Category Archives: Democrat

When they passed a $1.9 trillion Covid-19 relief bill this month, Democrats in Congress sped past their Republican opposition, using the budgetary reconciliation process to present a case study of what happens when they dont bend over backward for G.O.P. buy-in.

Today, as they began hearings on a major piece of voting rights legislation, Democrats were making a different calculation. The bill isnt eligible for reconciliation and is almost certain to meet gridlock in the Senate, given the threat of a filibuster from Republicans.

Few issues, if any, divide the country along partisan lines more than voting rights. The bill being debated, the For the People Act, passed the House on party lines with no Republicans voting for it. Knowing that getting 10 Republicans to join Democrats in overriding a filibuster is virtually impossible, Senator Chuck Schumer, the majority leader, is putting Democrats on a collision course with the existential debate over the filibuster.

But at the hearing today, he relished the opportunity to drive home the divide between Democrats and Republicans on this issue. Today, in the 21st century, there is a concerted, nationwide effort to limit the rights of citizens to vote and to truly have a voice in their own government, Schumer said, later chanting, Shame! Shame! at Republican lawmakers.

Theres a poetic irony and also a perfect logic to the fact that a debate over the filibuster would come to a head over voting rights legislation. Not only because filibuster reform involves the Senate altering its own voting rules, but also because the most high-profile uses of the filibuster throughout history have often been in order to block civil rights.

Senator Raphael Warnock, a Georgia Democrat, in a recent speech on the Senate floor, succinctly tied the For the People Act to the filibuster debate. It is a contradiction to say we must protect minority rights in the Senate while refusing to protect minority rights in society, he said.

Pressure has been growing among Democratic insiders this week for changes to the filibuster. Senators have begun broadcasting their support for ending the practice, and a report in Axios published today quoted people close to President Biden saying he was ready to roll back the maneuver, although the White House has been publicly tight-lipped on the issue.

Just as Democratic senators were strident in their calls for federal voting rights laws today, Republicans were combative in their arguments against the bill. Some expressed outrage over the legislations proposal to end the mandatory 3-3 partisan split on the Federal Election Commission, a move that Democrats have said was necessary to promote reform.

This bill is designed to corrupt the election process permanently, and it is a brazen and shameless power grab by Democrats, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas said.

Senator Mitch McConnell, the minority leader, said that states simply are not engaging in trying to suppress voters whatsoever.

Senator Shelley Moore Capito, Republican of West Virginia, argued that the bill was trying to fix a voting system that didnt need fixing, a position that seemed to go against prominent Republican narratives that the 2020 election was supposedly tainted by voter fraud.

But Democrats see an opportunity to press their case for filibuster reform with the For the People Act, a sweeping bill that would establish core national voting rights standards and create independent, nonpartisan commissions to handle the congressional redistricting process.

State-level Republican lawmakers have proposed hundreds of bills this year that would tamp down voting rights, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, and the G.O.P. will control the redistricting process next year in many key swing states. Democrats in Congress are looking at this bill as an increasingly urgent bulwark against voting restrictions and gerrymandering that could perpetuate targeted disenfranchisement, tilting the balance of political power for years to come.

Of course, its not yet certain that Senate Democrats will even unify in support of the bill. Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who votes against his party with some regularity, is the lone Democrat who didnt sponsor it, and he has yet to signal unequivocal support. If he does get behind it, he would have to work to roll back the filibuster as well (something that he and at least one other Democratic senator, Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, havent yet gotten behind) in order to make that support mean anything.

New York Times Podcasts

On the season premiere of their podcast, the co-hosts and culture writers Jenna Wortham and Wesley Morris confront the most offensive word in the English language a weapon of hate and a badge of belonging thats everywhere and cant be ignored. You can listen here, and tune in every Thursday for new episodes.

On Politics is also available as a newsletter. Sign up here to get it delivered to your inbox.

Is there anything you think were missing? Anything you want to see more of? Wed love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com.

Follow this link:

Voting Rights Bill Puts Democrats on a Crash Course With the Filibuster - The New York Times

The most outrageous provision of the Election Integrity Act of 2021, the omnibus election bill signed by Gov. Brian Kemp of Georgia last week, is one that makes it illegal for anyone except poll workers to offer food or water directly to voters standing in line. Defenders of the law say that this is meant to stop electioneering at the polls; critics say it is a direct response to volunteers who assisted those Georgians, many of them Black, who waited for hours to cast their ballots in the 2020 presidential election.

Less outrageous but more insidious is a provision that removes the secretary of state from his (or her) position as chairman of the State Election Board and replaces him with a new nonpartisan member selected by a majority of Georgias Republican-controlled Legislature. The law also gives the board, and by extension the Legislature, the power to suspend underperforming county election officials and replace them with a single individual.

Looming in the background of this reform is the current secretary of state Brad Raffenspergers conflict with Donald Trump, who pressured him to subvert the election and deliver Trump a victory. What won Raffesnsperger praise and admiration from Democrats and mainstream observers has apparently doomed his prospects within the Republican Party, where stop the steal is dogma and Trump is still the rightful president to many. It is not even clear that Raffensperger will hold office after his term ends in 2023; he must fight off a primary challenge next year from Rep. Jody Hice of Georgias 10th Congressional District, an outspoken defender of Trumps attempt to overturn the election.

Sign up for The Morning newsletter from the New York Times

This is what it looks like when a political party turns against democracy. It doesnt just try to restrict the vote; it creates mechanisms to subvert the vote and attempts to purge officials who might stand in the way. Georgia is in the spotlight, for reasons past and present, but it is happening across the country wherever Republicans are in control.

Story continues

On March 24, for example, Republicans in Michigan introduced bills to limit use of ballot drop boxes, require photo ID for absentee ballots, and allow partisan observers to monitor and record all precinct audits. Senate Republicans are committed to making it easier to vote and harder to cheat, the state Senate majority leader, Mike Shirkey, said in a statement. Shirkey, you may recall, was one of two Michigan Republican leaders who met with Trump at his behest after the election. He also described the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6 as a hoax.

Republican lawmakers in Arizona, another swing state, have also introduced bills to limit absentee voting in accordance with the former presidents belief that greater access harmed his campaign. One proposal would require ID for mail-in ballots, and shorten the window for mail-in voters to receive and return their ballots. Another bill would purge from the states list of those who are automatically sent a mail-in ballot any voter who failed to cast such a ballot in both the primary election and the general election for two consecutive primary and general elections.

One Arizona Republican, John Kavanagh, a state representative, gave a sense of the partys intent when he told CNN, Not everybody wants to vote, and if somebody is uninterested in voting, that probably means that theyre totally uninformed on the issues. He continued: Quantity is important, but we have to look at the quality of votes, as well.

In other words, Republicans are using the former presidents failed attempt to overturn the election as a guide to how you would change the system to make it possible. In Georgia, as weve seen, that means stripping power from an unreliable partisan and giving it, in effect, to the party itself. In Pennsylvania, where a state Supreme Court with a Democratic majority unanimously rejected a Republican lawsuit claiming that universal mail-in balloting was unconstitutional, it means working to end statewide election of justices, essentially gerrymandering the court. In Nebraska, which Republicans won, it means changing the way the state distributes its electoral votes, from a district-based system in which Democrats have a chance to win one potentially critical vote, as Joe Biden and Barack Obama did, to winner-take-all.

This fact pattern underscores a larger truth: that the Republican Party is driving the nations democratic decline. A recent paper by Jacob M. Grumbach, a political scientist at the University of Washington, makes this plain. Using a new measure of state-level democratic performance in the United States from 2000 to 2018, Grumbach finds that Republican control of state government consistently and profoundly reduces state democratic performance during this time period. The nationalization of American politics and the coordination of parties across states means that state governments controlled by the same party behave similarly when they take power. Republican-controlled governments in states as different as Alabama and Wisconsin have taken similar actions with respect to democratic institutions.

The Republican Partys turn against democratic participation and political equality is evident in more than just these bills and proposals. You can see it in how Florida Republicans promptly instituted difficult-to-pay fines and fees akin to a poll tax after a supermajority of the states voters approved a constitutional amendment to end the disenfranchisement of most felons. You can see it in how Missouri Republicans simply ignored the results of a ballot initiative on Medicaid expansion.

Where does this all lead? Perhaps it just ends with a few new restrictions and new limits, enough, in conjunction with redistricting, to tilt the field in favor of the Republican Party in the next election cycle but not enough to substantially undermine American democracy. Looking at the 2020 election, however and in particular at the 147 Congressional Republicans who voted not to certify the Electoral College vote its not hard to imagine how this escalates, especially if Trump and his allies are still in control of the party.

If Republicans are building the infrastructure to subvert an election to make it possible to overturn results or keep Democrats from claiming electoral votes then we have to expect that given a chance, theyll use it.

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

2021 The New York Times Company

Link:

The Republican Party Is Driving the Nation's Democratic Decline - Yahoo News

AUSTIN (KXAN) Flanked by the family of Botham Jean the Dallas man who was killed by an off-duty police officer while inside his own apartment in 2018 Texas Democrats unveiled a police reform proposal named in his honor.

Bos Law would clarify the states Castle Doctrine to require someone to physically be in their home, car or place of work in order to use the stand-your-ground defense.

The proposal would also require a police officer to record all aspects of an investigation with their body-worn camera.

HB 929 will set us a step closer to Texans being safe at home, state Rep. Carl Sherman, a Dallas Democrat, said. No one should have the right to break into your home or your car, kill you or your family, and claim that they thought it was their car.

Bos Law is the latest attempt by Texas Democrats to seize the moment for meaningful police reform in the 87th Legislature, capitalizing on calls for change following the deaths of Jean, George Floyd, Javier Ambler and Mike Ramos.

But any reform effort requires Republican support, and state leaders have instead focused their attention on preventing local governments from reducing police budgets.

While the moment has changed, Brandon Rottinghaus, a political science professor at the University of Houston, said the political hurdle for Democrats hasnt.

In a world where, typically, youd see consensus politically towards criminal justice reform, and you have in the past couple sessions, youve got the defunding the police, youve got the law and order messaging from Republicans really in the way, Rottinghaus said.

Kevin Lawrence, executive director of the Texas Municipal Police Association, said Bos Law should never see the light of day because of its requirement for body cameras to record all aspects of an investigation.

Its about whether or not our law enforcement officers have any rights, whatsoever. Whether or not they have rights under the 4th, 5th or 6th amendments like every other citizen in this country, Lawrence said.

Politics reporter John Engel will have a full report tonight at 6 p.m. on KXAN News.

See original here:

Texas Democrats try to seize the moment for police reform why theyll need help - KXAN.com

Dear Editor:

The two proposed bills For the People Act which changes voting and the Equity Act are two very disturbing bills. The Democrats who are pushing the For the People Act as well as condemn Georgia for requiring voting ID have said black people do not have ID. Really? So that means black people do not have cars, apartments, own homes, bank accounts, jobs, bury loved one, or attend school because every one of those activities require ID. If you are a Hudson County resident, you need ID to enter county buildings. So, either Democrats are lying or they believe black people are inept in securing ID on their own.

The Equity Act allows trans people especially men who think they are females into females sports where they will all the time. In fact, a transwoman cracked the skull of a martial arts female fighter. Men are stronger than women even if they take hormone therapy. Their internal organs/muscles are larger as well as their bones.

But this act also goes after people of faith, either Christians will choose between calling Jesus a liar on marriage when he said, a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife and the two will be one flesh, or obey the dictates of the state. In Biblical terms, it will be Maccabees moment when the ruler had a Jewish mother and her seven sons choose between life under him by eating pork or death by obeying her God. This bill is similar to Californias proposed bill AB 655 that removes Christians from the police force for being orthodox believers. If you actually believe in what God said on sexual matters then it is hate speech, so much for diversity and tolerance by Democrats.

What I find disturbing is how the Democrats have turned into socialists, after all the first thing Fidel Castro did when he got into power was to shut down the churches and stop another political party. I see the control of the elections as an one-party system with For the People Act and the curtail of religion with the Equity Act.

Yvonne Balcer

Read the original post:

Democrats are turning into Socialists - The Hudson Reporter

Heres what you need to know:Representative Tom Suozzi, Democrat of New York, warned that he would not support the presidents spending plan unless it eliminated a rule that prevents taxpayers from deducting more than $10,000 in local and state taxes from their federal income taxes.Credit...Cheriss May/Getty Images

Senior Democrats on Monday proposed a tax increase that could partly finance President Bidens plans to pour trillions of dollars into infrastructure and other new government programs, as party leaders weighed an aggressive strategy to force his spending proposals through Congress over unified Republican opposition.

The moves were the start of a complex effort by Mr. Bidens allies on Capitol Hill to pave the way for another huge tranche of federal spending after the $1.9 trillion stimulus package that was enacted this month. The president is set to announce this week the details of his budget, including his much-anticipated infrastructure plan.

He is scheduled to travel to Pittsburgh on Wednesday to describe the first half of a Build Back Better proposal that aides say will include a total of $3 trillion in new spending and up to an additional $1 trillion in tax credits and other incentives.

Yet with Republicans showing early opposition to such a large plan and some Democrats resisting key details, the proposals will be more difficult to enact than the pandemic aid package, which Democrats muscled through the House and Senate on party-line votes.

In the House, where Mr. Biden can currently afford to lose only three votes (not eight votes, as an earlier post said), Representative Tom Suozzi, Democrat of New York, warned that he would not support the presidents plan unless it eliminated a rule that prevents taxpayers from deducting more than $10,000 in local and state taxes from their federal income taxes. He is one of a handful of House Democrats who are calling on the president to repeal the provision.

And in the Senate, where most major legislation requires 60 votes to advance, Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader, was exploring an unusual maneuver that could allow Democrats to once again use reconciliation the fast-track budget process they used for the stimulus plan to steer his spending plans through Congress in the next few months even if Republicans are unanimously opposed.

While an aide to Mr. Schumer said a final decision had not been made to pursue such a strategy, the prospect, discussed on the condition of anonymity, underscored the lengths to which Democrats were willing to go to push through Mr. Bidens agenda.

The presidents initiatives will feature money for traditional infrastructure projects like rebuilding roads, bridges and water systems; spending to advance a transition to a lower-carbon energy system, like electric vehicle charging stations and the construction of energy-efficient buildings; investments in emerging industries like advanced batteries; education efforts like free community college and universal prekindergarten; and measures to help women work and earn more, like increased support for child care.

The proposals are expected to be partly offset by a wide range of tax increases on corporations and high earners.

The Biden administration announced a plan on Monday to vastly expand the use of offshore wind power along the East Coast, aiming to tap a potentially huge source of renewable energy that has so far struggled to gain a foothold in the United States.

The plan would designate an area between Long Island and New Jersey as a priority offshore wind zone and sets a goal of installing 30,000 megawatts of offshore wind turbines in coastal waters nationwide by 2030, generating enough clean electricity to power 10 million homes. To help meet that target, the administration said it would accelerate permitting for proposed wind projects off the Atlantic coast, offer $3 billion in federal loan guarantees for offshore wind projects and upgrade the nations ports to support wind construction.

The White House said on Monday that the plan would avoid 78 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions.

The moves come as President Biden prepares an approximately $3 trillion economic recovery plan that will focus heavily on infrastructure to tackle climate change, an effort he has framed as a jobs initiative. Officials made a similar case on Monday, saying offshore wind deployment would directly create 44,000 new jobs, such as building and installing turbines, and indirectly create another 33,000.

The president recognizes that a thriving offshore wind industry will drive new jobs and economic opportunity up and down the Atlantic coast and the Gulf of Mexico and in Pacific waters, Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, said during a briefing on Monday.

Republicans said they were skeptical of Mr. Bidens promise of millions of green jobs. They have criticized his earlier moves to suspend new oil and gas leases and revoke permits for the Keystone XL pipeline as responsible for killing well-paying jobs in their states.

Gina McCarthy, the White House national climate adviser, called offshore wind a new, untapped industry that will create pathways to the middle class for people from all backgrounds.

Last month, the Biden administration took a key step in approving the nations first large-scale offshore wind farm, off the coast of Marthas Vineyard in Massachusetts a project that had stagnated under the Trump administration. The proposal for 84 large turbines with 800 megawatts of electric generating capacity is slated to come online by 2023.

Vineyard Wind is one of 13 offshore wind projects proposed along the East Coast, and the Interior Department has estimated that as many as 2,000 turbines could be rotating in the Atlantic Ocean by 2030.

Zolan Kanno-Youngs contributed reporting.

President Biden, charged as vice president under President Barack Obama to oversee the implementation of the 2009 stimulus bill, is preparing a new, vastly larger, economic recovery plan that would once again unite the goals of fighting climate change and restoring the economy.

While clean energy spending was just a fraction of the Obama stimulus bill, Mr. Biden wants to make it the centerpiece of his proposal for trillions of dollars not billions of government grants, loans, and tax incentives to spark renewable power, energy efficiency and electric car production.

Mr. Bidens plan, for example, is expected to call for funding at least half a million electric vehicle charging stations.

But the failures of the Obama stimulus and Mr. Bidens role in them he oversaw Recovery Act spending could haunt the plan as it makes its way through Congress. The risk to taxpayers could be much higher this time around, and Republicans for years have proven adept at citing Solyndra a solar panel company that went defunct after securing federal subsidies to criticize federal spending.

Mr. Bidens advisers, many of whom worked on the Obama stimulus, say the situation is very different this time around.

For one, the market demand for electric vehicles is much higher, and the cost of the cars much lower than in 2009, the year after Tesla Motors produced its first roadster. Solar power is more economically competitive. The use of wind power is expanding rapidly.

You have to step up to the plate and take a swing in order to hit the ball, and sometimes you swing and you miss, said Jennifer Granholm, the energy secretary, who served as governor of Michigan during the Obama years.

Advisers to Mr. Obama concede they fell short, especially on electric cars. The recovery act was supposed to put a million plug-in hybrids on the road by 2015, but mustered fewer than 200,000. Even today, fewer than 1 percent of vehicles on the road are electric.

Republicans are already weaponizing the losses of the Obama green stimulus in their political attacks against the Biden plan.

The Obama administration promised thousands of green energy jobs, said Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming, the ranking Republican on the Senate Energy Committee. These jobs never materialized.

Most economists say that, on balance, the Obama green stimulus spending did lift the economy, and had a long-lasting impact. Clean energy spending created nearly a million jobs between 2013 and 2017, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research.

It also made money for taxpayers: The Energy Departments loan guarantee program ultimately made $2 billion.

That is why Democrats say that one of the biggest lessons from the Obama stimulus is to go bigger much bigger.

One element of the spending in Mr. Bidens bill that was not in the Obama plan could draw bipartisan support: Mr. Biden has spoken explicitly of the need to adapt the nations roads and bridges to a changing climate, which will bring stronger storms, higher floods and more intense heat and drought.

In a series of speeches, interviews and Twitter posts, Mike Pompeo is emerging as the most outspoken critic of President Biden among former top Trump officials. And much as the former Trump secretary of state did when in office, he is ignoring the custom that current and former secretaries of state avoid the appearance of political partisanship.

In back-to-back appearances in Iowa and during an interview in New Hampshire over the past week, Mr. Pompeo questioned the Biden administrations resolve toward China. In Iowa, he accused the White House of reversing the Trump administrations immigration policy willy-nilly and without any thought. He derided Mr. Biden for referring to notes during his first formal news conference on Thursday.

Whats great about not being the secretary of state anymore is I can say things that when I was a diplomat I couldnt say, Mr. Pompeo said the next morning, to a small crowd at the Westside Conservative Club near Des Moines.

It seems clear that Mr. Pompeo, a onetime Republican congressman from Kansas, is animated not just by freedom but also by a drive for high elective office long evident to friends and foes. His appearances in a pair of presidential battleground states only seem to confirm his widely assumed interest in a 2024 presidential campaign.

Usually former presidents and secretaries of state try not to quickly trash their successors especially in foreign policy, said Michael Beschloss, a presidential historian. He said Mr. Pompeo probably believes he is demonstrating his Trumpiness by castigating the performance of the newly installed President Biden.

Last week, Mr. Pompeo tweeted that the Biden administrations plans to restart aid to the Palestinians canceled under Mr. Trump were immoral and would support terrorist activity. Americans and Israelis should be outraged by the Biden administrations plans to do so, Mr. Pompeo wrote.

But his commentary goes beyond foreign policy. Mr. Pompeo has also condemned Mr. Bidens backward open border policies. And on March 19, he simply tweeted the number 1,327 an apparent reference to the number of days until the 2024 election.

There is little sign that Mr. Pompeos criticism has struck a nerve among Biden officials and their allies. Asked about the remarks last month, a State Department spokesman, Ned Price, declined to respond directly but said the Biden and Trump administrations shared the goal of preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

No one cares, Ben Rhodes, a former deputy national security adviser to President Barack Obama, tweeted in response to a recent news report about a Pompeo critique of Mr. Bidens policies.

Kelly Tshibaka, an Alaska Republican who promoted former President Donald J. Trumps false claims of rampant election fraud, announced Monday that she would challenge Senator Lisa Murkowski, one of Mr. Trumps fiercest Republican critics, in 2022.

Ms. Murkowski, a moderate who called on Mr. Trump to resign after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and then voted to convict him on a charge of incitement in his subsequent impeachment trial, had expected a fight after the former president called her disloyal and invited challengers.

Ms. Tshibaka who is from Alaska, served as the chief data officer in the U.S. Postal Service inspector generals office, and held other high-profile jobs over a 17-year career in Washington before returning home in 2019 is pitching herself as an outsider taking on the insider, Ms. Murkowski.

In a preview of the kind of campaign she intends to run, Ms. Tshibaka posted a five-minute ad on her campaigns Facebook page that included a scathing takedown of Ms. Murkowski, who was censured by the state party earlier this year for being one of seven Republicans to vote for Mr. Trumps conviction in the Senate.

Lisa Murkowski is so out of touch that she even voted to remove Donald Trump from office, even after he was already gone, Ms. Tshibaka said, in a video that alternated footage of her speaking in her kitchen with images of her standing in front of snow-blanketed mountains. (If Mr. Trump had been convicted in the trial, the Senate could have voted to bar him from running for office in the future.)

Earlier on Monday, Ms. Tshibaka stepped down as commissioner of Alaskas sprawling Department of Administration, which oversees many of the states agencies.

In a resignation letter posted on her personal Facebook page, Ms. Tshibaka wrote that she was leaving, effective immediately, to pursue other endeavors.

Last November, Ms. Tshibaka, a graduate of Harvard Law School, wrote an op-ed in which she claimed, inaccurately, that there were many credible allegations and documented incidents of fraud, voter oppression and voting irregularities during the election. She slammed the news media for what she called its premature announcement that Biden is our president-elect.

Ms. Murkowski a daughter of Frank Murkowski, who served as governor and represented Alaska in the Senate has not formally announced her intention to run again, but she filed the necessary federal paperwork this month.

Speaking to reporters in Juneau last month, Ms. Murkowski said she was doing what I should be doing to ensure that I have that option and that opportunity to run for yet another term.

Ms. Murkowski, a resourceful and tenacious campaigner, has managed to win all four of her Senate campaigns, despite never breaking the 50 percent threshold, thanks to the presence of third-party candidates who have divided the opposition.

She has faced tough primary opponents before. In 2010, she lost the Republican nomination but managed a stunning victory as a write-in candidate with strong backing from local unions and Alaska Natives.

But the dynamic will be different next year.

In 2020, Alaska voters approved a ranked-choice system that eliminated party primaries and replaced them with a free-for-all primary from which the top four candidates, whatever their affiliation, will advance to the November election.

A frustrated Supreme Court heard arguments on Monday in a securities fraud class-action case against Goldman Sachs, with several justices indicating puzzlement about what they were supposed to do in light of both parties seeming to agree about the governing legal standard.

Two justices, using the same metaphor, said they saw little daylight between the two sides.

The case was brought by pension funds that said they had lost as much as $13 billion because of what they called false statements about the investment banks sales of complex debt instruments before the 2008 financial crisis.

The contested statements were abstract and general. One example: Our clients interests always come first. Another: Integrity and honesty are at the heart of our business.

The plaintiffs argued that those statements and others were at odds with what they said were conflicts of interest at the firm, which they accused of packaging and selling securities intended to fail even as Goldman Sachs and its favored clients bet against them. Goldman has denied deceiving investors.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in New York, said Goldmans statements, in context, were enough to allow the case to proceed as a class action. If that decision is upheld, it would simplify future plaintiffs task in bringing class-action fraud suits.

Securities fraud cases often involve examining whether false statements caused a companys stock price to rise, but in this case, the plaintiffs argue that the statements served to keep the stock from falling, until it plummeted in 2010 on word that the Securities and Exchange Commission was investigating one of the banks funds that dealt with subprime mortgages.

A lawyer for Goldman Sachs, Kannon K. Shanmugam, said the exceptionally generic and aspirational statements could not have affected its stock price, but conceded as a general matter that courts could take account of generic statements in deciding whether investors had relied on them.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett said the positions of the pension funds and Goldman Sachs had evolved and converged during the litigation. It seems to me that youve both moved toward the middle, she told Thomas C. Goldstein, a lawyer for the pension funds. Theyve backed off on how important they think generality is and whether it can be decided categorically. But youve also conceded that generality is relevant.

And Justice Stephen G. Breyer suggested there might be nothing for the Supreme Court to do, as its main job is to announce general legal principles rather than to decide particular disputes.

This seems like an area that, the more that I read about it, he said, the less that we write, the better.

Pressure is growing on President Biden to fulfill his campaign promise to renew the thaw in relations with Cuba that began under President Barack Obama.

Mr. Biden, focused on the pandemic and its economic devastation, has said little as president about how and when he would change United States policy toward Cuba, irking some progressives and former administration officials who urge a swift return to the more accommodating policies of the last Democratic administration.

A Cuba policy shift is not currently among President Bidens top priorities, Mr. Bidens spokeswoman, Jen Psaki, said earlier this month.

Theres no reason for the Biden Administration to stick with Trumps failed reversal of the Cuba opening and plenty of good reasons for the Cuban people and US interests to reopen relations ASAP, Ben Rhodes, an Obama White House official who helped negotiate a 2014 agreement with officials in Havana, wrote Monday on Twitter.

On Sunday, demonstrators in Havana demanded an end to the 60-year-old U.S. embargo on the island. Reuters reported that more than 50 small protests took place around the world, including in the United States, in an effort to press the Biden administration to act.

Earlier this month, 75 progressive congressional Democrats wrote the White House, urging Mr. Biden to use his executive authority to quickly void all of Mr. Trumps actions on Cuba especially his designation of Cuba as an official state sponsor of terrorism a few days before he left office. That reversed Mr. Obamas decision in 2015 to remove Havana from the list.

By signing a single order, you have the power to revert these regulations back to their status on the final day of the Obama-Biden administration, the members wrote.

Mr. Trump took dozens of executive actions that chilled relations between the two nations, aimed at pleasing the politically critical, conservative Cuban-American community in South Florida. His actions included a renewed ban on the importation of Cuban goods such as rum and cigars, and an order that in effect prohibited Cubans residing in the United States from sending cash remittances to their relatives back home.

During the campaign, Mr. Biden sharply criticized those executive actions, suggesting he would swiftly reverse them and arguing during the 2020 campaign that they had done nothing to advance democracy and human rights.

But his administration has done little thus far, apart from beefing up the investigation into mysterious illnesses suffered by U.S. diplomatic officials in Cuba, known as Havana syndrome.

And Ms. Psaki, when pressed, offered no timetable for any changes, telling reporters only that the White House was committed to carefully reviewing policy decisions made in the prior administration.

The Biden administration suspended a trade pact with Myanmar on Monday following one of the deadliest weekends in the country since the military ousted the civilian leadership and began a killing spree on civilians.

United States Trade Representative Katherine Tai said in a statement that the halt on a 2013 trade agreement with the country would remain in place until a democratically elected government is restored.

The killing of peaceful protesters, students, workers, labor leaders, medics and children has shocked the conscience of the international community, Ms. Tai said in a statement. These actions are a direct assault on the countrys transition to democracy and the efforts of the Burmese people to achieve a peaceful and prosperous future.

The suspension is largely a symbolic move to condemn the violence in Myanmar, where more than 100 people were killed on Saturday during protests against the Tatmadaw, the countrys military, according to the United Nations. Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, said during a briefing on Monday that the suspension would take effect immediately.

Were deeply concerned by the recent escalation of violence against peaceful protesters in Burma, Ms. Psaki said. Burmese security forces are responsible for hundreds of deaths in Burma since they perpetrated a coup on February 1st.

Myanmar, formerly Burma, is the United States 84th-largest trade partner, with the two countries exchanging $1.4 billion worth of goods during 2020. And the country was the United States 100th-largest goods export market last year, according to the Trade Representatives office.

The Treasury Department last week also announced sanctions on two miliary holding companies in Myanmar to target the economic resources of Burmas military regime.

The Tatmadaw has killed more than 420 people and assaulted, detained or tortured thousands of others since the Feb. 1 coup, according to a monitoring group.

Many of the civilians killed on Saturday were bystanders, including teenagers and a 5-year-old boy. A baby girl in Yangon, Myanmars largest city, was also struck in the eye with a rubber bullet.

Last weeks killing of children is just the most recent example of the horrific nature perpetrated by the military regime, Ms. Psaki said.

transcript

transcript

When I first started at the C.D.C. about two months ago, I made a promise to you: I would tell you the truth, even if it was not the news we wanted to hear. Now is one of those times when I have to share the truth, and I have to hope and trust you will listen. Im going to pause here. Im going to lose the script. And Im going to reflect on the recurring feeling I have of impending doom. We have so much to look forward to, so much promise and potential of where we are, and so much reason for hope. But right now, Im scared. We have come such a long way: Three historic scientific breakthrough vaccines, and we are rolling them out so very fast. So Im speaking today not necessarily as your C.D.C. director, and not only as your C.D.C. director, but as a wife, as a mother, as a daughter, to ask you to just please hold on a little while longer. I so badly want to be done. I know you all so badly want to be done. We are just almost there, but not quite yet. We can change this trajectory of the pandemic, but it will take all of us recommitting to following the public health prevention strategies consistently while we work to get the American public vaccinated. We do not have the luxury of inaction. For the health of our country, we must work together now to prevent a fourth surge.

President Biden, facing a rise in coronavirus cases around the country, called on Monday for governors and mayors to reinstate mask mandates as the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warned of impending doom from a potential fourth surge of the pandemic.

The presidents comments came only hours after the C.D.C. director, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, appeared to fight back tears as she pleaded with Americans to hold on a little while longer and continue following public health advice, like wearing masks and social distancing, to curb the viruss spread. The nation has so much reason for hope, she added.

But right now, she said, Im scared.

The back-to-back appeals reflected a growing sense of urgency among top White House officials and government scientists that the chance to conquer the pandemic, now in its second year, may slip through its grasp. According to a New York Times database, the seven-day average of new virus cases as of Sunday was about 63,000, a level comparable with late Octobers average. That was up from 54,000 a day two weeks earlier, an increase of more than 16 percent.

Public health experts say that the nation is in a race between the vaccination campaign and new, worrisome coronavirus variants, including B.1.1.7, a more transmissible and possibly more lethal version of the virus that has been spreading rapidly. While more than one in three American adults have received at least one shot and nearly one-fifth are fully vaccinated, the nation is a long way from reaching so-called herd immunity the tipping point that comes when spread of a virus begins to slow because so many people, estimated at 70 to 90 percent of the population, are immune to it.

The warnings come at the same time as some promising news: A C.D.C. report released Monday confirmed the findings of last years clinical trials that vaccines developed by Moderna and Pfizer were highly effective against Covid-19. The report documented that the vaccines work to prevent both symptomatic and asymptomatic infections in real-world conditions.

The seven-day average of vaccines administered hit 2.76 million on Monday, an increase over the pace the previous week, according to data reported by the C.D.C. On Sunday alone, nearly 3.3 million people were inoculated, said Andy Slavitt, a senior White House pandemic adviser.

Mr. Biden said on Monday that the administration was taking steps to expand vaccine eligibility and access, including opening a dozen new mass vaccination centers. He directed his coronavirus response team to ensure that 90 percent of Americans would be no farther than five miles from a vaccination site by April 19.

Here is the original post:

Democrats Weigh Strategy to Force Through Bidens Infrastructure Plan - The New York Times

Many liberal economists say there are good reasons to raise taxes, starting with using those funds to invest in workers and help build economic opportunity. Spending on physical infrastructure, like roads and water pipes, or on programs like education and child care that are meant to help people earn more money could help curb persistent inequalities in income and wealth. The economists also say that tax increases that are properly set up would provide incentives for multinational companies to keep jobs in the United States and not shift profits to lower-tax foreign countries.

The purpose of the tax system is to both raise enough revenue for what the government wants to do, and to make sure that as were doing that we are encouraging activities that are in the national interest and discouraging ones that are not, said Heather Boushey, a member of the White Houses Council of Economic Advisers.

Key Democrats are trying to bring the party to consensus. The top tax writer in the Senate, Ron Wyden of Oregon, is drafting a series of bills to raise taxes, many of them overlapping with Mr. Bidens campaign proposals.

Ill be ready to raise what the Democratic caucus decides is required to move forward, Mr. Wyden, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said in an interview.

Mr. Wydens plans include big changes to the portions of Mr. Trumps tax cuts that overhauled how the United States taxes multinational companies, including the creation of a minimum tax of sorts on income earned abroad. Mr. Wyden and many Democratic economists, including some inside the Biden administration, say that the tax was devised in a way that it ultimately incentivized companies to continue moving profits and activities offshore to avoid American taxes. Republican economists and some tax experts disagree and say the law has allowed U.S. companies to better compete globally.

A report from the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation this month showed that multinational companies paid an average U.S. tax rate of less than 8 percent on their income in 2018, down from 16 percent in 2017. The report also found that those companies did not slow their practice of booking profits in low-tax havens like Bermuda.

Mr. Biden, Mr. Wyden and Mr. Sanders have all drafted plans to raise revenues by amending the 2017 law to force multinational companies to pay more to the United States. One of the most lucrative ways to do that, according to tax scorekeepers, would be to increase the rate of the global minimum tax, forcing those companies to pay higher U.S. tax rates no matter where they locate jobs or profits.

See the article here:

Biden Poised to Raise Taxes on Business and the Rich - The New York Times

Qualifying for Municipal Elections in Mississippi opened Monday and runs through February 5th.

The Mississippi Republican Party expanded its reach into cities and towns during the 2017 cycle, seating more Republicans in City Halls across the state than ever before. This was largely due to targeted outreach in communities where voters routinely supported Republicans in state and national elections by a greater margin, making voting for Republicans on the local level a natural fit.

Mississippi Democrats are against the wall in many areas, having lost even more local officials through party switching since the 2017 cycle at the municipal, county and state levels. Democrats have lost once firmly held seats at the local level, even in locales where the demographics would indicate a different outcome on the surface.

For example: George Flaggs in Vicksburg dropped the Democrat label in 2018, declaring himself as an Independent after serving 25 years in the Mississippi Legislature as a Democrat, saying then that it was in order that I may build better relationships to prosperity for the people of Vicksburg and Mississippi. He is running for re-election.

Hattiesburg saw its mayoral seat change from Democrat to Independent in 2017 with Toby Barkers win. Barker, who served in the Legislature as a Republican, defeated incumbent Johnny DuPree to shift the dynamic within the Hub City government. Barker is expected to seek re-election.

Longtime Ocean Springs Mayor Connie Moran lost her re-election bid in 2017 to a political newcomer in Republican Shea Dobson. Now, the Coast city where Republicans were never truly competitive in the mayoral race will have a crowded Republican Primary to see who will lead the community for the next four years. Dobson will face State Rep. Jeff Guice and Melanie Allen, with others who may throw their name in the hat.

No Democrat names of substance have yet emerged in these areas that would indicate the possibility of flipping the mayoral seats or boards in these municipalities.

It appears the trend away from the Democratic Party may continue in this 2021 cycle as Democrats are once again seeing some of its up and comers decide to forego the party label on the first day of municipal qualifying.

The Daily Journal reported Monday that Oxford Mayor Robin Tannehill will seek re-election as an Independent, dropping her Democratic Party affiliation.

I have thought and prayed a lot about this decision to run as an independent, and I feel like its where my heart is, Tannehill was quoted as saying by the Daily Journal. I think its where our community is. Our community is a community that works to make Oxford, Mississippi, the best not the Democrats the best or the Republicans the best.

Oxford, Starkville and Tupelo are three of the largest cities in North Mississippi, as the Daily Journal notes, and all three have had Democrat mayors in recent years. However, Taylor Vance writes, the decision by Tannehill in Oxford to run as an independent and Jason Shelton in Tupelo not to run at all deals a blow against Democrat hopes of holding all three offices.

In Tupelo, Shelton, once viewed as a contender for statewide office, announced in the fall of 2020 that he would not seek re-election. Since then, at least two Republicans have announced that they will vie for the mayoral seat Tupelo Councilman Markel Whittington and Lee County Supervisor Todd Jordan. It will be a challenge for Democrats to hold this seat.

A bit South down Highway 45, outspoken Meridian City Councilman and formerly active Democrat Weston Lindemann said Monday that he would qualify as an Independent and run for Mayor of the Queen City. According to the Meridian Star, Democrat Mayor Percy Bland has qualified for re-election. Lindemann and Bland have routinely butted heads over the last four years, with Lindemann frequently taking issue with how Blands administration has operated the police department and questioning the hiring practices within City Hall.

One bright spot for Democrats other than the City of Jackson, where the left will certainly maintain their control, may be in Starkville. Mayor Lynn Spruill has announced for intention to seek re-election, but has not said whether she will run again as a Democrat, although that is expected.

The state Democratic Party has expressed their intent to be competitive in local races in the 2021 cycle, hoping to compete and win despite recent losses both at the ballot box and through party switching. However, that effort, at least based on the latest reports, appears to be largely based on race. That focus has thus far been a losing proposition for Democrats in Mississippi.

Still, Mississippi Democratic Party Chairman Tyree Irving recently told Politico that one of his first goals is to oust Greenwoods incumbent Independent mayor, Carolyn McAdams.

<>

Politico couched Irvings comments in this way: More than 73 percent of the population of Greenwood, Irvings hometown and the site of Emmitt Tills death, is Black. McAdams is white. McAdams was first elected in 2009, beating incumbent Sheriel Perkins, Greenwoods first Black mayor. Shes been reelected repeatedly as an independent.

Irving wants to replace McAdams with a progressive Democrat.

###

Municipal Primary Elections in Mississippi are set for April 6th, with the Municipal General Elections scheduled for June 8th.

If you are considering a run for a municipal office in your city or town, the Mississippi Secretary of States office has published a Candidate Qualifying Guide here and the Mississippi Ethics Commission has distributed a flyer here outlining what candidates need to know to remain compliant.

Continue reading here:

As municipal qualifying begins, Democrats in Mississippi ...

California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks at a press conference in Los Angeles, Calif. | Mario Tama/Getty Images

SACRAMENTO Gov. Gavin Newsom's camp has one message for Democrats considering a California recall bid: Don't even think about it.

The mere hint of a candidacy draws immediate condemnation from Newsom attack dog Sean Clegg, while other Newsom surrogates are making clear publicly and privately that any Democratic challenger will become persona non grata in the party.

Minutes after POLITICO reported Tuesday that former Democratic presidential candidate Tom Steyer was surveying voters on his recall chances, Clegg tweeted that Steyer doesnt want to be the cynical, vulture-investing billionaire who bet against Democratic unity so Trump Republicans can take CA."

After former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa called for California schools to reopen immediately amid talk of a potential candidacy, Clegg last week fired off a clear rebuke: My old friend Antonio will embarrass himself and forever poison his legacy if he runs, he wrote.

Thats how you lose," Clegg, a strategist for Newsom, said in an interview. We need to hold our base."

It is all but certain that California will have its second gubernatorial recall ever, likely this fall, based on an official state signature tally released last week. The state's unique recall system lends itself to a delicate intraparty dance. California asks two questions: first, do you want to recall Newsom, and second, who should replace him if the recall is successful? The rules don't allow Newsom to appear on that replacement list of contenders who would take his job.

As the prospect of a Villaraigosa candidacy gained steam in recent weeks, other Newsom allies tried to blunt that momentum. Former Assembly Speaker Fabian Nez declined to share his private conversations with Villaraigosa and stressed that he does not speak for the former mayor, but Nez predicted that at the end of the day, all of the Democratic establishment and Democratic activists are going to be on the side of Gov. Gavin Newsom.

We cant make the same mistake twice, Nez said, invoking the ill-fated entry of Democratic Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante in the 2003 recall won by Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger. I dont see Democrats repeating that exercise again.

If Democrats play their cards wrong and Newsom is recalled without a leading Democrat on the ballot as an option, a high-name ID Republican could take the top job with a quarter of the vote in one of the nations bluest states.

The only time I worry about a Republican [not] winning this seat is if one credible Democrat gets in, said Anne Dunsmore, who runs one of the recall committees that are on the verge of qualifying the election.

One Democratic lawmaker said this week that California's two-question approach needs an overhaul. "The crazy thing about our system is that many more people can vote to keep the incumbent in office than the person who ends up replacing the incumbent," said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica).

The topic of a Democrat potentially getting into the race is the prevailing obsession among elected officials, donors and political consultants in California. There are two schools of thought. In one view, not running a backup candidate would be an unforgivable oversight that could allow a Republican to waltz into office with a plurality of the vote. In the other, a Democrats entry would signal weakness and disunity when Newsom needs his allies more than ever potentially ensuring the second question is necessary.

The dance around the recall forces California Democrats to balance two elemental political motivations: self-preservation and opportunism. Any ambitious Democrat who runs and fails would topple off the career ladder into political oblivion. No one has forgotten the implosion of Bustamante after he jumped into the 2003 race. But the recall also offers a tantalizing chance to leapfrog into the governors office.

For now, Democrats have projected unity behind Newsom. At event after event, Democrats seen as potential contenders have pledged their fealty to the governor and lambasted the recall as a partisan distraction.

The governors team has also sought to squelch a challenge from the left, reaching out to progressive California Democrat Rep. Ro Khanna to enlist the support of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and rolling out an endorsement from Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). They're trying to signal that Newsom may have sometimes fallen short, but he is far superior to a Republican.

I made the case [to Sanders] that he really needed to weigh in, that this is a Republican attempt to take over California, Khanna said in an interview. I understand there may be some progressive disappointment in [progressive] goals not being achieved yet, such as single-payer, but this is the time we really need to unify against the recall.

Newsom remains in a relatively strong position, with an approval rating hovering around 50 percent far better than Gov. Gray Davis had before he was ousted by voters. Democrats contemplating a run are likely to wait and see where Newsom stands closer to a likely fall candidate filing deadline.

If Im wondering, Am I going to go sailing in 90 days? Im going to wait 89 days and see what the weather is, said Rob Stutzman, a Republican political consultant who worked for Schwarzenegger.

If Newsom cant muster a majority to fend off being recalled, a Democrat would enjoy powerful advantages on the second question of whom to replace the governor. California remains an overwhelmingly Democratic state.

The larger risk-benefit calculus could favor the entry of a Democrat who doesnt currently hold public office and thus has less to lose. Political observers are closely watching Villaraigosa, who lost to Newsom in the 2018 gubernatorial primary. Villaraigosa, a public affairs partner at Mercury, has name recognition and could activate a political support network in Los Angeles, a power base that would counterbalance Newsoms Bay Area roots.

The former mayor has been coy about his intentions, criticizing the recall without explicitly ruling out a run. But he has been an outspoken critic of continued school closures, a major liability for Newsom. Education policy was a dividing line in the 2018 primary, with charter allies spending millions to boost Villaraigosa and unions rallying to Newsoms defense.

Steyer also looms. The Democratic former presidential candidate has a long history of wading into California politics, no office to lose but considerable personal wealth to fund a campaign.

And there's always a nuclear option.

If polls suggest Newsom is in serious trouble as the recall draws closer, the governor could resign from office. That would allow Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis to take over the job and short-circuit the recall tied to Newsom while undoubtedly raising the hackles of Republicans.

"In September, he could be doing great and well proceed," said Democratic political strategist Christine Pelosi, daughter of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. "But if hes really underwater, it may be that no Democrat could win. Then, he should step down as governor and Eleni Kounalakis should be the governor, and they should cancel the election. In that case, the Democratic Party would retain the governorship."

View post:

Newsom swats away Democratic challengers. Will his party live to regret it? - POLITICO

Republican Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks took office in January after the Iowa State Board of Canvassers certified her victory over Democratic candidate Rita Hart. She won by six votes after a full recount. Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images hide caption

Republican Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks took office in January after the Iowa State Board of Canvassers certified her victory over Democratic candidate Rita Hart. She won by six votes after a full recount.

The House Administration Committee is reviewing a challenge brought by defeated Iowa Democrat Rita Hart against freshman Republican Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks, who won the race by just six votes.

Attorneys for the two candidates submitted initial legal briefs to the panel on Monday. In a terse 23-page brief, Miller-Meeks' counsel broadly denied Hart's claims and said the burden was on Hart to prove that a state-certified election should be overturned.

"We don't have to prove anything at this point, and that's something I think is important to emphasize: The congresswoman has a certificate of election, and that demonstrates that she is the winner of the race under Iowa law," Alan Ostergren, an attorney representing Miller-Meeks in the complaint, told reporters on Monday.

Hart's team alleges that there are 22 ballots that should have been counted in the election and that if they had, she would have won by nine votes. Hart's campaign has cited examples including five absentee ballots cast in her favor that were not counted because they were not properly sealed. However, the race was certified by the Iowa State Board of Canvassers with bipartisan support after a full recount.

Rita Hart filed in late December to challenge the results under the Federal Contested Elections Act. Caroline Brehman/CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images hide caption

In a more detailed 71-page brief, Hart's attorney, Marc Elias, argues that ballots should not have been throw out if the error was the result of election administrators or "circumstances outside the voter's control."

"Contestant Hart initiated this contested election case to vindicate the promise of our democratic system: that the representatives who serve us have been selected by the votes of their constituents, not the errors and caprices of election administrators," the brief states.

"It is the committee's constitutional duty to investigate all of these claims," said Chairwoman Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., at a March 10 committee meeting. "Today none of us can state with confidence who actually won this election." The Constitution gives both the House and Senate authority to decide how to seat its members, and the Federal Contested Elections Act grants the authority to review House elections to the House Administration Committee.

While it is not unusual for defeated candidates in close races to petition the House to review their election, the House has almost never sided in favor of a petitioner. Since 1933, 110 campaigns have requested that the panel review an election, according to a committee aide. In all but three cases, those petitions were rejected, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. In one case, the House agreed to seat no one and left the seat vacant.

"Our committee should not be moving forward with overturning our colleague's state-certified election. [Miller-Meeks] is a sitting member of Congress with all of the same rights and privileges as each and every one of us," said Rep. Rodney Davis of Illinois, the top Republican on the committee, at the March 10 meeting. Republicans have noted that Hart's campaign opted not to challenge the election results in Iowa court, but rather through a partisan House process with a Democratic advantage.

There are growing political tensions around this particular challenge in the House, where relationships between Democrats and Republicans have deteriorated since the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, the day of the certification of the Electoral College vote results. On that day, 139 House Republicans voted to object to state-certified results in Arizona and Pennsylvania after extremists ransacked the Capitol. Now, Democrats are in control of a process to decide whether to overturn a certified election result.

Democrats maintain that there is nothing unethical about reviewing an election with a historically close margin in an established legal process. "It should not be surprising that any candidate in these circumstances would choose to exercise their rights under the law to contest the results," said Peter Whippy, a Democratic spokesman for the House Administration Committee.

However, with a narrow 219-211 current majority, some Democrats are aware that the review could be cast as a power grab to pad their margin in the House. "Losing a House election by six votes is painful for Democrats. But overturning it in the House would be even more painful for America. Just because a majority can, does not mean a majority should," tweeted Rep. Dean Phillips of Minnesota, a centrist Democrat.

There is no timeline for wrapping up the election review, although Lofgren has said she would like to resolve the matter this spring. The committee could vote to dismiss the case or make a recommendation to overturn the election result, which would require a majority vote of the full House to take effect.

Attorneys for the two sides have until March 29 to submit follow-up briefs.

Continue reading here:

Defeated Iowa Democrat Asking House To Overturn Election - NPR

Florida Republicans bested Democrats in the blocking and tackling of running campaigns last year, leading to victories up and down the ballot for the GOP. Now the states top Democrat is bringing in outside help to prevent a repeat in 2022.

Florida Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried and the National Democratic Training Committee are announcing a new initiative to train local county Democratic leaders in organization and strategizing. The goal is to strengthen the Democrats closest to the voters and activists on the ground.

Organizing has historically been the Democratic Partys strong suit and after Floridas 2020 election results, its clear that an initiative to strengthen party efforts from the ground up, prioritizing the local level, will be crucial for future success, Fried, the states only statewide Democrat, said in a statement.

The training will take place over four sessions that will begin in April.

This series is the latest effort by Fried to help the party rebuild from the ground up. Fried recently announced the hiring of Abigayil Yisrael as engagement and outreach director for her political committee. Yisrael is coming off the successful campaign of Georgia Sen. Jon Ossoff, in which Democrats flipped the southern state blue to take control of the Senate.

This refocus on the ground will be a familiar tune to local county parties, who for years have heard such promises from state Democratic Party leaders only to watch them abandon those efforts as elections approach.

After widespread losses in 2018, Florida Democrats spent months assessing what went wrong and concluded that they needed to give more resources to local Democratic parties and engage with their activists all year, not just election season.

By the time the 2020 election rolled around, there was a steady drumbeat of angst and frustration from local Democratic leaders, who said they were being stepped on by national Democrats. Many sounded the alarm that Joe Bidens campaign wasnt doing enough to engage with Black and Latino Floridians and that these outside strategists didnt understand the intricacies of operating in such a large, diverse state.

The National Democratic Training Committee partners with labor unions, trade groups, state parties and progressive organizations. Its Florida series will focus on training local precinct committee people, membership recruitment and building a successful organization.

When our local party infrastructure is organized, we get more people involved, recruit more candidates and ultimately win more races. We are thrilled to be teaming up with Commissioner Fried to train Democratic leaders across the state, said Kelly Dietrich, founder and CEO of the National Democratic Training Committee.

Originally posted here:

Florida Democrats lost the ground game in 2020. Training is on the way. - Tampa Bay Times