Category Archives: Democrat

House Democrats took aim at major oil companies climate pledges during an Oversight Committee hearing on Tuesday after company board members declined to appear.

The hearing replaced the committees initial plans to have board members from ExxonMobil, BP, Chevron and Shell testify after the committee said last week that four out of five invitees declined to appear on the scheduled date.

Instead, the lawmakers brought in experts and advocates, who criticized the companies promises as insufficient as they anticipate continued use of fossil fuels.

The lawmakers, too, criticized the companies, saying that plans to continue and in many cases expand fossil fuel production are incompatible with fighting climate change.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, burning fossil fuels is the biggest contributorto climate change.

The companies have said that they want to reduce the carbon intensity of their fossil fuels meaning that the fuels themselves will release less carbon dioxide into the air.

Panel witness Michael Mann, a Pennsylvania State University atmospheric science professor, said that with increased production, doing thiswould besimilar to eating more potato chips but selecting a lower-fat variety.

They love to talk about how they are going to decrease the carbon intensity of their fossil fuels. Thats sort of like your doctor telling you that you need to cut fat from your diet and so you switch to 40 percent reduced fat potato chips, but you eat twice as many of them, Mann said.

"That doesnt help and thats effectively what fossil fuel interests are doing, he added.

Chevron and Exxon particularly came under fire for including releases of planet-warming gasses only from their operations,and not from the burning of their products to power cars or generate electricity, in their carbon neutrality pledges.

The fuels use, not their production, is responsible for the vast majority of their emissions.

That would be like an automaker pledging to eliminate emissions from their manufacturing, but doing nothing to improve their cars fuel efficiency, said Rep. Ro KhannaRohit (Ro) KhannaSmall ranchers say Biden letting them get squeezed Sanders, 50 Democrats unveil bill to send N95 masks to all Americans Overnight Health Care Insurance will soon cover COVID-19 tests MORE (D-Calif.)

Meanwhile, Rep. Hank JohnsonHenry (Hank) C. JohnsonHouse Ethics Committee takes no action against Bowman over voting rights protest arrest New revelations raise pressure on Barr to testify on Jan. 6 The truth of Jan. 6 is coming to light accountability will fall to the courts MORE (D-Ga.) criticized Shell for a2020 company statement, sayingthat its operating plans, outlooks, budgets and pricing assumptions do not reflect its emission reduction targets.

How can we take Shells climate mitigation goals seriously when they do not even consider these goals in their current budgets, outlooks and prices? he asked.

And Rep. Ayanna Presley (D-Mass.) expressed criticism about the companies plans involving the use of carbon capture technology to prevent emissions from their products from going into the atmosphere.

She asked Mann if there had been enough advancements proving that the technology would perform as advertised.

I dont see any evidence at this point. There hasnt been a proof of concept that shows you can use [carbon capture and storage] and produce energy without producing carbon pollution, he said.

Republicans, meanwhile, criticized their Democratic colleagues, characterizing the hearing as an attack on fossil fuel companies.

Their investigation hasnt turned up anything, no smoking gun, because there is not one. No matter what these companies do, it will never be enough to please the Democrats, said the committee's ranking member, Rep. James ComerJames (Jamie) R. ComerFormer Washington football team staffers detail sexual harassment, humiliation, racism to House panel Lawmakers battle at Washington Football Team roundtable on sexual harassment Overnight Defense & National Security Inside Austin's civilian harm directive MORE (R-Ky.).

Originally, the committee invited a membereach from Chevron, Shell and BPs boards of directors and two members of Exxons board.

In a statement last week, the committee said that four of the five refused to appear at Tuesdays hearing, so it was being pushed back.

The Big Oil companies should consider the March hearing their last chance to cooperate. If their board members refuse to appear, they should expect further action from this Committee, Chairwoman Carolyn MaloneyCarolyn MaloneyOvernight Energy & Environment Biden's Fed pick draws GOP heat on climate Former Washington football team staffers detail sexual harassment, humiliation, racism to House panel Lawmakers battle at Washington Football Team roundtable on sexual harassment MORE (D-N.Y.) said in the statement at the time.

Shell spokesperson Curtis Smith said that its board member, Jane Holl Lute, was the one witness who would have attended the hearing originally scheduled for today and indicated that she will attend the rescheduled hearing.

Matt Herrington, a lawyer representing BP board member Melody Meyer said via email that Tuesday was not a workable date, butadded that next month, Melody will be happy to appear with other industry representatives at the rescheduled hearing.

Casey Norton, Exxons spokesperson, saidthe company'sboard members, Susan Avery and Alexander Karsner, would also appear voluntarily when both are available.

On the hearing in general, Norton said via email that over the next six years, the company plans to invest more than $15 billion in emissions-lowering initiatives including "scaling carbon capture and storage, hydrogen and biofuels."

BP spokesperson JP Fielder highlighted that the company plans to reach carbon neutrality across its both sales and operations by 2050 when asked for comment.

Spokespeople for Chevron did not respond to The Hills requests for comment.

The effort comes as part of a broader push by Democrats to investigate the oil companies. Top executives from each firmtestified before the House in October, during which they largely downplayed early knowledge of climate change.

Following the October hearing, Maloney issued subpoenas to the companies, saying they failed to provide requested financial documents and internal communications.

Here is the original post:

Democrats go after Big Oil climate pledges, calling them insufficient | TheHill - The Hill

Jailers Sylvia Wagler, Travis Ashby, Brittany Small, and Adam Davis talked with the Bloomfield Democrat (and http://www.bdemo.com) last week about their jobs as jailers and how they serve the inmates' needs at the Davis County Jail. Also learn which Bloomfield organizations were granted hotel/motel tax funds, who was arrested on drug charges, and meet Jared Wittmaack, Bloomfield's newest police officer. Also see the latest in FFA news, which DCHS students participated in honor bands and who was on the DCHS honor roll. In sports, four DC wrestlers will move on to the district tournament, two DCHS students signed letters of intent, the basketball teams won, and the bowling teams scored big wins. You'll even find a Mexican Pizza Dip recipe for the big game day, and Valentine greetings, Valentine ads, and "Super Party" ads.

Go here to see the original:

What's in the Bloomfield Democrat this week? | Syndicated Content | bdemo.com - bdemo.com

Democrats are facing the headwinds of history as they race to save their narrow House and Senate majorities later this year even before they factor in the challenges of an out-of-control pandemic and rising inflation.

Thats because voters typically punish the party in power when a new president faces his first midterm election. In the past century, the presidents party has picked up seats in midterm elections only twice, in 1934 and 2002.

In both of those occasions, the incumbent president Franklin Roosevelt and George W. Bush were hugely popular. Roosevelt had guided the country through the end of the Depression, and Bush was riding a tide of patriotism after the Sept. 11 terror attacks.

Democrats need Biden to be popular if they have any hope of retaining their slim majorities. Theres plenty of time left before voters start voting, but history is not on their side.

Go here to read the rest:

What Biden's approval rating says about Democrats' chances in the 2022 midterms | TheHill - The Hill

Democrat-allied experts have begun to turn on the Biden administrations shaky coronavirus response, dubbing it a credibility crisis and the butt of jokes.

While then-candidate Biden promised over ten times in 2020 to shut the virus down, the omicron variant has reportedly continuedto set records, threatening Bidens credibility.

The administration in general has lost the confidence of people who would be their natural supporters, Biden administration advisory board member Celine Gounder told Axios, speaking about the rise of omicron and the ensuinginfighting between the White House andCenters for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Former CDC Director Tom Frieden also told Axios the Biden administrations waveringhealth guidelines and shifting messaging tactics is the butt of jokes.

Its never good to be the butt of jokes, the expert said.

George Washington University professor and CNN commentator Leana Wen alsoacknowledged the CDC is facing a real crisis of trust and pointed to Bidens CDC Director Rochelle Walensky for poor crisis communication skills.

The primary problem is the policy and how insular Walensky has been in setting it, Wen said. She and the others are great communicators but no one can communicate a bad policy.

Bidens CDC director apparently has acknowledged she needs help communicating the ever-shifting health guidelines to the nation and has hired aprominent Democratic media consultant Mandy Grunwald to improve her communication skills, CNN reported.

The experts opinions on Bidens effort to shut down the virus come as Bidens CDC has continually altered health guidelines over the course of the year.

In May,the CDC said it was safe to not wear masks indoors but later reversed the opinion months later.

In February,the CDC advised that schools could reopen without fully vaccinated teachers. But the White House said that guidance given byWalensky was only in her personal capacity.

In December, the CDC revised quarantine guidelines from five days to five without rapid testing to ensure infections were no longer present.Walensky later changed her mind and advisedpeople should be tested for coronavirus after five days, if they can find a test.

Follow Wendell Huseb on Twitter@WendellHuseb

See the rest here:

The Butt of Jokes: Democrat-Allied Experts Turn on Joe ...

Laura Ingraham pointed out that some Democrats appear to be encouraging former first lady Michelle Obama to run for president in her "Ingraham Angle" on Friday.

Ingraham said the exercise shows Democrats still haven't learned why they're losing ground in the polls with the average American they think their main issue is their brand, rather than their failing and, at times, dangerous political policies.

Former first lady Michelle Obama. (AP Photo/John Locher, File)

"Michelle to the rescue? You might ask yourselves, how much trouble are the Democrats really in?" she said.

"They actually might try to convince Michelle Obama to run for president. Remember, just a few months ago, even Joe Rogan got in on that act."

Rogan, a Spotify podcaster and mixed martial arts expert, recently made headlines for allowing open discourse about coronavirus mitigation on his show. Previously, Rogan entertained that Obama is the "wife of the best president we have had in our lifetime in terms of a representative of intelligent people."

Podcaster Joe Rogan. (Photo by Stacy Revere/Getty Images)

Ingraham noted that Obama was recently polled as the most popular Democrat in the world, but added that she has "zero relevant experience" to govern except for her former title as first lady.

A Michelle Obama push would be akin to Republicans trying to encourage former first lady Laura Bush to run in 2008, Ingraham added.

She clarified that former President Donald Trump also had no previous governing experience, but he managed a major American corporate empire with diverse holdings and was able to translate that business sense into politics.

"He used that experience and a keen sense of the political undercurrents to quickly galvanize a populist conservative movement," she said. "He was offering a set of ideas that his party had not fully embraced at the time, from strict border enforcement to tougher trade deals to less military intervention abroad."

CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Presidents Biden and Putin. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images | Mikhail Svetlov/Getty Images)

"By contrast, the entire point of a Michelle Obama movement would be to take her fame and celebrity, then tie them to the same failed ideas that destroyed the Democrat Party over the last year and destroyed American cities as well."

"Democratic officeholders, they're not flailing and failing because they're not charming or glamorous," Ingraham said. "They're failing because their policies cannot and do not work. Look at the state of Blue America right now."

"Despite all the speculation, it is really hard to see any scenario under which Michelle Obama would actually agree to this nonsense. She's intelligent enough to realize that a lot of her popularity stems from the fact that her husband was beloved and usually, not always, but usually she tends to stay above politics Plus her husband was savvy enough to keep the far left at bay. Middle-class Americans didn't like radicalism when he was president, and [former President Barack Obama] knew it."

Link:

Ingraham: Democrats think their problems are branding, not policies - Fox News

In December of that year, Senator Tim Johnson, Democrat of South Dakota, had a cerebral hemorrhage, putting the slim, newly won Democratic majority in jeopardy. Though he was gone for months, Mr. Johnson ultimately returned the next fall and won re-election in 2008 despite continuing health struggles.

In another recent case, Senator Mark Kirk, Republican of Illinois, had a stroke in January 2012 and was gone almost an entire year. No requirement exists for senators to step aside for health reasons if they choose not to, and there are many earlier instances of ill senators being away from Washington for lengthy periods, forcing their colleagues to adjust accordingly.

With Democrats able to approve a nominee themselves with their 50-vote majority, Republicans have so far signaled that they do not intend to dig in too hard against the pick, allowing them to show that Supreme Court confirmations can be conducted without becoming hyperpartisan spectacles. But any uncertainty about the Democratic ability to produce a sure 50 votes could quickly change that calculation and give Republicans more leverage over the nominee and the proceedings themselves.

Based on what has happened in the past, Republicans will tread carefully, not wanting to be seen as trying to gain advantage from the illness of a colleague and recognizing that like many things in the Senate, the tables can quickly turn.

On Wednesday, Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the minority leader, said that the entire Senate was praying and pulling for Mr. Lujn and that it was encouraging to read that our friend and colleague is expected to make a full recovery.

Though Mr. Lujns medical issue was more serious, the Senate has already contended with frequent absences this year as members dealt with positive coronavirus tests and family issues, forcing leaders of both parties to keep close track of attendance to guide their scheduling. Mr. Lujns condition and the approach of a Supreme Court debate have now put such issues in the spotlight.

Thats just what we live with every day in a 50-50 Senate, said Senator Debbie Stabenow, Democrat of Michigan. We are all human beings, and something can happen to someone at any time.

Emily Cochrane and Annie Karni contributed reporting.

See more here:

One Illness Reminds Democrats They Have No Votes to Spare - The New York Times

The bills enjoy broad support the 42 co-sponsors of Ms. Spanbergers TRUST in Congress Act include Representatives Matt Gaetz of Florida, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and Andy Harris of Maryland, all firmly in the Trump wing of their party and if anything, they are putting Ms. Pelosi in the spotlight.

You have the speaker of the House out there trading, and her husband making millions and millions of dollars a year, Mr. Hawley said.

Democrats are just as eager to contrast their position with Ms. Pelosis. They said her refusal in December to consider a stock trading ban Were a free-market economy, she said when asked about the push made the issue a cause clbre.

The speaker, I dont want to directly call her out, but handfuls of members have put dozens and dozens of years here. They come at this from a different time and a different perspective, said Ms. Stevens, who has found herself almost certainly facing another Democrat, Andy Levin, in the upcoming House primaries in redistricted Michigan. Both signed on to last weeks letter demanding action on a trading ban.

Democratic leaders remain leery. They argue that once Congress begins trying to regulate its own members out of investments, it is difficult to draw the line between what is permissible and what is not. If stock ownership is forbidden because it could create a conflict with legislating, would having student loan debt make it inappropriate for a member to press for loan relief? Would owning real estate confer an improper personal interest in environmental or land-use policy?

Mr. Roy allowed that there were complexities, but, he said, a line had to be drawn.

If youre talking about dirt, well, are you talking about your family farm or are you engaging in thousands of real estate transactions? he asked. Are you buying and selling and engaging in commercial real estate transactions development while youre in Congress? There are limits to what were supposed to do.

Drew Hammill, Ms. Pelosis deputy chief of staff, said the speaker had asked Representative Zoe Lofgren, Democrat of California and the chairwoman of the Committee on House Administration, to examine an array of proposals to regulate lawmakers trading, including a ban on owning stocks. Ms. Lofgren is also looking at increasing penalties for unacceptable noncompliance with the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act, a 2012 law that mandates that lawmakers disclose their stock trading, a step he said Ms. Pelosi supports.

More:

Democrats Break With Leaders Over Congressional Stock Trading - The New York Times

ANDERSON Two Democrats have filed for the partys nomination in the 5th Congressional District to challenge incumbent Republican Victoria Spartz.

As of Friday, Spartz remained unchallenged for the Republican Party nomination as she seeks a second term.

Matthew Hall and Jeanine Lee Lake have declared their intentions to seek the Democratic Party nomination in the 5th District.

Hall, 50, has served with the U.S. Army for 28 years and did two tours of duty in Afghanistan. He remains a member of the reserves with the rank of major.

He served one year on the Lawrence Common Council after being appointed to fill a vacancy in 2018.

It was a great learning experience, Hall said during an interview with The Herald Bulletin. I got a free education in the political process.

Hall said he was considering running for a seat in the Indiana Senate or Indiana House and starting thinking about running for Congress.

Im excited about it, he said. This could really work and provide a way to serve more people.

Hall said he is not concerned about the makeup of the district, stating it has four distinct regions.

There is a rural area, union members around Kokomo, educators at Ball State and suburbs in Hamilton County, he said. I dont think Republican or Democrat is the challenging part. There is a wedge between the parties and theyre not talking to each other.

Hall said he wants to help the American people to trust their elected officials in the future.

Leadership is a way of life, he said. You can still be a leader in a lesser position.

Hall said he agrees with some of the policies of President Joe Biden.

I dont like the bundling of all these bills together, he said. There should be separate votes on each proposal.

If elected, he wants to see broadband internet service expanded to rural areas, work on economic development initiatives and invest in infrastructure in the district.

Hall said fundraising is a necessary evil and admits that incumbent Spartz has deep pockets.

There is a way to reach people without spending $5 million, he said. You can communicate with people online, and I will have a strategic plan with our spending.

Hall said too many members of Congress are getting wealthy with investments in the stock market.

Im not in it to make money. I want to help people, he said.

Hall has been in contact with the Indiana state party organization, which has indicated they will work with both candidates for the nomination.

Follow Ken de la Bastide on Twitter

@KendelaBastide, or call 765-640-4863.

View original post here:

Hall seeking Democrat nomination for 5th Congressional District - The Herald Bulletin

Photo-Illustration: Intelligencer; Photos: Getty Images

This week, New Yorks Democratic Party approved a redrawn congressional map that could net it three more seats in the House of Representatives and cut the states Republican representation in half. Governor Kathy Hochul signed the new map into law the following day, along with new maps for the state Senate and Assembly districts.

Democrats currently hold a thin 222-212 majority in the House, but the tendency for parties in power to suffer midterm losses plus less than ideal approval ratings for President Joe Biden has the party on edge. Because Democrats hold a legislative supermajority in New York, it was one of the few states in which the party could take control of the redistricting process and slightly improve its overall midterm prospects. The aggressive effort to do just that has prompted accusations of hypocrisy toward Democrats, who have frequently campaigned against gerrymandering. Party officials say they are merely matching an example set by Republicans across the country.

New York Republican State Committee chairman Nick Langworthy described the newly drawn districts as textbook filthy, partisan gerrymandering and voiced the possibility of a court challenge, though it appears one is unlikely to succeed.

We are reviewing all of our legal options to protect the voices of millions of New Yorkers, he said.

Not long after Hochul signed off on the new district lines, a lawsuit was filed in the Steuben County Supreme Court alleging that the new maps are unconstitutional.

The changes are wide-ranging. Congresswoman Nicole Malliotakis, a Republican, represents the 11th Congressional District, which encompasses all of conservative Staten Island as well as Bay Ridge and Dyker Heights in Brooklyn. The new map links Staten Island with liberal neighborhoods like Park Slope and Sunset Park, drastically changing the districts demographics. This favors Democrat Max Rose, the former congressman who previously held the seat before losing to Malliotakis in 2020 (also, possibly, Bill de Blasio).

This is a blatant attempt by the Democrat leadership in Albany to steal this seat, even after New Yorkers voted twice by ballot referendum for nonpartisan maps, said Rob Ryan, a spokesman for the Malliotakis campaign, in a statement to Intelligencer.

Outside the city, the seats currently held by outgoing Republicans Lee Zeldin and John Katko were already seen as prime pickup opportunities. (Zeldin declared his candidacy for governor in early 2021, while Katko announced in January that he would be retiring from office.) But both congressmens districts have also been redrawn, with Zeldins First District on Long Island extending into Democratic areas and Katkos 24th District folded into the 22nd District, which will include the blue cities of Ithaca and Syracuse.

Another Republican congresswoman, Claudia Tenney, is opting to run in a new district entirely after a large portion of her 22nd District was redrawn into the 19th, currently represented by Democrat Antonio Delgado. Tenney will try her luck in the 23rd District, where the regions current representative, Republican Tom Reed, previously announced his plans to retire.

In 2014, New Yorkers backed a ballot proposal that would amend the state constitution and establish an independent redistricting commission responsible for redrawing state and congressional districts based on Census results. (In 2020, the state lost one seat in the House just barely.) In January, the ten-member panel submitted two maps to the state legislature after members failed to come to an agreement on a single proposal. The legislature rejected both maps and gave the panel additional time to present a new draft. But the panel reached an impasse, allowing the states legislative task force to step in and submit its own lines. State lawmakers moved quickly, citing the fact that candidates will have to begin petitioning to run for districts in March.

Steven Romalewski, director of the mapping service at the City University of New Yorks Graduate Center, said that the state legislatures actions are consistent with the law.

I think theres a big difference between what the perception is of what the voters voted on versus the reality. The constitutional amendment, for good or for ill, explicitly gives the legislature the ability to do exactly what theyre doing now, and that was part of the constitutional proposal that the voters approved, Romalewski said.

There has also been criticism that state lawmakers didnt provide enough time for public input into the creation of the new maps. The independent redistricting commission, by contrast, held public hearings and allowed members of the community to submit comments on the proposed maps.

Now you have these maps that are drafted by the legislature in the space of a week without any opportunity for the public to have any input, said Susan Lerner, the executive director of Common Cause New York. She called the commission fatally flawed from the beginning.

In Lerners view, for a redistricting commission to be truly independent, it has to be citizen-led and outside the purview of legislative officials.

Its virtually irresistible for politicians to be able to benefit themselves and to lock in their position. The pencils got to be taken out of their hands, she said.

Independent commissions have the final word on redistricting in states like Michigan and California. And in some places, such as Pennsylvania, state courts have stepped in to take control after determining that legislators maps were too partisan. But it looks likely that in New York, raw politics will determine the lay of the land for the next ten years.

Daily news about the politics, business, and technology shaping our world.

See the article here:

New York Democrats Have Gerrymandered Their Way to a Huge Advantage - New York Magazine

Residents wait in line to vote outside of the Tippecanoe branch library on Oct. 20, 2020, in Milwaukee, Wis. Minimum standards for access to in-person early voting are one reform that both Republicans and Democrats have backed. Scott Olson/Getty Images hide caption

Residents wait in line to vote outside of the Tippecanoe branch library on Oct. 20, 2020, in Milwaukee, Wis. Minimum standards for access to in-person early voting are one reform that both Republicans and Democrats have backed.

Earlier this year, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., called a targeted effort by some senators to reform the election certification process that former President Donald Trump attempted to hijack on Jan. 6, 2021, "unacceptably insufficient and even offensive."

Schumer wanted to go bigger.

He wanted to focus on much more expansive voting rights legislation, known as the Freedom to Vote Act, which would have overhauled essentially everything about the American election system: when and where Americans could cast a ballot, how they contribute to political campaigns and how states draw their political lines.

The proposal was trimmed down from an even larger elections bill, but it was still so massive that many election experts and even some Democrats privately say they never actually expected it to pass.

Then it failed.

Democrats in Congress haven't made it clear what they might pursue next, but experts see at least two paths toward a more piecemeal approach to putting in some guardrails around elections in the U.S.

The option gaining momentum recently is an update to the aforementioned rules around presidential election certification, known as the Electoral Count Act.

The law has been derided as poorly written and vague for decades, and its lack of clarity led to the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, when Trump supporters falsely believed Vice President Mike Pence had more power over the certification of Electoral College votes submitted by the states than he actually did.

A bipartisan group of senators has been meeting to discuss potential revisions to the law, and there are indications that Schumer's opposition to it may be softening since the larger Democratic effort on voting rights failed.

Rick Hasen, an election law expert at the University of California-Irvine, said that he feels the voting reforms in the Freedom to Vote Act are necessary too, but Congress would be right to prioritize the ECA and other laws meant to prevent subversion of the results of a presidential election.

"As much as one might be concerned about voter suppression and I've written two books on the subject, I'm very concerned about it I put the concern about election subversion even higher," Hasen said. "If you don't have a system where votes are fairly counted, you don't have a democracy at all."

The bipartisan group of senators looking at changing the law is working in smaller groups focused on a number of different aspects of voting reform, according to Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who spoke to reporters Monday night after the group met on Capitol Hill.

Each of the smaller groups has a Democrat and Republican co-chair, Collins said, and they are focused on protecting election workers and potential new funding for election administration, in addition to updating the ECA. But she made it clear she thinks whatever legislation that comes from the group will not look anything like the Freedom to Vote Act.

"My goal is to have a bipartisan bill that can secure 60 or more votes in the Senate," she said. "If we re-litigate issues that have already been rejected by the Senate, then I think it would be very difficult for us to reach the 60-vote margin."

The bipartisan group of 16 senators, which includes nine Republicans, is set to meet again on Friday and could start writing text for their proposal in the coming days or weeks. The GOP support is key, since Democrats would need 10 Republicans in agreement to pass a measure in the Senate.

"This group is full of members of the Senate that have experience in getting bipartisan bills to the floor of the Senate. So maybe this group will be more successful," said Connecticut Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy, a member of the group.

On Tuesday, a group of key Democratic senators also separately released their own potential draft update to the ECA. In some cases, the plan by Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., and Angus King, I-Maine, mirrors proposals that were part of a House Administration Committee staff report released last month.

For example, it says that for an objection to a state's election results to be raised before Congress, the current threshold of only needing one member from each chamber should be raised. Rather, the Senate Democratic proposal, like the House staff report, suggests that one-third of each chamber should have to object. Both Democratic plans also say objections should be subject to a vote by a supermajority not a simple majority in both the House and Senate.

"We stand ready to share the knowledge we have accumulated with our colleagues from both parties and look forward to contributing to a strong, bipartisan effort aimed at resolving this issue and strengthening our democracy," Durbin, Klobuchar and King said in a statement on Tuesday.

King and several members of the bipartisan group agreed they see a potential to work together.

"I'm going to work with anybody who wants to work on the issue," King said.

Alaska GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski, another member of bipartisan group, says the various efforts signal momentum.

"I think what that telegraphs is that this is important and it's something that we can move through on a bipartisan basis," Murkowski said.

The level of bipartisan engagement on the ECA never coalesced around the other voting rights reforms Democrats had hoped would come from this Congress, which have grown more urgent as some states across the country passed laws last year restricting voting access.

Republicans have often said they have no interest in federalizing the nuts and bolts of election infrastructure, so mandating things like automatic voter registration or no-excuse absentee voting was a nonstarter.

But Matthew Weil thinks there is another way.

Weil leads the elections project at the Bipartisan Policy Center, which recently released a report detailing what it sees as an "achievable" set of reforms for Congress to focus on.

"Both parties have prioritized elections to their voters," said Weil. "Democrats have been spending a lot of time talking about voter suppression and voters from the Republican Party are hearing that our election system is completely insecure."

BPC's proposal would address both concerns, Weil says, meaning there's a way for politicians to sell it to their voters no matter their affiliation.

Importantly, the BPC report does not argue for federal mandates, but instead argues for an incentivization structure where federal funding would be tied to whether states meet minimum accessibility and security standards such as:

Nine states that range across the political spectrum either currently already meet all of the report's minimum standards or meet all but one. Both Colorado and Georgia meet all of the proposed minimum standards for instance, even though Colorado is a vote-by-mail state and Georgia leans more heavily on in-person voting.

Because of the incentive structure, the proposal also might be an easier sell to Republicans like Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose, who worry about federal overreach. LaRose staunchly opposed the Freedom to Vote Act, calling it a power grab on the part of Democrats.

But in an interview with NPR recently, LaRose said he had read the BPC report and that he could see supporting similar legislation. Ohio already complies with more than 80% of the report's standards.

Weil, of the BPC, sees parallels to 2002 when Congress passed a bipartisan set of election reforms in the shadow of the 2000 presidential election, one of the closest and most contentious in modern history.

"Both parties had incentives to do something about the elections process," Weil said. "I think I see some of those same possibilities now."

NPR's Claudia Grisales contributed to this report.

View post:

There are election reforms that both Democrats and Republicans seem to like - NPR