Category Archives: Democrat

Maybe Bill Clinton got a few things right after all.

For years, Democrats have rarely cited Clinton and the centrist New Democrat movement he led through the 90s except to renounce his third way approach to welfare, crime, and other issues as a violation of the partys principles. Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and even Bill Clinton himself have distanced themselves from key components of his record as president.

But now a loose constellation of internal party critics is reprising the Clintonites core arguments to make the case that progressives are steering Democrats toward unsustainable and unelectable positions, particularly on cultural and social questions.

Just like the centrists who clustered around Bill Clinton and the Democratic Leadership Council that he led decades ago, todays dissenters argue that Democrats risk a sustained exodus from power unless they can recapture more of the culturally conservative voters without a college education who are drifting away from the party. (That group, these dissenters argue, now includes not only white Americans but also working-class Hispanics and even some Black Americans.) And just as then, these arguments face fierce pushback from other Democrats who believe that the centrists would sacrifice the partys commitment to racial equity in a futile attempt to regain right-leaning voters irretrievably lost to conservative Republican messages.

Todays Democratic conflict is not yet as sustained or as institutionalized as the earlier battles. Although dozens of elected officials joined the DLC, the loudest internal critics of progressivism now are mostly political consultants, election analysts, and writersa list that includes the data scientist David Shor and a coterie of prominent left-of-center journalists (such as Matthew Yglesias, Ezra Klein, and Jonathan Chait) who have popularized his work; the longtime demographic and election analyst Ruy Teixeira and like-minded writers clustered around the website The Liberal Patriot; and the pollster Stanley B. Greenberg and the political strategist James Carville, two of the key figures in Clintons 1992 campaign. Compared with the early 90s, the pragmatic wing of the party is more fractured and leaderless, says Will Marshall, the president of the Progressive Policy Institute, a centrist think tank that was initially founded by the DLC but that has long outlived its parent organization (which closed its doors in 2011).

For now, these dissenters from the partys progressive consensus are mostly shouting from the bleachers. On virtually every major cultural and economic issue, the Democrats baseline position today is well to the left of their consensus in the Clinton years (and the country itself has also moved left on some previously polarizing cultural issues, such as marriage equality). As president, Biden has not embraced all of the vanguard liberal positions that critics such as Shor and Teixeira consider damaging, but neither has he publicly confronted and separated himself from the most leftist elements of his partythe way Clinton most famously did during the 1992 campaign when he accused the hip-hop artist Sister Souljah of promoting hatred against white people. Only a handful of elected officialsmost prominently, incoming New York City Mayor Eric Adamsseem willing to take a more confrontational approach toward cultural liberals, as analysts such as Teixeira are urging. But if next years midterm elections go badly for the party, its possible, even likely, that more Democrats will join the push for a more Clintonite approach. And that could restart a whole range of battles over policy and political strategy that seemed to have been long settled.

The Democratic Leadership Council was launched in February 1985, a few months after Ronald Reagan won 49 states and almost 60 percent of the popular vote while routing the Democratic presidential nominee Walter Mondale. From the start, Al From, a congressional aide who was the driving force behind the group, combatively defined the DLC as an attempt to steer the party toward the center and reduce the influence of liberal constituency groups, including organized labor and feminists.

The organization quickly attracted support from moderate Democratic officeholders, mostly in the South and West and also mostly white and male (critics derided the group alternately as the white male caucus or Democrats for the Leisure Class). After moving cautiously in its first years, the DLC shifted to a more aggressive approach and found a larger audience following Michael Dukakiss loss to George H. W. Bush in 1988. Losing to a generational political talent like Reagan amid a booming economic recovery was one thing, but when the gaffe-prone Bush beat Dukakis, who had moved to the center on economics, by portraying him as weak on crime and foreign policy, more Democrats responded to the DLCs call for change. Thats when it clicked in brains that we just dont have an offer [to voters] that can sustain majority support around the country, Marshall, who worked for the DLC since its founding, told me.

Read: Who was Bill Clinton, anyway?

The DLC responded to its larger audience by releasing what would become the enduring mission statement of the New Democrat movement. In September 1989, the Progressive Policy Institute, the think tank the DLC had formed a few months earlier, published a lengthy paper called The Politics of Evasion.

The papers authors, William Galston and Elaine Kamarck, were two Democratic activists with a scholarly bent, but on this occasion they wrote with a blowtorch. In the paper, they dismantled the common excuses for the partys decline: bad tactics, unusually charismatic opponents, and the failure to mobilize enough nonvoters. Dukakiss defeat meant that Democrats had lost five of the six previous presidential elections, averaging only 43 percent of the popular vote, and the party, Galston and Kamarck argued, needed to face the dire implications of that record. Too many Americans, they wrote, have come to see the party as inattentive to their economic interests, indifferent if not hostile to their moral sentiments and ineffective in defense of their national security.

The party had veered off course, they argued, because it had become dominated by minority groups and white elitesa coalition viewed by the middle class as unsympathetic to its interests and its values. Unless Democrats could reverse the perception among those middle-class voters that they too were profligate in spending and too permissive on social issues such as crime and welfare, the party was unlikely to win them back, even if a Republican president mismanaged the economy or Democrats convincingly tarred Republicans as favoring the wealthy. All too often the American people do not respond to a progressive economic message, even when Democrats try to offer it, because the partys presidential candidates fail to win their confidence in other key areas such as defense, foreign policy, and social values, Galston and Kamarck wrote. Credibility on these issues is the ticket that will get Democratic candidates in the door to make their affirmative economic case.

The only way to prove to these disaffected middle-class voters that the party had changed, the pair suggested, was for centrists to publicly pick a fight with liberals. Only conflict and controversy over basic economic, social, and defense issues are likely to attract the attention needed to convince the public that the party still has something to offer, they declared.

Bill Clinton, who took over as DLC chairman a few months after The Politics of Evasion was published, devoured these analyses of the Democrats difficulties as if they were so many French fries, as Dan Balz and I wrote in our 1996 book, Storming the Gates. Clinton sanded down some of the sharpest edges of these ideas and adapted them into the folksy, populist style he had developed while repeatedly winning office in Arkansas, a state dominated by culturally conservative, mostly non-college-educated white Americans. But the basic prescription of the Democratic dilemma that Galston and Kamarck had identified remained a compass for him throughout his 1992 presidential campaign and eventually his presidency.

After a quarter century of futility, Clintons reformulation of the traditional Democratic message restored the partys ability to compete for the White House. But after he left office, more Democrats came to view his approach as an unprincipled concession to white conservatives, particularly on issues such as crime and welfare. Compared with Clinton, Barack Obama generally pursued a much more liberal course, especially on social issues and especially as his presidency proceeded. Hillary Clinton, in her 2016 primary campaign, felt compelled to renounce decisions from her husbands presidency on trade, LGBTQ rights, and crime (though not welfare reform). Similarly, in the 2020 primary race, Biden distanced himself from both the 1994 crime bill (which he had steered through the Senate) and welfare reform, without fully repudiating either. Even Bill Clinton, in a 2015 appearance before the NAACP, apologized for elements of the crime bill, which he acknowledged had contributed to the era of mass incarceration. With the DLC having folded a decade earlier, the PPI enduring only as a shadow of its earlier size and prominence, and other centrist organizations raising relatively fewer objections to the Democratic Partys course, the rejection of Clintonism and the ascent of progressivism appeared complete as Biden took office.

Eleven tumultuous months later, the neoNew Democrats have emerged as arguably the loudest cluster of opposition to the partys direction since the DLCs heyday. But so far, the new critics of liberalism have not produced a critique of the partys failures or a blueprint for its future as comprehensive as The Politics of Evasion. David Shor, a young data analyst and pollster who personally identifies as a democratic socialist, has promoted his ideas primarily through interviews with sympathetic journalists (taking criticism along the way for failing to document some of his assertions about polling results). Ruy Teixeira and his allies have advanced similar ideas in greater depth through essays primarily in their Substack project, The Liberal Patriot. Stan Greenberg, the pollster, summarized his approach in an extensive recent polling report on how to improve the partys performance with working-class voters that he conducted along with firms that specialize in Hispanic (Equis Labs) and Black (HIT Strategies) voters.

These analysts dont always agree with one another. But they do overlap on key points that echo central conclusions from The Politics of Evasion. Like Galston and Kamarck a generation ago, Shor, Teixeira, and Greenberg all argue that economic assistance alone wont recapture voters who consider Democrats out of touch with their values on social and cultural issues. (Todays critics dont worry as much as the DLC did about the party appearing weak on national security.) The more working class voters see their values as being at variance with the Democratic party brand, Teixeira wrote recently in a direct echo of Evasion, the less likely it is that Democrats will see due credit for even their measures that do provide benefits to working class voters.

Also like Galston and Kamarck, Shor and Teixeira in particular argue that Democrats have steered off track on cultural issues because the party is unduly influenced by the preferences of well-educated white liberals. Like the pugnacious DLC founder Al From during the 1980s, Teixeira believes that Democrats cant convince swing voters that the party is changing unless they publicly denounce activists advocating for positions such as defunding the police and loosening immigration enforcement at the border. Several Never Trump Republicans fearful that Bidens faltering poll numbers will allow a Donald Trump revival have offered similar advice. (Shor also believes that Democrats must move to the center on cultural issues but hes suggested that the answer is less to pick fights within the party than to simply downplay those issues in favor of economics, where the partys agenda usually has more public support, an approach that has been described as popularism. On the social issues, you want to take the median position, he told me, but really the game is that our positions are so unpopular, we have to do everything we can to keep them out of the conversation. Period.)

Derek Thompson: Democrats are getting crushed in the vibes war

In all this, the critics are excavating arguments from the Clinton/DLC era that had been either repudiated or simply forgotten in recent years. Teixeira sees a family resemblance between his views and the case that Galston and Kamarck developed. Shor has more explicitly linked his critique to those years. When I first started working on the Obama campaign in 2012, I hated all the last remnants of the Clinton era, Shor told one interviewer. There was an old conventional wisdom to politics in the 90s and 2000s that we all forget Weve told ourselves very ideologically convenient stories about how those lessons werent relevant and it turned out that wasnt true. I see what Im doing as rediscovering the ancient political wisdom of the past.

When I spoke with him this week, Shor argued that his generation had incorrectly discarded lessons about holding the center of the electorate understood by Democrats of Clintons era, and even through the early stages of Obamas presidency. The electorate today, he said, is less conservative than in Clintons day but more conservative than most Democrats want to admit. It took me a long time to accept this, because it was very ideologically against what I wanted to be true, but the reality is, the way to win elections is to go against your party and to seem moderate, Shor said. I like to tell people that symbolic and ideological moderation are not just helpful but actually are the only things that matter to a big degree.

As Teixeira told me, most of todays critics reject the Clinton/DLC economic approach, which stressed deficit reduction, free trade, and deregulation in some areas, such as financial markets. Even the most conservative congressional Democrats, such as Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia, have signaled that they will accept far more spending in Bidens Build Back Better agenda than Clinton ever might have contemplated. Shor remains concerned that Democrats could spark a backlash by moving too far to the left on spending, but overall, most in the party would agree with Teixeira when he says, You dont see that kind of ideological divide between tax-and-spend Democrats and the self-styled apostles of the market like you had back in those days.

On social issues, too, the range of Democratic opinion has also moved substantially to the left since the Clinton years. No Democrat today is calling for resurrecting the harsh sentencing policies, particularly for drug offenses, that many in the party supported as crime surged in the late 80s and 90s. All but two House Democrats voted for sweeping police-reform legislation this year. Similarly, Biden and congressional Democrats have unified around a provision that would permanently provide an expanded child tax credit to parents without any earnings, even though some Republicans, such as Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, claim that that would violate the principle of requiring work in the welfare-reform legislation that Clinton signed in 1996. The Democratic consensus has also moved decisively to the left on other social issues that bitterly divided the party in the Clinton years, including gun control, LGBTQ rights, and a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

All of these changes are rooted in the reconfiguration of the Democratic coalition and the broader electorate since the Clinton years. Compared with that era, Democrats today need fewer culturally conservative voters to win power. Roughly since the mid-90s, white Americans without a college degreethe principal audience for the centrist criticshave fallen from about three-fifths of all voters to about two-fifths (give or take a percentage point or two, depending on the source). Over that same period, voters of color have nearly doubled, to about 30 percent of the total vote, and white voters with a college degree have ticked up to just above that level (again with slight variations depending on the source).

The change in the Democratic coalition has been even more profound. As recently as Clintons 1996 reelection, those non-college-educated white voters constituted nearly three-fifths of all Democrats, according to data from the Pew Research Center, with the remainder of the party divided about equally between college-educated white voters and minority voters. By 2020, the Democratic targeting firm Catalist, in its well-respected analysis of the election results, concluded that non-college-educated white Americans contributed only about one-third of Bidens votes, far less than in 1996, only slightly more than white Americans with a college degree, and considerably less than people of color (who provided about two-fifths of Bidens support). This ongoing realignmentin which Democrats have replaced blue-collar white voters who have shifted toward the GOP (particularly in small towns and rural areas) with minority voters and well-educated white voters clustered in the urban centers and inner suburbs of the nations largest metropolitan areashas allowed the party to coalesce around a more uniformly liberal cultural agenda.

Shor, Teixeira, Greenberg, and like-minded critics now argue that this process has gone too far and that analysts (including me) who have highlighted the impact of demographic change on the electoral balance have underestimated the risks the Democratic Party faces from its erosion in white, non-college-educated support, especially in the Trump era. Although Democrats have demonstrated that they can reliably win the presidential popular vote with this new alignmentwhat Ive called their coalition of transformationthe critics argue that the overrepresentation of blue-collar white voters across the Rust Belt, Great Plains, and Mountain West states means that Democrats will struggle to amass majorities in either the Electoral College or the Senate unless they improve their performance with those voters. Weakness with non-college-educated white voters outside the major metros also leaves Democrats with only narrow paths to a House majority, they argue. Shor has been the starkest in saying that these imbalances in the electoral system threaten years of Republican dominance if Democrats dont regain some of the ground they have lost with working-class voters since Clintons time.

Ron Brownstein: What Democrats need to realize before 2022

These arguments probably would not have attracted as much notice if they were focused solely on those non-college-educated white Americans who have voted predominantly for Republicans since the 80s and whose numbers are consistently shrinking as a share of the electorate (both nationally and even in the key Rust Belt swing states) by two or three percentage points every four years. What really elevated attention to these critiques was Trumps unexpectedly improved performance in 2020 among Hispanics and, to a lesser extent, Black Americans. The neoNew Democrats have taken that as evidence that aggressive social liberalismsuch as calls for defunding the policeis alienating not only white voters but now nonwhite working-class voters.

If it lasts, such a shift among working-class voters of color could largely negate the advantage that Democrats have already received, and expect moving forward, from the electorates growing diversity. You wont benefit that much from the changing ethnic demographic mix of the country if these overwhelmingly noncollege, nonwhite [voters] start moving in the Republican direction, and that concentrates the mind, Teixeira told me.

As in the DLC era, almost every aspect of the neoNew Democrats critique is sharply contested.

One line of dispute is about how much social liberalism contributed to Trumps gains last year with Hispanic and Black voters. Polls, such as the latest American Values survey, by the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute, leave no question that a substantial share of Black and especially Hispanic voters express culturally conservative views. Greenberg says in his recent study that non-college-educated Hispanics and Black Americans, as well as blue-collar white voters, all responded to a tough populist economic message aimed at the rich and big corporations, but only after Democrats explicitly rejected defunding the police. You just didnt get there [with those voters] unless you were for funding and respecting, but reforming, the police as part of your message, Greenberg told me. The same way that in his era and time welfare reform unlocked a lot of things for Bill Clinton, it may be that addressing defunding the police unlocks things in a way that is similar.

Yet some other Democratic analysts are skeptical that socially liberal positions on either policing or immigration were the driving force of Trumps gains with minority voters (apart, perhaps, from a localized role for immigration in Hispanic South Texas counties near the border). Stephanie Valencia, the president of the polling firm Equis Labs, told me earlier this year that Biden might have performed better with Hispanics if the campaign debate had focused more on immigration; she believes that Trump benefited because the dialogue instead centered so much on the economy, which gave conservative Hispanics who were worried about a continued shutdown [due] to COVID a permission structure to support him. Terrance Woodbury, the CEO of the polling and messaging firm HIT Strategies, similarly says that although Black voters largely reject messaging about defunding the police, they remain intently focused on addressing racial inequity in policing and other arenasand that a lack of perceived progress on those priorities might be the greatest threat to Black Democratic turnout in 2022.

Other political observers remain dubious that Democrats can regain much ground with working-class white voters through the strategies that the neoNew Democrats are offering, especially when the Trump-era GOP is appealing to their racial and cultural anxieties so explicitly. Even if Democrats follow the critics advice and either downplay or explicitly renounce cutting-edge liberal ideas on policing and cancel culture, the party is still irrevocably committed to gun control, LGBTQ rights (including same-sex marriage), legalization for millions of undocumented immigrants, greater accountability for police, and legal abortion. With so many obstacles separating Democrats from blue-collar white voters, theres not a lot of room for Democrats to improve their standing with those voters, says Alan Abramowitz, an Emory University political scientist who has extensively studied blue-collar attitudes.

Rather than chasing the working-class white voters attracted to Trumps messages by shifting right on crime and immigration, groups focused on mobilizing the growing number of nonwhite voters, such as Way to Win, argue that Democrats should respond with what they call the class-race narrative. That approach directly accuses Republicans of using racial division to distract from policies that benefit the rich, a message these groups say can both motivate nonwhite intermittent voters and convince some blue-collar white voters. Were much better off calling [Republicans] outscorning them for trying to use race to divide us so that the entrenched can keep their privilegesand laying out a bold populist reform agenda that actually impacts people across lines of race, says Robert Borosage, a longtime progressive strategist who served as a senior adviser to Jesse Jackson when he regularly sparred with the DLC during his presidential campaigns and after.

For their part, first-generation New Democrats such as Galston and Marshall believe that the current round of critics is unrealistic to assume that neutralizing cultural issues would give the party a free pass to expand government spending far more than Clinton considered politically feasible. Too many Democrats think its about the things government can do for you, but lots of working people of all races want opportunity They want a way to get ahead of their own effort, Marshall told me. Shor, unlike some of the other contemporary critics of progressivism, largely seconds that assessment. There are things that people trust Republicans on and you have to neutralize those disadvantages by moving to the center on them, and that includes the size of government, that includes the deficit, he said. You have to make it seem that you care a lot about inflation, that you care a lot about the deficit, that you care about all of those things.

Read: Liberals are losing the culture wars

Though Biden hasnt directly engaged with these internal debates, in practice hes landed pretty close to the critics formula. The president has overwhelmingly focused his time on trying to unify Democrats around the sweeping kitchen-table economic agenda embodied in his infrastructure and Build Back Better plans. Hes talked much less about social issues whether hes agreeing with the left (as on many, though not all, of his approaches to the border) or dissenting from it (in his repeated insistence that he supports more funding, coupled with reform, for the police.) I dont know where his heart is on this stuff, but I think hes a creature of the party and what he thinks is the party consensus, Teixeira told me. He doesnt want to pick a fight.

Yet despite Bidens characteristic instinct to calm the waters, the debate seems destined to intensify around him. Galston, now a senior governance fellow at the Brookings Institution, has recently discussed with Kamarck writing an updated version of their manifesto. Is there a basis for the kind of reflection and rethinking that was set in motion at the end of the 1980s? I think yes, Galston told me. Meanwhile, organizations such as Way to Win are arguing that Democrats should worry less about recapturing voters drawn to Trump than mobilizing the estimated 91 million individuals who turned out to vote for the party in at least one of the 2016, 2018, and 2020 elections.

The one point on which both the neoNew Democrats and their critics most agree is that with so many Republicans joining Trumps assault on the pillars of small-d democracy, the stakes in Democrats finding a winning formula are even greater today than they were when Clinton ran. Theres a greater sense of urgency, I would say. Because if we had gotten it wrong in 1992, the countrys reward would have been George H. W. Bush, which wasnt terrible at the time and in retrospect looks better, Galston said. This time if we get it wrong, the results of failure will be Donald Trump.

Originally posted here:

Why Democrats Can't Win the Culture Wars - The Atlantic

Democrats have a messaging problem. But, of course, they have always had a messaging problem. This hardly started with President Joe BidenJoe BidenJos Andrs to travel to Kentucky following devastating tornadoes Sunday shows preview: Officials, experts respond to omicron; Biden administration raises alarms about Russia, China Biden says he will visit area impacted by storms: 'We're going to get through this together' MORE, himself, a pathetic messenger.

Imagine if Democrats used the Child Tax Credit alone eligible families can receive up to $3,600 for each child under age six and up to $3,000 for each age 6 through 17 for 2021 this puts money in parents pockets for their children and yet few Democrats communicate this feat. Likewise, messaging Bidens Build Back Better package or the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which will provide much-needed improvement to marginalized communities such as reasonable broadband access to ensure that Americans receive reliable high-speed internet, are keys to a potential win in 2022.

The Democrats Build Back Better plan would ensure paid sick leave, home healthcare, another year of monthly child tax credits that have lifted millions out of poverty, universal prekindergarten, two years of community college, a cap on families child-care expenses, healthcare subsidies, Medicare hearing benefits, climate change programs and, to offset the costs, tax increases on corporations and the wealthiest individuals, as well as authorization for Medicare to negotiate for lower prescription drug prices. All of these are popular with the American people and Republicans, who dismiss the entire plan simply as socialism or wasteful spending without being challenged to address its popular particulars.

Republicans have a far-reaching conservative media apparatus, dominated by Fox News and extending to right-wing websites, white evangelical churches, sources and local talk-show hosts to amplify their message, which is often how and why they are great at winning. Republicans have also directed the national political discourse with critical race theory.

Glenn YoungkinGlenn YoungkinTrump struggles to clear GOP field in North Carolina Senate race Democrats can win in 2022 here's how Do the media really treat Biden worse than Trump? MOREs (R) Virginia gubernatorial victory over Democratic candidate Terry McAuliffeTerry McAuliffeDemocrats can win in 2022 here's how Perilous Pennsylvania, Trump's non-strategy takes another hit Republicans eye gains with female voters after Virginia rout MORE, fueled by pandemic-era, schools-and education-related anguish that went well beyond the dog-whistle political buzzword of critical race theory, constituted a parental revolt. With a winning mix of rural Trump enthusiasts coupled suburbanites who voted for Biden the 2021 Virginia gubernatorial election results forged unlikely alliances heading into next years midterms and even 2024 by spotlighting a potentially new COVID-created key constituency piqued moms and dads. Republicans see the Virginia campaign as a playbook in the big U.S. Senate races in 2022.

Traditionally, voters have trusted Democrats more on education, but Virginia undermined that. Its now a blueprint for Republicans. Outside of critical race theory, I believe Democrats underestimated how many voters and Democratswere mad at the school closures, especially metro-suburban white mothers. And Republicans have tapped into that anger, concern, crisis mode and fear.

Democrats have talked about raising the opportunity forallchildren, and where Republicans are winning the messaging war presently is they are focused on raising opportunities foryourchild. Republicans are betting that parents angst about educational issues ranging from the quality of curricula to mask mandates and culture wars will help them retake suburban independents in upcoming elections.

Following a string of wins on local school boards and a strong performance in the suburbs in recent gubernatorial races, Republicans say their message is resonating among parents, whose frustrations have boiled up during the coronavirus pandemic, and now include the quality of classwork, mask mandates and transgender rights.

Democrats can start messaging to voters directly. Every Democratic operative or strategist can stay on message and discuss how Build Back Better will invest over $3.385 billion in capital access investments for small employers and entrepreneurs with nearly $2 billion in a Small Business Association direct lending program for the smallest businesses and government contractors or $60 million to diversify and create equity within the Small Business Investment Company (SBIC) program.

Democrats could win by going on offense, running the record of successes, not playing defense responding to GOP attacks. The simple lesson lean into the Democratic success and communicate these wins, mainly how the triumphs aid American families and children, engage African Americans and Asian-Americans including Korean Americans and Chinese Americans communicate the talking points and how they improve these communities and others.

Democrats should also capitalize on another critical issue in the midterm elections the battle between traditional establishment Republicans versus Trump Republicans. Will the establishment fringe wing of the GOP gain control power from the Trump wing? As the GOP-civil war rages on, this allows Democrats further opportunity, in addition to touting the Houses successful passage of their social spending and tax passage as they try to ease voters concerns about inflation and shortages of goods.

The conservative-learning Supreme Court could also help Democrats maintain their House and Senate majorities and state legislatures in 2022 per their decision regarding reproductive rights by June of 2022 five months before the midterm contests. As such, Democrats and progressive activists could use the Mississippi case's threat to abortion rights and make the message hit closer to home for millions of women, including suburban women, potentially winning them back.

Ultimately, Democrats predict the ruling against Roe v. Wade will energize the base. But Republicans are already mobilizing their base even amongst the infighting. Will the Democrats?

Quardricos Bernard Driskell is an adjunct professor of legislative politics at The George Washington University Graduate School of Political Management. Follow him on Twitter @q_driskell4

View post:

Democrats can win in 2022 here's how | TheHill - The Hill

Democrats are feeling an increased sense of urgency to quickly get President BidenJoe BidenJos Andrs to travel to Kentucky following devastating tornadoes Sunday shows preview: Officials, experts respond to omicron; Biden administration raises alarms about Russia, China Biden says he will visit area impacted by storms: 'We're going to get through this together' MOREs social spending and climate package across the finish line due to the pending expiration of the expanded child tax credit at the end of the year.

Absent congressional action, the IRS will make its last monthly child tax credit payment on Dec. 15. Democrats see the monthly payments as critical to reducing child poverty and want to prevent a lapse.

The key obstacle is Sen. Joe ManchinJoe ManchinMatt Taibbi: Mainstream media 'in sync' with Democratic Party The problem with our employment stats Manchin faces pressure from Gillibrand, other colleagues on paid family leave MORE (D-W.Va.), who has expressed a reluctance to passing the social spending package this year. Despite Manchins hesitancy, key Democrats are insistent that the expanded child tax credit wont expire.

We are not going to have a lapse in payments. Thats too important, said Sen. Sherrod BrownSherrod Campbell BrownBiden's pick for bank watchdog pulls out after GOP accusations of communism Senate race in Ohio poses crucial test for Democrats Powell says Fed will consider faster taper amid surging inflation MORE (D-Ohio).

The $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief law that Biden enacted in March expanded the child tax credit for 2021. The expansion included an increase in the credit amount and monthly advance payments of the credit andallowed the lowest-income families to be eligible for the full credit amount.

The Treasury Department and IRS in July started sending out monthly advance child tax credit payments of up to $300 for each child under age 6 and up to $250 for each child ages 6 to 17. The monthly payments, which allow families to receive funds in installments rather than in a lump sum when they file their tax returns, are currently set to end this month.

The social spending package includes a one-year extension of the expanded credit. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenOn The Money Inflation hits nearly 40-year high It's time for Congress to close the carried interest loophole Dispute between Wyden, son on taxes becomes public MORE (D-Ore.) told reporters Thursday that the IRS has indicated that Congress should pass the social spending package by Dec. 28 in order to ensure that monthly payments are made on Jan. 15.

We've got to work very hard and move quickly because of some of the logistical challenges that the IRS has in terms of the process, and I'm committed to getting it done, he said. I'm pulling out all the stops to make sure that there is no interruption.

Democrats view the monthly child tax credit payments as a key way to help low- and middle-income families afford household expenses.

Our view is that the child tax credit is a really important, basic support for families and that we should extend it, National Economic Council Director Brian DeeseBrian DeeseThe Memo: Inflation delivers gut-punch as Biden tries to sell economic record Graham hopes to sway Manchin against Biden plan with new CBO report Economists call on Congress to 'swiftly' pass sweeping climate and social policy bill MORE said during Thursdays White House press briefing. And we should extend it because it's doing what we hoped it would do, which is dramatically reduce child poverty in America, dramatically reduce poverty in America, and give families some breathing room in a very strong but uncertain recovery.

Additionally, a lapse in the monthly payments could pose a political risk for Democrats ahead of the midterm elections.

Ethan Winter, lead pollster for the Fighting Chance for Families coalition focused on making the expanded child tax credit permanent, said that continuing to offer concrete benefits such as the child tax credit is one of the best ways for Democrats to counter Republican messaging on cultural issues targeted to parents, such as on critical race theory.

If you allow the benefits to lapse, I do think this would present a political liability for the Democratic Party, Winter said.

The House passed its version of the social spending bill last month. Senate Majority Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerTrump struggles to clear GOP field in North Carolina Senate race Coalition urges Senate to publish bills, amendments online while still under consideration Some good news in the battle to rebalance the courts MORE (D-N.Y.) has repeatedly said he wants the Senate to pass a version of the bill by Christmas.

Senate Democrats are using an arcane process known as budget reconciliation to pass the spending package. The process, which Democrats used earlier this year to pass the coronavirus relief law, will allow the party to pass the package with a simple majority in the upper chamber, bypassing a likely Republican filibuster. Still, every Senate Democrat will need to back the legislation for it to pass because the chamber is evenly divided between the two parties.

Getting all Senate Democrats to fall in line behind the plan has been an arduous task for the party this year as leadership works to meet competing demands from members.

The process over there can be agonizing in terms of its pace, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard NealRichard Edmund NealIt's time for Congress to close the carried interest loophole GOP fears boomerang as threat of government shutdown grows House passes giant social policy and climate measure MORE (D-Mass.) said about the Senate last week.

Manchin has repeatedly suggested that he thinks Congress should wait before voting on the spending package, citing concerns about inflation. Manchin has also suggested in the past that there be work requirements and lower income limits for the expanded child tax credit.

When asked Wednesday about whether he felt urgency to pass the spending package in time for the IRS to make child tax credit payments on Jan. 15, Manchin indicated that he thought that any missed payments could be made up for at a later date.

I've never seen a situation where we weren't able to make up whatever you thought time would be lost, he told reporters.

The spending package may be Democrats best option for passing an extension of the expanded child tax credit before the end of the year, given that lawmakers are using the reconciliation process. A stand-alone bill with a temporary extension could face challenges getting enough Republican support to bypass a filibuster.

Could you get 10 Republican votes for it? I don't know the answer to that, Sen. Tim KaineTimothy (Tim) Michael KaineManchin quietly discusses Senate rules changes with Republicans Liberty University professor charged with alleged sexual battery and abduction of student Senate parliamentarian looms over White House spending bill MORE (D-Va.) said.

No Republican in Congress voted for Bidens COVID-19 relief package including the expanded benefit. Republicans expanded the child tax credit themselves in their 2017 tax cut law, but they have criticized Democrats subsequent expansion, arguing that Democrats eliminated work incentives associated with the child tax credit. Republicans have also expressed concerns that the monthly payment structure would lead to an increase in improper payments and fraud.

Some Republicans have signaled interest in reaching a bipartisan agreement on a path forward for the tax credit but said the benefit would likely look much different from the expansion approved under Biden earlier this year.

Unfortunately, that went to very high income people. It was unlinked to work, and I would prefer we went back to the original formulation, said Sen. Susan CollinsSusan Margaret CollinsTransformational legislation should be bipartisan again The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Uber - Senate debt limit drama ends; Trump legal troubles rise On The Money Senate risks Trump's ire with debt ceiling deal MORE (R-Maine).

But Democrats are also committed to extending the current expansion to the benefit as it stands, with some insisting the party use the expansions current deadline later this month as an impetus to get Bidens larger spending plan passed.

Let's use this to finally make a decision to get Build Back Better done, Kaine said, calling the tax credit expansion the single best deadline that might get us finally to act.

See original here:

Child tax credit expiration adds pressure for Democrats | TheHill - The Hill

To understand the forces shaping American politics, one state will be impossible to overlook in 2022: Georgia.

The Peach State will offer the biggest litmus test yet of former US president Donald Trumps grip on the Republican party, and the persistence of his false claims of election fraud, as well as a guide to whether Democrats can expect the nation to move in their direction.

It will also offer something of a laboratory experiment for new voting restrictions and the threat they pose to democracy.

Georgia enters into the realm of Florida 2000, Ohio 2004, Pennsylvania 2020 as the pivotal state, said John Zogby, an author and pollster. Itll be a benchmark for 2024. Its important demographically because its in a state of balance right now. Its having its moment.

The southern, socially conservative state was a bulwark of the Confederacy during the civil war. But it is now home to a film industry dubbed the the Hollywood of the south. It produced Congressman John Lewis, a civil rights hero. But it also produced Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, a far-right conspiracy theorist.

Its outsized role came into focus last year when Joe Biden became the first Democratic presidential nominee to win it since Bill Clinton in 1992. Then, in January, Democrats won two Senate runoff elections, giving Biden an unexpected majority and dramatically scaling up his ambitions.

Now the plotlines that have dominated US politics for the past decade are set to converge in Georgia again. Trump supporters have turned out in force at local Republican meetings and sought to gain control of the state party apparatus, purging officials deemed insufficiently loyal.

The ex-president has also inspired a slate of devotees to seek statewide office including former senator David Perdue, who this week launched a challenge against incumbent Republican governor Brian Kemp.

Trump has fumed against Kemp over the governors refusal to overturn the election results last year, even after several recounts and audits affirmed Bidens victory.

Perdue has immediately grabbed on to the mantle of baseless election lies, telling Axios this week he would not have voted to certify the election, then joining a lawsuit seeking to prove he and Trump were cheated out of election victories. Kemp said last year he was required by law to certify the election.

The former president called Kemp a very weak governor in a statement endorsing Perdue on Monday, citing nothing specific in his opposition to the sitting governor apart from his position on election integrity. Most importantly, Trump said of Kemp, he cant win because the MAGA [Make America great again] base which is enormous will never vote for him.

If he is proven wrong and Kemp prevails, it would be a humiliating defeat for Trump, offering a sign his influence over the Republican party is slipping. Such a rebuke might even help dissuade him from running for president again in 2024.

Eric Erickson, a conservative writer and radio host based in Georgia, said: It certainly would impact his electoral college map in 2024 and it would definitely suggest that the voters are ready to move on. When you look at the polling, I think people are looking towards 2024 and maybe theyre ready to look at the future instead of the past.

The primary for governor is not the only battle here with wider implications. Trump is backing former football star Herschel Walker in a Republican primary against state agriculture commissioner Gary Black. The winner will go forward to challenge Warnock.

Lower down the ballot there is also a high stakes election for secretary of state, Georgias top election official. Trump has endorsed Jody Hice, a congressman, in his bid to oust fellow Republican Brad Raffensperger from the secretary of states office. Trump has attacked Raffensperger ever since he refused to go along with the then presidents request to find enough votes to overturn the election.

Robert P Jones, chief executive and founder of the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI), said: Weve got basically a Maga versus chamber of commerce battle going on and what makes it particularly poignant is the role that governor Brian Kemp and secretary of state Brad Raffensperger played in the last presidential election.

They were two Republicans that stood on the side of democracy and resisted Donald Trumps request to overthrow the fair results of the election. In that way, theyve theyve been put in the crosshairs by Trump and are being challenged from the right by David Perdue on the one hand and Jody Hice on the other, both of whom have repeated this big lie that Trump actually won in Georgia.

Theyre essentially running on this Make America great again big lie, so itll be a real test to see how that plays out among Republicans in the primaries before you even get to the general election.

Which ever Republican candidate for governor emerges from months of infighting they will still have to face Democrat Stacey Abrams, a voting rights activist bidding to become the first Black female governor in American history.

Abrams narrowly lost to Kemp in 2018 in what proved a flashpoint election. It was a contest that encapsulated how Georgia is changing Abrams, vying to be the first female Black governor in US history, symbolized a new progressive Georgia, while Kemp represented the old conservative guard.

Such trends surfaced again in January when Democrats Raphael Warnock, who is African American, and Jon Ossoff, who is Jewish, defeated Kelly Loeffler and Perdue, both of whom are white.

Jones, who was born in Atlanta, Georgia, added: Whats also at play here is the changing face of the country and the kind of candidates that might represent the way the demographics are changing.

If you go back to right before the 2008 election, Georgia was 53% white and Christian. Today its 41% white and Christian. Just between the beginning when Barack Obama was running and today, things have changed quite dramatically. It also has this urban-rural divide that so many states, particularly southern and peripheral south states, have: Atlanta and its suburbs versus the rest of the more rural state.

Just as she did in 2018, Abrams is likely to make voting rights a central issue. During that campaign, she highlighted serious election issues in Georgia, including the way the state was disproportionately flagging Black voters for potential removal from the rolls and a surge in polling place closures in the state.

Now the stakes around voting rights are even higher.

In March, Georgia Republicans enacted sweeping new voting restrictions, even though there was no evidence of fraud in the 2020 election. The new law gives voters less time to request an absentee ballot and requires them to provide information from a state ID on both the ballot request and ballot itself.

It also limits the use of ballot drop boxes to one box per 100,000 voters, and only allows them to be in use during early voting hours. The boxes were used for the first time in 2020, when they proved popular and were available 24/7. The new law adds an additional day of Saturday early voting and makes Sunday early voting optional.

Kemp has staunchly defended the measure, even as the state faced enormous pressure from Major League Baseball and other companies. The justice department and several other civic action groups are currently suing Georgia over the law.

Helen Butler, a longtime organizer in Georgia, said she is already seeing the effects of the new voting law on the ground there. During municipal elections earlier this year, she said her group, the Georgia Coalition for the Peoples Agenda, had seen an uptick in people who wanted rides to the polls because they were wary of using an absentee ballot.

The new law also limited what kind of assistance her group could give voters with mail-in ballots, she said. Were tired of always seeing barriers put in place to us being able to exercise our right to vote.

Events in Georgia will be closely watched elsewhere. Trump has endorsed more than 60 midterm candidates across the country, including several running against Republican incumbents. Some strategists fear he could sabotage his own party as it seeks to regain the House and Senate. Democrats, meanwhile, have tried to learn from Abrams ability to generate enthusiasm.

Andra Gillespie, an associate professor of political science at Emory University in Atlanta, said: There is a very real story in Georgia about Stacey Abrams organising and finding the Democratic voters and getting what people to turn out and vote. It was a story that started well before the 2018 cycle.

Shes going to want to try to continue to build on that momentum but what shes facing is that Republicans know thats what shes doing. They are aware that shes probably the best in the business at being able to get people to turn out to vote and they are going to match those efforts with their own get-out-their-own effort.

Read more:

Its having its moment: Georgia to offer litmus test for Trump and Democrats - The Guardian

The race to chair the Texas Democratic Party is heating up early as the states Democrats contemplate their future after a disappointing 2020 election and ahead of a challenging 2022 election.

The current state party leader is Gilberto Hinojosa, who has held the job since 2012 and has indicated he is not going anywhere. But that has not stopped early interest in the race, which will be determined by delegates to the state partys biennial convention next summer.

Kim Olson, the former candidate for agriculture commissioner and Congress, has announced she is running to lead the party, saying the promise of a Blue Texas has so far fallen short of expectations. Meanwhile, Carroll G. Robinson, chair of the Texas Coalition of Black Democrats, is considering a campaign for the job and plans to make an announcement in January. And other names have been discussed as potential candidates with still several months to go before the election.

The stakes are considerable.

Texas Democrats have been regrouping after a 2020 election during which they thought they were poised for their biggest breakthrough in recent memory, but they came up woefully short. As they have been licking their wounds, they have had to stare down a daunting 2022 election, with a national environment that is not in their favor and state Republicans using the redistricting process to cement GOP majorities in Austin and Washington, D.C.

We need a course correction because what we are doing has not yielded a statewide win. Period, Olson said in an interview.

She launched her campaign with some 250 endorsements. The endorsers feature 35 county party chairs, including from some of the most populous counties in the state Tarrant, Denton, Fort Bend and Galveston. The list also includes several members of the State Democratic Executive Committee and a host of Democratic candidates from 2018 and 2020.

Hinojosa was on the hot seat after the 2020 election.

A group of State Democratic Executive Committee members wrote him to demand change at the party, and he assembled a committee to do a deep dive on what wrong that November. The party released an autopsy in February that concluded Republicans beat them in turnout and partly blamed Democrats underwhelming results on their decision to suspend in-person campaigning because of the coronavirus pandemic.

At the same time, the state party has been rebuilding its organization chart after the departure of its top two staffers in January.

Publicly, Hinojosa has not given any indication that he is ready to step aside.

While I sincerely respect anyone who seeks office inside or as a nominee of our Party, I believe I still have much to contribute towards our shared goal of turning Texas blue and I intend to accelerate my commitment to that goal in my role as the Texas Democratic Party Chairman, Hinojosa said in a statement. Ultimately the delegates will decide, but because we all share the same goal and stand united in this fight to win back the soul of our state, I believe I will continue to have their support.

Olson has been the most visible potential candidate for state party chair so far, announcing an exploratory effort in early October and traveling the state since then.

A retired Air Force colonel who broke barriers as a female pilot, Olson made a name for herself politically with her fiery 2018 challenge to Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller, which she lost by 5 percentage points. She ran last year to flip the 24th Congressional District, which was being targeted by national Democrats, but lost in a primary runoff.

Olson is leaning on that experience to pitch improved infrastructure for candidates across the state, as well as more support for local party leaders like county chairs. Similarly, she said the state party should be more mindful of how messaging can vary in different parts of Texas. For example, she noted oil-and-gas jobs are often some of the best-paying jobs in the Rio Grande Valley, and Democrats need to be able to explain to voters there how their job fits into the transition to a more environmentally responsible future.

One of Olsons priorities is expanding the partys reach into rural Texas and helping narrow the gap with Republicans who have long run up the score in those areas. Olson, who is from rural Palo Pinto County, said Democrats need to release the GOP death grip on our rural areas.

Rural Texas has not been given the attention thats needed in order to win statewide or federal races, said Nancy Nichols, an SDEC member from East Texas who supports Olson. Col. Olson recognizes the power thats wielded in the rural counties, and shes going to the rural counties.

Robinson, meanwhile, has been credited with helping rebuild the state Coalition of Black Democrats in recent years. He has long been involved in Democratic politics and the legal community in the Houston area, where he has served as an at-large City Council member and Houston Community College trustee. He teaches law at Texas Southern University and once was general counsel to the state party.

Robinson said the state party needs to do a better job providing an overarching message for candidates to run under, particularly in places like East Texas and West Texas.

Democrats need to put together a multiracial, multigenerational, multiregional coalition across Texas to win statewide races and take back the Texas Legislature, and literally, weve got to do it in 2022, 2024, and weve also got to get ready for the 2030 census and redistricting cycle that follows, Robinson said.

In addition to Olson and Robinson, the speculation about the state party chair race has included the partys vice chair, Carla Brailey. However, Brailey has said she is not looking at running for state party chair at this time and instead is considering a run for lieutenant governor. The filing deadline for that race, which already includes at least three Democrats, is Monday.

Patsy Woods Martin, the former executive director of Annies List, which works to elect Democratic women in Texas who support abortion rights, said she thought about running for state party chair earlier this year but is dedicating herself to fundraising for gubernatorial candidate Beto ORourke.

Manuel Medina, state chair of the Tejano Democrats, acknowledged in an interview that there has been speculation about whether he would run for state party chair, but said he has not considered it and will support Hinojosa for another term.

Despite the discussion about replacing Hinojosa, he still has plenty of allies who appreciate how far the party has come under him.

I feel like the party is much better off than it was when he took over, that its grown in terms of resources and impact, said Rick Levy, president of the Texas AFL-CIO. While theres challenges, to be sure, hes had a clear vision, and for working people, hes really incorporated our voices into the vision.

Medina, a former chair of the Bexar County party, said Hinojosa has proven he can raise money and build infrastructure to help Democrats make more inroads in Texas.

At this point, I think its all in our best interest to stay on the path the chairman set, Medina said.

Medina suggested Democrats major shortcoming in 2020 eschewing in-person campaigning was because of a national strategy and not the fault of Hinojosa. While that strategy might have been enough to get Joe Biden elected president, Medina said, in states like ours, block walking wouldve made all the difference in the world and led to a Democratic majority in the state House.

Whoever runs, the race is bound to be shaped by questions about who is best positioned to lead a party that continues to see its future in young people and people of color. In the near term, that is especially relevant as Republicans make a serious push next year across predominantly Hispanic South Texas.We need to have a long and hard look at a leader who is going to recognize the issues of the present, the capabilities of the future, while still being respectful of the people whove been doing the work for a long time, said Jen Ramos, an SDEC member from Central Texas who helped organize the letter to Hinojosa after the 2020 election. For me, I think, with this chair race, its one, what is the definition of winning for our chair candidates, and two, how are we going to accept our weaknesses as much as our strengths as we move into the next election and post-redistricting.

Disclosure: Annies List and Houston Community College have been financial supporters of the Texas Tribune. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribunes journalism.

The Texas Tribune is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Link:

After Texas Democrats' woeful performance last year, the 2022 race to chair the party is already heating up - San Antonio Express-News

Senate Democrats have nixed the idea of imposing a new federal tax on nicotine vaping products, which would have disadvantaged a potentially lifesaving alternative to cigarettes and violated President Joe Biden's pledge to avoid raising taxes on American households that earn less than $400,000 a year.The Wall Street Journal reports thatSen. Catherine Cortez Masto (DNev.), a member of the Senate Finance Committee, "pushed to remove the tax," which was included in the House version of the Build Back Better spending package, and "helped force its deletion."

House Democrats originally proposed a $100.66 excise tax per 1,810 milligrams of nicotine in e-liquids, which would have added about $60 to the cost of a high-strength 60-milliliter bottle containing 18 milligrams of nicotine per milliliter. For some products, retailers reported, the tax would have doubled or tripled the retail price. The same proposal also would have increased the federal excise tax on cigarettes and other tobacco products, yielding an estimated $96 billion in new revenue over a decade.

Last month that proposal was replaced by a plan to tax e-liquids at $50.33 per 1,810 milligrams of nicotine, still a hefty levy that would have substantially increased the cost of vaping. And unlike the earlier plan, this provision would not have boosted federal taxes on cigarettes, so it would have reduced the comparative economic appeal of vaping and raised only about $9 billion over a decade.

Supporters of the nicotine tax portrayed it as a "public health" measure, aimed largely at deterring underage consumption. But it would have discouraged current smokers from switching to a far less hazardous source of nicotine, resulting in more tobacco-related deaths. The increased cost also would have encouraged former smokers who are now vaping to switch back to a much deadlier habit.

"There is no valid reason to impose new taxes on tobacco-free nicotine products, particularly at a time when American families are feeling the impact of rising inflation," Gregory Conley, president of the American Vaping Association, said in response to the provision. He noted that House Democrats were perversely "aiming to make smoke-free alternatives more expensive than smoking."

Cortez Masto did not mention the public health implications of the tax, focusing instead on the provision's inconsistency with Biden's promise. Last month she described the proposed levy as "aregressive tax on the very people that we're trying to cut costs, cut taxes on." Sen. Joe Manchin (DW.Va.), who in November said the nicotine tax "doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever," likewise did not mention the harm-reducing potential of vaping products. Neither did Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (DAriz.), who also opposed the tax.

Michelle Minton, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute who follows tobacco policy, welcomed the decision to eliminate the vaping tax. "By dropping the nicotine tax from the Build Back Better bill," Minton said in a press release, "Democrats have averted a public health disaster. Imposing a tax increase on safer nicotine products would have failed to meaningfully address youth vaping and, worse, would have discouraged adult smokers from switching to life-saving alternatives, particularly among lower-income Americans. Generating revenue off the increased misery and poverty of predominantly lower-income Americans is no way to build back better."

In an August American Journal of Public Healtharticle, David J.K. Balfour and 14 other leading tobacco researchers warned that "policies intended to reduce adolescent vaping," including taxes and flavor bans, "may also reduce adult smokers' use of e-cigarettes in quit attempts." They emphasized that "the potential lifesaving benefits of e-cigarettes for adult smokers deserve attention equal to the risks to youths."

Follow this link:

Senate Democrats Nix a Regressive, Unhealthy Vaping Tax Endorsed by the House - Reason

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., walks to a policy luncheon on Capitol Hill, Thursday, Oct. 7, 2021, in Washington.AP Photo/Alex Brandon

Dick Durbin apologized to Tom Cotton in order to confirm five US attorney nominees.

Cotton disliked that Durbin interrupted him during a hearing on a Department of Justice nominee.

While Durbin apologized to Cotton, he said Republicans attempted to block a vote on the nominee.

Last week, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., refused to confirm the Biden administration's US attorney nominees in Democratic states until Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., apologized for interrupting him during a committee hearing in March.

Durbin pointed out that Cotton's objection breaks with custom, stating that it has been nearly half a century since the Senate required a roll call vote on a US attorney nominee. He also recounted how Democrats never held up US attorney nominations during the Trump administration despite having the power to do so.

"Given the critical role that these US attorneys play in bringing justice to those who violate federal criminal laws, it is hard to imagine that any member of this body would obstruct efforts to confirm these law enforcement officials," Durbin said. "Doing so could threaten public safety and puts at risk millions of Americans' security. It's also a stark departure from what has happened before."

Still, Cotton said that "courtesy and collegiality and respect" need to be a "two-way street" in the Senate, reiterating that he has the right to object to nominees.

"If there are not consequences when rules and traditions are breached in this institution, we will soon not have rules and traditions," Cotton said. "I also said that if the senator from Illinois would simply express regret for what happened that day and pledge that it wouldn't happen again, I would be happy to let all these nominees move forward."

Cotton was referencing a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in March on Vanita Gupta, who was nominated by the Biden administration and later confirmed as an associate attorney general at the Department of Justice.

Story continues

Durbin, who chairs the committee, interrupted Republican attacks on Gupta in order to force a vote, which resulted in a deadlock, according to The Hill. She was narrowly confirmed by a bipartisan vote in the Senate, 51-49, with Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski casting the lone Republican vote of support.

While Durbin eventually acquiesced to Cotton's demand and apologized for interrupting him during the March hearing, he maintained that Republicans forced his hand by attempting to block a vote on Gupta's nomination by invoking an obscure Senate rule to prevent the Committee from meeting after midnight, The Hill reported.

"This outrageous obstruction of a nominee with broad support from across the political spectrum left Chair Durbin with no option but to call a roll call vote before the Committee meeting was terminated by Republicans' invocation of this rule," an account for Judiciary Committee Democrats tweeted following the vote.

Following Durbin's apology, the committee unanimously confirmed five nominees for US attorneys in Illinois, Hawaii, Rhode Island, Vermont, and New Jersey, according to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Read the original article on Business Insider

View post:

Sen. Tom Cotton refused to confirm US attorney nominees in Democratic states until Sen. Dick Durbin apologized for interrupting him nine months ago -...

Many congressional Democrats are increasingly fleeing the shadow of their party's leader, President Biden, while the United States continues to socioeconomically falter under his leadership amid anxiety over a possible 2010-like Republican wave in the quickly approaching 2022 midterms.

The panel on "The Five" discussed how Biden's ineffective and unpopular leadership is becoming even more of a drag on a fractured Democratic Party.

One notable Democrat, Maine Rep. Jared Golden who holds a seat in an expansive, mostly rural district with a Cook PVI of Republican+6 said he is not concerned with Biden's popularity because he is personally eclipsing the president by 30 points in his region.

Congressman, U.S. Marine Corps veteran and Moral Courage Award recipient Jared Golden speaks on stage during Headstrong Washington DC Gala.. (Photo by Paul Morigi/Getty Images for Headstrong )

Golden was also the only House Democrat to join Republicans and vote against Biden's socioeconomic overhaul package dubbed "Build Back Better." In 2018, he voted against Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., in her bid to remain Speaker of the House, instead casting a vote for Illinois Democratic Sen. Tammy Duckworth.

"Things [are] getting pretty lonely for President Biden in his own party. Democrats are worried Biden scary poll numbers will lead to a midterm bloodbath and some are making sure to distance themselves from the commander-in-chief," host Dana Perino said. Perino added that people in "vulnerable" districts like Golden's are distancing themselves from the president.

She also pointed out that left-wing elected prosecutors in Democratic-run cities nationwide continue to propagate soft-on-crime policies.

"We saw with Uncle Larry Krasner in Philadelphia spending his whole press conference saying we dont have a problem, there is nothing happening here, you dont believe your own eyes, the crime is not up,'" she said, alluding to recent remarks by the Philadelphia district attorney amid what is the highest murder rate in Pennsylvania's largest city since 1990.

Philadelphia recently surpassed 500 homicides this year under the watch of Krasner and fellow Democrat Mayor James Kenney. Last week, Kenney blamed Pennsylvania's Second Amendment-friendly Republican-led House and Senate in part for the spike in gun crime, claiming they "don't care how many people get killed."

Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner reacts while being mentioned by Danielle Outlaw at a press conference announcing her as the new Police Commissioner on December 30, 2019 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. (Photo by Mark Makela/Getty Images) (Getty)

]Perino and the rest of "The Five" panelists said it is also local Democratic officials like Krasner and his Los Angeles counterpart George Gascon who are creating a political issue for national Democrats.

Host Jesse Watters, a Philadelphia native, ripped both Krasner and Biden, saying that the district attorney should "feel the pain, not spin the pain" of southeastern Pennsylvanians, while the president separately appears "out of touch" with the fears of Americans living with a national crime spike.

"The [people] feel like the country is going down, down, down and thats where he looks like he is out of touch," Watters said. "If I was a Democrat running for the reelection, you know what I would do? I would retire and become a lobbyist."

"[W]hy would I want to sit around and dial for dollars if Im going to get smoked in the midterms? The donors dont want to give me any money, they know Im getting smoked, so what am I going to run for reelection [for]?"

CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

He added that few Democrats outside of safe districts will want the president to campaign with them, which is a blow to the typical support felt by lawmakers aligned with a president's party.

Watters said that if he were a Democratic lawmaker, he might instead invite Michelle Obama or Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg as a proxy for Biden.

"[Biden] is not Barack [Obama] he is not Donald Trump they were historic and both had huge bases and both of their parties got crushed in the midterms," he argued. "What does Joe have going for him?"

More:

'The Five': Democrats flee Biden over fears of being 'smoked in the midterms' - Fox News

WASHINGTON, D.C. U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today urged his colleagues to consider the safety of their constituents and vote against the confirmation of Rachael Rollins as U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts due to her radical and dangerous policies while serving as District Attorney for Suffolk County. During her tenure, she maintained a blanket policy to decline to prosecute 15 categories of dangerous crimes, including resisting arrest, possession with intent to distribute, and breaking and entering. Following Sen. Cruzs remarks, Senate Democrats confirmed Rachael Rollins nomination. Read excerpts of his remarks below.

I rise today to strongly oppose the confirmation of Rachel Rollins to be a U.S. Attorney in Massachusetts. Many Americans have probably never heard of Rachael Rollins, but theyre becoming very familiar with the kind of lawlessness and dangerous crime that radical left-wing district attorneys like her have generated under their watch. Weve seen looting and larceny, and violent crime rates rise in cities all over the country the past couple of years. Ms. Rollins is part of a web of left-wing district attorneys across the country who see it as their job not to prosecute crime, [but] rather, to protect criminals.

[]

Whats happened with these prosecutors who refuse to prosecute crime? Well, all too predictably, crime rates have skyrocketed. Last year, the murder rate went up nearly 30 percent overall, and it went up 40 percent in cities with populations between 100,000 and 250,000. Weve seen horrific crimes and tragedies that could have been prevented if these DAs had simply done their jobs. Take John Chisholm, the DA in Milwaukee, who released Darrell Brooks, a repeat and dangerous criminal on $1,000 bail. What was the crime he was charged with? Using his vehicle, a red SUV to run down a woman, the mother of his child, released on $1,000 bail what happened. Brooks, as we all know, drove that same red SUV through a Christmas parade [and] murdered six people including an eight year old boy. That man should not have been on the street should not have been behind the wheel. The DA knew he was a violent criminal who use that SUV as an instrument of violence. And for $1,000 the left-wing DA let him go. Had Brooks not been out on such a low bail, this horrific tragedy wouldn't have occurred. That eight year old boy would still be alive.

Our communities dont need prosecutors who endanger the very communities theyre supposed to serve by refusing to prosecute or detain criminals. They dont need left-wing prosecutors who let violent criminals walk the streets. The damage that these so-called prosecutors can do has thankfully been somewhat limited by the fact that when they choose not to prosecute criminals, the federal government has the ability in many instances to step in and charge criminals federally. But Joe Biden and Senate Democrats are working to change that by elevating one of these radical leftists soft on crime district attorneys, Rachael Rollins, to be the U.S. attorney in Massachusetts, the chief federal prosecutor in the entire state of Massachusetts. Lets talk a little bit more about what exactly Rachael Rollins believes prosecutors should do and what her record is.

[]

In The Rachel Rollins Policy Memo, a list of 15 crimes, whose prosecution, should always be declined, or dismissed without conditions. Charges on this list of 15 crimes should be declined or dismissed pre-arraignment, without conditions. The presumption is the charges that fall into this category should always be declined. So youve got a DA saying, These are the crimes we dont prosecute, always be declined, dismissed without conditions.

[]

Number onetrespass. So I want you to think about it. If you dont want to see people trespassing on your property. Well, under Rachael Rollins, the Democrats U.S. Attorney, we dont prosecute trespassing. What else? Shoplifting. Does anyone watch the videos of the people breaking into stores and stealing and looting? You know what, Joe Biden and Senate Democratstheyre bringing that to a neighborhood near you.

[]

Driving with a suspended license. Well, sometimes that might be okay. What was the suspended for? Was it suspended for DWI? Was it suspended because youre a drunk whos killed people? Was it suspended because youre this homicidal maniac in Milwaukee who murdered six people? You know whatthis DA says, Hey drive it was a suspended license no problem at all, no longer a crime. Breaking and entering into a vacant property without property damageso any property thats vacant, you can break in and youre fine.

[]

Number 15 is really the crowning jewel of thisresisting arrest. So I want you to envision what this says you can break it enter into vacant property and do damage. You can have a homeless person, trespass on your front lawn, set up a tent, threaten your children, sell them drugs. God help you if you dont want violent criminals robbing your store, God help you if you dont want drunken homeless people setting up tents in your front yard. God help you if you dont want drug dealers selling drugs to your children, because Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have said those are all okay.

[]

One Democrat could stop this nominationone. Every individual Democrat, you have the choice. It means every one of you is also the deciding vote. So when you go back to your home state, you single handedly decided this lawless, so-called prosecutor should be confirmed. Ill tell you this, you could never again claim you oppose abolishing the police because this vote is front and center. Trespassingnot prosecuted. Shoplifting, larceny, disorderly conduct, receiving stolen property, driving with a suspended license, breaking and entering with property damage, wanton and malicious destruction of property, threats, minor in possession of alcohol, marijuana possession, possession with intent to distribute, non-marijuana drug possession. I dont ever want to see a Democrat stand up here talking about fentanyl. Fentanyl is terrible. I dont want to see another Democrat talk about the opioid crisis, say, People are dying in New Hampshire. People are dying in my state. They are, and youre about to vote for a prosecutor who wont prosecute the drug dealers selling those opioids and poisoning our children.

Watch Sen. Cruzs remarks in the Judiciary Committee markup for her nomination in September here.

###

Read the original here:

Sen. Cruz Blasts Democrat Colleagues Over Radical Biden Nominee: Here are the 15 Crimes Rachael Rollins Wouldn't Prosecuteand You're About to Make Her...

"Fox News Primetime" host Tammy Bruce ripped Democratic Party leadership as "miserable, incompetent weaklings" in her opening monologue Tuesday.

TAMMY BRUCE: [The United States' diplomatic boycott of the Beijing Winter Olympics] is the same weakness from the Democratic establishment we see abroad that's also present here at home. Pandering to progressives on some of the most extreme policy positions; pandering to those who want the most devastation and the most control. It's all now at the center of the Democrat playbook because, for whatever reason, most moderate, center liberals [who] are still around are bending the knee to it.

All of this is fed by the same feckless weakness, the same lack of ideals, principles, and vision, resulting in empty actions, bad decisions, constant lying, in fact, then to cover up the charade. The Democratic Party, more than ever, is being driven by miserable, incompetent weaklings there's no other way to put it unable to even fully grasp the implications of their own policies.

Whatever critical coverage Biden is receiving is a result of his failures being so undeniable and obvious that there's not much else left to say. And get this: We are now learning that the White House is working behind the scenes with news outlets toget more positive coverage in an apparent effort to have the press help them cover up for their massive failures. Now they're not even trying to hide the collusion. It's weakness like we've never seen and frankly panic as well. Rather than actually find solutions to mounting crises, the Democrats' solution is to find new and creative ways to reshape the coverage in their favor and win the news cycle.

Read the rest here:

Biden, Democrats can't fully grasp the implications of their own policies: Tammy Bruce - Fox News