court challenges in various states contesting his election loss and numerous vote recounts in individual political battleground states all upheld Biden’s victories.     

State election officials often said there was no appreciable voter fraud, as Trump has alleged to this day, that would have changed the outcome in his favor.  

If Meadows had appeared for a deposition, the committee said it would have questioned him about numerous documents he provided.  

On Monday, Meadows said through his attorney that the committee’s referral was unwise, unfair and contrary to law, according to The Associated Press.  

Meadows said in an interview on the Fox News cable network late Monday the committee’s decision was “disappointing, but not surprising.” 

“This is about Donald Trump and about actually going after him once again,” Meadows said. 

In a November 7, 2020, email, the committee said that just days after Trump lost the election, Meadows discussed an effort to have state legislators in states Trump lost appoint electors supporting Trump rather than the pro-Biden electors a majority of voters had chosen.      

In text messages with an unidentified senator, Meadows discussed Trump’s erroneous view that then-Vice President Mike Pence had the power to overturn the Electoral College vote count as lawmakers officially certified the state-by-state tally on January 6. Pence drew Trump’s ire as he refused to upend the Electoral College vote, which Biden won by a 306-232 margin, the same count Trump won by in 2016.     

A day before the riot occurred, Meadows said National Guard troops would be at the Capitol to “protect pro-Trump people.” Other emails touched on the rioting at the Capitol as it unfolded, with pro-Trump supporters shutting down the Electoral College vote count for hours before Biden was finally declared the winner in the early hours of January 7.     

The committee also said it wants to ask Meadows about claims he made in his new book, “The Chief’s Chief,” about his time in the White House with Trump.  

“Mr. Meadows has shown his willingness to talk about issues related to the Select Committee’s investigation across a variety of media platforms — anywhere, it seems, except to the Select Committee,” the panel wrote.     

In turn, Meadows has sued the committee, asking a court to invalidate two subpoenas that he says are “overly broad and unduly burdensome.” 

The panel has interviewed nearly 300 witnesses and lawmakers linked in some way to the rioting or contesting of the election results. The committee says it is planning a series of hearings early next year to make public many of its findings.  

Some of the more than 600 people charged in the rioting, often identified by boasts on social media accounts of being inside the Capitol, have been sentenced to prison terms of a few months or, in more serious cases, to more than four years. But most of the criminal charges have yet to be adjudicated. 

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

Judge Rejects Trump Bid to Keep Tax Returns From Congress

A U.S. judge Tuesday dismissed a bid by former President Donald Trump to keep his tax returns from a House of Representatives committee, ruling that Congress’ legislative interest outweighed any deference Trump should receive as a former president. 

U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden said in his ruling that Trump was “wrong on the law” in seeking to block the House Ways and Means Committee from obtaining his tax returns. 

McFadden, who also said it was within the power of the committee’s chairman to publish the returns if he saw fit, put his ruling on hold for 14 days, allowing time for an appeal. 

Trump was the first president in 40 years not to release his tax returns as he aimed to keep secret the details of his wealth and the activities of his family company, the Trump Organization. 

The committee sued in 2019 to force disclosure of the tax returns, and the dispute lingers nearly 11 months after Trump left office. 

Trump lawyer Patrick Strawbridge told McFadden last month the committee had no legitimate reason to see the tax returns and had asked for them in the hope of uncovering information that could hurt Trump politically. 

House Democrats have said they need Trump’s tax returns to see if the Internal Revenue Service is properly auditing presidential returns in general and to assess whether new legislation is needed. 

McFadden, a Trump appointee, said the committee would be able to accomplish its stated objective without publishing the returns. 

He cautioned the panel’s Democratic chairman, Representative Richard Neal, that while he has the right to do so, “anyone can see that publishing confidential tax information of a political rival is the type of move that will return to plague the inventor.” 

Neither the committee nor Strawbridge immediately responded to requests for comments on the ruling. 

 
…

US Senate Approves Boosting Debt Limit to $31.4 Trillion, Sends to House

The U.S. Senate on Tuesday approved raising the federal government’s debt limit by $2.5 trillion, to about $31.4 trillion, and sent it to the House of Representatives to pass and avert an unprecedented default. 

The 50-49 party-line vote follows a months-long standoff between Democrats and Republicans, with the latter seeking to force President Joe Biden’s party to raise the debt limit on its own from the current $28.9 trillion level, generating fodder for attack ads during the 2022 congressional elections. 

A deal last week between Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and his Republican counterpart, Mitch McConnell, set the stage for Tuesday’s vote, bypassing normal Senate rules requiring at least 60 of the chamber’s 100 members to agree to advance most legislation. 

The Democratic-led House will also need to approve the bill before sending it to Biden for his signature. The chamber was expected to take the matter up later on Tuesday. 

Schumer said the increase would cover the government’s needs into 2023, through the November 8 midterm elections that will determine control of Congress. 

U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen had urged Congress to hike the debt limit before Wednesday. 

Under the unusual deal worked out by Schumer and McConnell, and approved by both chambers last week, legislation raising the debt ceiling could be passed this one time in the Senate by a simple majority, which meant Democrats could get it through on their own. 

In the House, Republican Representative Jodey Arrington told the chamber’s Rules Committee he was disappointed that McConnell had agreed to the deal. The country’s debt level was at its highest since World War Two and “we ain’t in a war,” Arrington said. 

The committee’s chairman, Democrat Jim McGovern, responded: “I don’t normally have many nice things to say about Mitch McConnell, but I do think he understands that … not to allow this to go forward, it would be ruinous to our economy.” The committee then voted 9-4 to move the legislation to the House floor. 

The increase is needed in part to cover debt incurred during Republican Donald Trump’s presidency, when the debt rose by about $7.85 trillion, partly through sweeping tax cuts and spending to fight the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Republicans, who oppose the debt ceiling increase and control half of the Senate’s 100 seats, have tried to link the vote to Biden’s $1.75 trillion “Build Back Better” bill to bolster the social safety net and fight climate change. 

“Every Senate Democrat is going to vote along party lines to raise our nation’s debt limit by trillions of dollars,” McConnell said in a speech before the vote. “If they jam through another reckless taxing and spending spree, this massive debt increase will just be the beginning.” 

But Schumer was upbeat, saying: “This is about paying debt accumulated by both parties, so I’m pleased Republicans and Democrats came together to facilitate a process that has made addressing the debt ceiling possible.” 

The debt ceiling fight and another self-created crisis, passing a bill to continue funding the government through February, occupied much of Congress’ time this month, and members in both chambers are now eager to begin long holiday breaks. 

It remains unclear if congressional Democrats will be able to meet Schumer’s other goal, passing Biden’s sweeping $1.75 trillion bill to bolster the social safety net and fight climate change, by Christmas. Deep disagreements within the party on the size and scope of the package have stalled that effort. 

 
…

US Lawmakers Call on White House to Expedite Weapon Deliveries to Ukraine 

U.S. lawmakers just back from a visit to Ukraine warn that Washington’s threats of sanctions and diplomatic maneuvering are not doing enough to dissuade Russian President Vladimir Putin from potentially launching an invasion. 

The group of Democrats and Republicans visited Kyiv Saturday and Sunday where they met with the commander of the Ukrainian special forces and with U.S. special operators and National Guard troops who have been helping the Ukrainian military with training. 

They described the situation as “very concerning” and urged the White House to speed up the delivery of weapons to the Ukrainian forces in the hopes of staving off a Russian invasion. 

“I think promising tough action, just to be candid, after an invasion, will do very little in terms of Putin’s calculus,” Republican Representative Michael Waltz told reporters Tuesday.

“We’re seeing Putin, I think, do this in many respects because he knows he can get away with it,” Waltz added. “We need to help Ukraine porcupine themselves and raise the costs now.” 

Democrats on the trip likewise urged the White House to take actions that will make Russia feel the blowback for an invasion of Ukraine almost instantly. 

“If Putin invades, I want him to know that he’ll have trouble buying a soda from a vending machine in the next five minutes, not that NATO will convene a conference to debate what to do next over the ensuing several weeks,” Representative Seth Moulton said. 

“We need to clearly communicate how the weapons we provide will cause large losses of Russian troops on Day One, not just over time,” he said. “Not just convincing them or trying to convince them that an occupation will be painful, but rather that an immediate full-scale invasion will be hard to take immediately.” 

The lawmakers also expressed confidence that unlike in 2014, when Russia invaded and occupied Crimea, Ukrainian forces are prepared to mount a fierce resistance if Putin sends in Russian troops. They said it would be folly, though, to think Ukrainian troops could hold out for long. 

“I think what we have to work on in the immediate future, right now, is to create the capability for a strong resistance in nonconventional warfare,” said Democrat Ruben Gallego.

“(Ukraine) being able to hold out and impose costs will be very helpful,” he said. And that would “hopefully change the calculation that Putin is using.” 

The lawmakers called for the White House to speed up the delivery of weapons to Ukraine, including ship-to-shore missiles, air defense missiles and additional Javelin anti-tank missiles. 

Some analysts have suggested such a strategy, aimed at imposing a military cost on Moscow, could work. 

“I think if Putin goes big, it could become very costly for him,” Luke Coffey of the Washington-based Heritage Foundation said Monday in response to a question from VOA. 

“They have a very robust reserve system in Ukraine where they can call up huge numbers of forces,” he said. “The further west that Russian forces would move, the stiffer the resistance would become, without a doubt.”

The White House signaled Tuesday it is prepared to stay the course, however, promising Moscow will pay a “terrible price” should it invade Ukraine due to what U.S. President Joe Biden has described as devastating sanctions.

“Our objective continues to be to keep this on a diplomatic path and for that to lead to de-escalation,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters Tuesday. 

“We’re obviously engaged in daily conversations with Europeans, with Russians, with Ukrainians, and conveying exactly what we think should happen here to de-escalate the situation on the ground,” Psaki said.

Yet those talks, including meetings by U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Karen Donfried with Russian officials in Moscow, seem to be having little impact on the ground, at least so far. 

The Pentagon said Tuesday it has seen no evidence of a pullback by Russian forces massed along the border with Ukraine. 

Putin on Tuesday reiterated Russia’s concern about Ukraine’s potential membership in NATO during a call with French President Emmanuel Macron, insisting the West provide Moscow with needed security guarantees. 

“The Russian president emphasized the importance of immediately launching international negotiations to develop legally fixed guarantees that would prevent any further NATO expansion to the east and the deployment of weapons to neighboring states, primarily in Ukraine, that threaten Russia,” the Kremlin said in a statement. 

Russia’s deputy foreign minister earlier threatened that Moscow could be forced to deploy tactical nuclear weapons if the U.S. and NATO fail to put an end the alliance’s eastward expansion. 

 NATO Tuesday dismissed such talk as hypocritical, specifically the Kremlin’s call for a moratorium on intermediate-range nuclear forces in Europe. 

“We had a ban, and they violated that ban,” NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg told reporters. “It is not credible when they now propose a ban on something they actually have already started to deploy.” 

Some information from Reuters was used in this report. 
…