The new rule would be the most aggressive move so far from the Biden administration to limit auto pollution, which makes up a significant portion of overall US greenhouse gas emissions. To encourage automakers to sell more electric vehicles, the regulation would reportedly set a limit to the amount of emissions an auto company’s fleet of sold cars can produce every year. The requirement wouldn’t specifically mandate that auto companies sell electric vehicles, but that limit would make doing so necessary to comply.
The proposed regulation, first reported by the New York Times, is expected to be formally announced by Wednesday. Given the impact on auto companies’ bottom lines, it would likely result in a battle between the administration, the auto industry, environmental groups, and consumer advocates over the new rules. The regulation would also go through public comment before taking effect and will almost certainly face legal challenges, meaning it could be months before the EPA officially sets the new rules.
The auto industry is likely to maintain that meeting the requirements of the proposal isn’t realistic. Last year, electric vehicle sales were up 65 percent from 2021, but they still only accounted for about 6 percent of all new vehicle sales. Getting EV sales up to the 67 percent in the reported EPA proposal would require, as the Times put it, a “quantum leap.”
The Biden administration has long seemed determined to make such a dramatic jump. In March, the administration announced commitments to expand the federal fleet of electric vehicles and the availability of charging stations. That plan includes placing 500,000 chargers across the nation’s highways and interstates. Earlier this year, the Inflation Reduction Act included an expansion of tax credits for the purchase of new or used electric vehicles. The administration’s actions on EV expansion are part of a larger goal to “put the United States on a path to achieve net-zero emissions, economy-wide, by no later than 2050,” according to the White House.
Monday, April 10, 2023
Last Call For Mission: Emissions, Con't
South Of The War, Durr!
In recent weeks, Donald Trump has discussed sending “special forces” and using “cyber warfare” to target cartel leaders if he’s reelected president and, per Rolling Stone, asked for “battle plans” to strike Mexico. Reps. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) and Mike Waltz (R-Fla.) introduced a bill seeking authorization for the use of military force to “put us at war with the cartels.” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) said he is open to sending U.S. troops into Mexico to target drug lords even without that nation’s permission. And lawmakers in both chambers have filed legislation to label some cartels as foreign terrorist organizations, a move supported by GOP presidential aspirants.
“We need to start thinking about these groups more like ISIS than we do the mafia,” Waltz, a former Green Beret, said in a short interview.
Not all Republican leaders are behind this approach. John Bolton, Trump’s third national security adviser who’s weighing his own presidential run, said unilateral military operations “are not going to solve the problem.” And House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Mike McCaul (R-Texas), for example, is “still evaluating” the AUMF proposal “but has concerns about the immigration implications and the bilateral relationship with Mexico,” per a Republican staff member on the panel.
But the eagerness of some Republicans to openly legislate or embrace the use of the military in Mexico suggests that the idea is taking firmer root inside the party. And it illustrates the ways in which frustration with immigration, drug overdose deaths and antipathy towards China are defining the GOP’s larger foreign policy.
Nearly 71,000 Americans died in 2021 from synthetic-opioid overdoses — namely fentanyl — far higher than the 58,220 U.S. military personnel killed during the Vietnam War. And the Drug Enforcement Agency assessed in December that “most” of the fentanyl distributed by two cartels “is being mass-produced at secret factories in Mexico with chemicals sourced largely from China.”
Democrats, meanwhile, are allergic to the Republican proposals. President Joe Biden doesn’t want to launch an invasion and has rejected the terrorist label for cartels. His team argues that two issued executive orders already expanded law-enforcement authorities to target transnational organizations.
“The administration is not considering military action in Mexico,” National Security Council spokesperson Adrienne Watson said. “Designating these cartels as foreign terrorist organizations would not grant us any additional authorities that we don’t already have.” Instead, Watson said the administration hopes to work with Congress on modernizing the Customs and Border Protection’s technologies and making fentanyl a Schedule I drug, which would impose the strictest regulations on its production and distribution.
Gen. Mark Milley, the Joint Chiefs chair, told Defense One in an interview last month that invading Mexico was a bad idea. “I wouldn’t recommend anything be done without Mexico’s support,” he said, insisting that tackling the cartel-fueled drug trade is a law enforcement issue.
But should a Republican defeat Biden in 2024, those ideas could become policy, especially if Trump — the GOP frontrunner — reclaims the Oval Office.
Mexico's popular president Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador rallied more than 100,000 supporters Saturday in Mexico City, attacking the country's right, its "oligarchs" and the United States, just over a year before elections to choose his successor.
The rally marked the 85th anniversary of the nationalization of the oil industry, a key event in Mexican history.
Denouncing US Republican lawmakers' push to send the US military to battle Mexican drug cartels, Lopez Obrador told the crowd: "Cooperation yes, submission, no!"
"Mexico is an independent and free country and not a colony or a protectorate of the United States," he told his supporters, who gathered in the city's famous Zocalo main square.
BREAKING: Six Dead Including Suspect In Louisville Bank Shooting
Officers responded to the Old National Bank on Main Street around 8:30 a.m. where they encountered active gunshots, Louisville Metro Police Deputy Chief Paul Humphrey said during a media briefing at 10:20 a.m. Five people were confirmed dead and six people were transported to the University of Louisville Hospital, including two LMPD officers.
Two of the victims at the hospital were in critical condition, including one officer who was in surgery, Humphrey said during an 11 a.m. update. The others suffered non-critical injuries.
Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear immediately came to Louisville after hearing of the shooting. Speaking at the 11 a.m. press conference, he said that one of his close friends was killed during the shooting and another was injured. He urged those impacted to get help.
"Our bodies and our minds are not meant to go through these kinds of tragedies," Beshear said, who teared up when speaking with the media.
Chinese Firing Drill
China's military simulated precision strikes against Taiwan in a second day of drills around the island on Sunday, with the island's defence ministry reporting multiple air force sorties and that it was monitoring China's missile forces.
China, which claims democratically governed Taiwan as its own territory, began three days of military exercises around the island on Saturday, the day after Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen returned from a brief visit to the United States.
Chinese state television reported that the combat readiness patrols and drills around Taiwan were continuing.
"Under the unified command of the theatre joint operations command centre, multiple types of units carried out simulated joint precision strikes on key targets on Taiwan island and the surrounding sea areas, and continue to maintain an offensive posture around the island," it said.
The Chinese military's Eastern Theatre Command put out a short animation of the simulated attacks on its WeChat account, showing missiles fired from land, sea and air into Taiwan with two of them exploding in flames as they hit their targets.
A source familiar with the security situation in the region told Reuters that China had been conducting simulated air and sea attacks on "foreign military targets" in the waters off Taiwan's southwestern coast.
"Taiwan is not their only target," the source said, speaking on condition of anonymity as they were not authorised to speak to the media. "It's very provocative."
Taiwan's defence ministry said that as of 0800 GMT on Sunday they had spotted 70 Chinese aircraft, including Su-30 fighters and H-6 bombers, as well as 11 ships, around Taiwan.
The ministry said they were paying particular attention to the People's Liberation Army's Rocket Force which is in charge of China's land-based missile system.
"Regarding the movements of the Chinese communists' Rocket Force, the nation's military also has a close grasp through the joint intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance system, and air defence forces remain on high alert," the ministry said.
It reiterated that Taiwan's forces will "not escalate conflicts nor cause disputes" and would respond "appropriately" to China's drills.
The security source said about 20 military ships, half from Taiwan and half from China, were engaged in a stand-off near the Taiwan Strait's median line, which has for years served as an unofficial barrier between the two sides, but did not behave provocatively.
China's aircraft carrier Shandong, which Taiwan has been monitoring since last week, is now more than 400 nautical miles off Taiwan's southeast coast and is carrying out drills, the source said.
Zhao Xiaozhuo of China's Academy of Military Sciences told the Chinese state-backed Global Times newspaper this was the first time China had openly talked of simulated attacks on targets in Taiwan.
Europe must reduce its dependency on the United States and avoid getting dragged into a confrontation between China and the U.S. over Taiwan, French President Emmanuel Macron said in an interview on his plane back from a three-day state visit to China.
Speaking with POLITICO and two French journalists after spending around six hours with Chinese President Xi Jinping during his trip, Macron emphasized his pet theory of “strategic autonomy” for Europe, presumably led by France, to become a “third superpower.”
He said “the great risk” Europe faces is that it “gets caught up in crises that are not ours, which prevents it from building its strategic autonomy,” while flying from Beijing to Guangzhou, in southern China, aboard COTAM UnitĂ©, France’s Air Force One.
Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party have enthusiastically endorsed Macron’s concept of strategic autonomy and Chinese officials constantly refer to it in their dealings with European countries. Party leaders and theorists in Beijing are convinced the West is in decline and China is on the ascendant and that weakening the transatlantic relationship will help accelerate this trend.
“The paradox would be that, overcome with panic, we believe we are just America’s followers,” Macron said in the interview. “The question Europeans need to answer … is it in our interest to accelerate [a crisis] on Taiwan? No. The worse thing would be to think that we Europeans must become followers on this topic and take our cue from the U.S. agenda and a Chinese overreaction,” he said.
Sunday, April 9, 2023
Sunday Long Read: Pilgrim's Passage
At the YMCA Blue Ridge Assembly, in the mountains outside of Asheville, North Carolina, pilgrims gathered. It was the beginning of April 2022, and in the way of that country, the days were warm and the nights were cool, and the morning fog that blanketed the valley below glowed blue. The camp conjured certain romantic and suspect associations, with its historic lodges wrapped in wide porches, their tall, white pillars smudged with the traces of a century of wear. An amalgam of cultural products signaling “the South” seemed to float in on the fog: corsets and crumbling antebellum mansions, or whatever.
The occasion at hand was tradition of an altogether different phylum: The Annual Gathering of American Pilgrims on the Camino—as in the Camino de Santiago, an ancient network of paths taken by pilgrims that ends in Galicia. Hundreds of thousands of pilgrims make the journey each year, departing from various locations in Europe, following big yellow arrows through the north of Spain to the tomb of St. James, and some onward to the coast. The website of the American Pilgrims on the Camino says that the gathering gives Camino veterans and aspirants alike the opportunity to “share experiences” and to “learn more.” But I had not come to trade intelligence on headlamps or blister care. I had come to meet the pilgrims. Really, I’d come to meet a particular pilgrim. Ann Sieben went on her first pilgrimage over fifteen years ago, and has been walking ever since. She abandoned a lucrative engineering career in nuclear remediation and gave away all her belongings, devoting herself to the life of the pilgrim.
Ann is not one to follow big yellow arrows, and she feels the Camino has largely become a “touristic” venture, in which one is nudged along a track like an “economic widget.” But she is a devoted servant of her God (Catholic), and part of her God-given task on earth is to teach the world about the virtues of pilgrimage. Since her friend Christine insisted on paying for her to attend the gathering, she has decided to use this opportunity to test-drive a set of six inspirational tales from her travels in front of a sympathetic audience.
On the second night of the conference, about a dozen people had congregated near the hearth in the main lodge to hear her speak. We’d just come from a performance of a one-woman show titled “Crying on the Camino,” written and performed by a retired speech pathologist. An hour and a half of bawdy jokes, musical numbers, and a recurrent direct address—“Blessed are you, pilgrim”—culminated in a tearful audience and a standing ovation. But just now, everyone looked sleepy. One silver-haired gentleman slackened in his chair, snoring.
Ann was standing before the hearth with her hands folded, monkish. She is small, just over five feet tall. Her hair is a short, white floof, buoyant as dandelion down, her eyes a blue so pale they shine like ice. She was dressed in her pilgrim best: leather walking boots, a hiking skirt, and a black, medieval-looking tunic she refers to as “the hoodie.” When she’s on a pilgrimage, this uniform is supplemented by a small backpack and a Day-Glo green top of some technical material. I learned that the tunic was patterned, in part, on a Lord of the Rings costume, and was “evening wear” reserved for places of rest such as monasteries, or dinner parties hosted by village mayors.
Ann introduced herself as a consecrated pilgrim who had renounced worldly possessions. “I travel with no money,” she said, “which means, every night when I get to my destination . . . I ask people for hospitality.” Throughout fifteen years, fifty-six different countries, and more than forty-five thousand miles, she told us, “I have never not found hospitality.”
Ann’s talk wove together some of her greatest hits, subdivided into related “couplets.” A story about two men who leveled rifles at her in the Western Desert of Egypt was paired with one about a crew of men who appeared to be narco-traffickers confronting her with machine guns while she “hoofed it” through the Chihuahuan Desert.
In the first case, Ann was walking across North Africa to Jerusalem, on a pilgrimage dedicated to “J.C. and the Boys.” She was the stranger in that story, the enemy “invader of their peaceful oasis.” She defused the situation by asking the men for water. By expressing an elemental need, she explains, the stranger made herself familiar.
The alleged narco-traffickers confronted her while she walked from Denver to Mexico City. “I am a pilgrim headed to Guadalupe,” she told their ringleader. “My pilgrimage will either end there, at the Basilica, or in Heaven with God. For me, it’s equal. You decide.” In her telling, the men lowered their weapons. Some crossed themselves and wrote down prayers for their grandmothers and children, which Ann promised to deliver to “Our Lady.” In this case, the men were the strangers, and their love of family taught Ann to love, in turn, “thy enemy.”
Every encounter with the stranger is an opportunity to create rapport. Ann’s raison d’ĂȘtre is building trust, because trust is the foundation of peace. Though she walks alone, pilgrimage is paradoxically a social project. “It is personal,” Ann told the crowd. “But it is not private.”
And a pilgrim never knows what gifts her needs will bestow upon her host. Take, for example, a snowy night in Romania, when an elderly peasant couple insisted that Ann sleep in their bed while they bunked with the goats. She spent the night tossing and turning with guilt. But in the morning, the couple emerged from the goathouse as flushed and giddy as naughty teenagers. The moral? “More pilgrims, more love.”
Someone must have tapped the dreaming man on the shoulder. By the time Ann finished the second couplet, the whole audience had leaned in, roused by allusion to eros and automatic weapons. Later I asked how she thought it went. Did she get much feedback?
“Just all the wows,” she replied. “With the silence afterwards . . . Spellbound. Speechless. Digesting.”
Saturday, April 8, 2023
Last Call For Bringing Down Boebert
After barely missing beating GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert last November, she's at the top of the list of flippable seats for Dems going into 2024 House races.
Democrats are gearing up to challenge Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) again after nearly unseating her in one of the biggest surprises of last year’s midterms.
In a sign of her perceived vulnerability, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) this week highlighted Boebert’s district as one of 31 targets next year, even after former President Trump handily won it in the past two presidential elections.
For Democrats, Boebert’s high-profile media antics and close ties to Trump’s MAGA (Make America Great Again) movement make her a prime foil.
“One of our most effective comments that we talked about in the district was she’s not focused on the job, she’s focused on herself,” said Adam Frisch, the Democrat who nearly defeated Boebert last year and who is running again to unseat her in 2024. “I can’t believe she had almost the most embarrassing loss in 20 years and she hasn’t changed one iota. She’s actually doubled down on crazy.”
That sentiment is one that Frisch, a businessman and former city council member in Pitkin County, will continue to hammer home in the run-up to the general election next year.
Boebert’s firebrand style has resulted in a long list of controversies in her short congressional career, including a Democratic push to have her removed from House committees after her Islamophobic attacks on Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and her staunch support of Trump’s claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him.
She emerged from her first election victory, defeating 10-year Republican incumbent Rep. Scott Tipton in the primary, as a star of the right wing of the GOP, tying herself closely to then-President Trump. Former Chair of the Colorado Republican Party Dick Wadhams remembered Boebert’s rabble-rousing speaking appearances ahead of the election, focusing on issues like gun rights and cultural issues.
“She took that very combative style to her everyday work in the U.S. House of Representatives,” Wadhams said. “I think it started the people in the third congressional district thinking that she wasn’t paying enough attention to the district as she was paying more attention to national politics.”
But the behaviors that Wadhams said may have pushed away some voters in the district also made her a national conservative media star and turned her into one of the GOP’s powerhouse fundraisers in Congress. She raked in nearly $8 million for the 2022 cycle.
“She’s always been a fundraising machine so she’s certainly going to have enough money,” Wadhams said.
But with national Democrats identifying the race as one of their priorities in 2024, Frisch, who in part self-financed his campaign with more than $2.2 million in loans in 2022, might be able to stock a campaign chest comparable with Boebert’s. Through the first quarter of 2023, Frisch raised more than $1.7 million in just over a month after announcing his campaign. Boebert has yet to release her fundraising numbers for the first quarter.
Frisch has pitched himself as an unabashedly moderate Democrat, focusing on agricultural and energy production issues. As the debate over an approaching debt ceiling rages in Washington, many Democrats have taken the stance that cuts to entitlement programs — like Social Security and Medicare — should be off the table as Republicans angle for spending slashes. Frisch ventured into territory that only a select number of Democrats have, arguing that while Congress should raise the debt ceiling, it does need to take a look at the long-term viability of entitlement programs.
“There are three or four big programs that control the vast majority of the budget, and then there’s everything else,” Frisch said. “So I think it’s hard to say we’re going to keep 85 percent of the budget off the table … even if you get rid of 600 percent of the 15 percent that’s left over, you might have a math problem.”
But Frisch will have to walk a tightrope in the run-up to 2024 in a district that Trump won by 12 points in 2016 and 6 points in 2020. Republicans have already tried to tie Frisch to what they say are the reckless crime policies of the Democratic Party.
“Extreme House Democrats lost the majority because they hammered families with crime, chaos and skyrocketing costs,” said Jack Pandol, communications director for the National Republican Congressional Committee. “Why would voters change their minds after Democrats spent their time in the minority coddling violent criminals and opposing relief?”
Florida Goes Viral, Con't
When Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo announced late last year that the state was officially recommending men under 40 to not get the COVID-19 vaccine because of a higher risk of heart problems than lives saved, Republicans went into a national crusade to outlaw the vaccine period.
Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo announced in October that young men should not get the COVID-19 vaccine, guidance that runs counter to medical advice issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
His recommendation was based on a state analysis that showed the risk of cardiac-related deaths increased significantly for some age groups after receiving a vaccine. It has been criticized by experts, including professors and epidemiologists at the University of Florida, where Ladapo is employed as a professor.
Now, draft versions of the analysis obtained by the Tampa Bay Times show that this recommendation was made despite the state having contradictory data. It showed that catching COVID-19 could increase the chances of a cardiac-related death much more than getting the vaccine.
That data was included in an earlier version of the state’s analysis but was missing from the final version compiled and posted online by the Florida Department of Health. Ladapo did not reference the contradictory data in a release posted by the state.
The Times’ records request asked for all previous versions of the state analysis made public on Oct. 7. The documents show that, before the final version was released, at least five drafts had been produced. One version included a data table showing the number of cardiac-related deaths from infection. The conclusion in four of the drafts provided a counterpoint to Ladapo’s assertion about the vaccine.
Four epidemiologists who reviewed the drafts said the omission is inexplicable and flawed from a scientific standpoint. They said that, based on the missing data, Ladapo’s recommendation should be rescinded.
Matt Hitchings, an infectious disease epidemiologist and professor of biostatistics at the University of Florida, said it seems that sections of the analysis were omitted because they did not fit the narrative the surgeon general wanted to push.
“This is a grave violation of research integrity,” Hitchings said. “(The vaccine) has done a lot to advance the health of people of Florida and he’s encouraging people to mistrust it.”
The surgeon general and the state’s health department have frequently questioned the safety of messenger ribonucleic acid or mRNA vaccines developed to counter COVID-19. Last year, Florida became the first state to recommend against vaccines for healthy children and it was the only state to not preorder coronavirus vaccines for children under 5.
Ladapo declined to answer specific questions about why the data showing the higher risk to Floridians from infection was removed. In an emailed statement, he said that he stands by his guidance and that this is not the first time he has faced criticism for his approach to COVID-19.
“As surgeon general, my decisions continue to be led by the raw science — not fear,” he said. “Far less attention has been paid to safety of the COVID-19 vaccines and many concerns have been dismissed — these are important findings that should be communicated to Floridians.”
Racist Top Tennessee, Con't
The state party knows that it’s drifting. Some openly and proudly admit it. It’s also evidenced by Sen. Bob Corker’s decision not to seek reelection in 2018, and Gov. Bill Haslam’s opting out of running for Alexander’s open seat in 2020. Both Corker and Haslam know they were unlikely to have survived a primary in the state, had they stayed true to their own brands of more moderate conservatism. Corker’s Senate seat ended up going to Marsha Blackburn, a Trump loyalist, and Bill Hagerty, now in Alexander’s seat, handily won the GOP primary after securing his own endorsement from Trump.
The same dynamic is on display at the state Capitol, where former Rep. Eddie Mannis — a John Kasich-Gary Johnson voter in 2016 and a gay Republican — entered the legislature in 2021 with plans of voting like a moderate, in line with his Knoxville district. Last year, he bowed out after just one term, later saying there were “too many people there who are just mean and vindictive,” only caring about “winning at all costs.” Other members live under the fear and dread of a possible primary challenge — the only election that now matters in most districts in Tennessee — if they stray from the party orthodoxy on guns, access to abortion and other issues.
But even for the jaded, Thursday’s expulsions were still extraordinary to watch play out. Longtime political insiders around the Capitol on Monday were stunned to see how quickly expulsion resolutions were drawn up against the three members. Mannis, who now occasionally opines on his former colleagues’ behavior, posted to Facebook: “Today is such a sad day for our State…”
For them and others, the speed with which the Tennessee House acted this week to throw out two young Black legislators must be put into perspective by all the other issues the legislature has declined to act on.
For more than four years, House Republicans declined to expel one of their own, Rep. David Byrd, after he was accused of sexually assaulting three teenage girls, students he taught and coached on a high school basketball team. Byrd was on tape apologizing to one of them, decades later. Even the Republican governor said he believed the allegations to be credible. But House Republicans — some conceding in private that they suspected Byrd may actually have preyed on minors — dug their heels in, saying he was fairly elected.
The debate around removal of the bust of Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest went on for years, even as Black lawmakers pleaded with their colleagues to take down the statue. Republicans punted on opportunities to authorize removal, with many wanting to keep the statue in place. In return, protesters — often led by Jones, one of the expelled representatives — rallied at the Capitol on a regular basis, their shouts outside the chambers carrying through the thick, shuttered wooden doors as lawmakers took up other legislative business. (The bust was finally removed in 2021, with resistance from Lt. Gov. Randy McNally and House Speaker Cameron Sexton, after GOP Gov. Bill Lee whipped votes on the necessary state commissions to resolve the issue once and for all.)
The undercurrent of race is present in many of the Capitol’s controversies.
“Black people are idiots,” Cade Cothren, the chief of staff to former House Speaker Glen Casada, once wrote in a text message during a conversation about Common Core curriculum. It was one of several uncovered prior to his resignation in 2019. Both Casada and Cothren are now awaiting federal trial in a case involving alleged bribery and kickbacks at the legislature. Cothren has since apologized for the racist comment, and more recently has even condemned the legislature’s decision to expel the Black Democratic legislators.
A former GOP legislative staffer told me that in 2020, a member of House Republican leadership in a text message referred to Jones, then an activist, and another Black lawmaker as “baboons.” Former GOP Rep. Brandon Ogles, then vice-chair of the Republican caucus, at the time also recorded the staffer discussing the text. He shared a copy of the recording with POLITICO. The member of leadership in question denies sending the text. The comments were allegedly made while Jones was taking part in protests following George Floyd’s murder by police.
A member presenting a bill about sanctuary cities in 2018 used the term “wetback” while telling a story. On two separate occasions in 2020, Republican legislators publicly cracked jokes about Black people eating fried chicken.
And on and on.
Politics changes over time, of course. It was the Tennessee Democrats who led the charge to install the Forrest bust in the 1970s and who made life difficult for Republicans when they ran the state legislature for decades.
The state’s Republicans may very well transition too. Perhaps — though there is not an ounce of evidence supporting this theory — that bygone era of Howard Baker bipartisanship will be resuscitated.
Friday, April 7, 2023
Last Call For A Double Judgment In Gilead
A federal judge in Texas blocked U.S. government approval of a key abortion medication Friday, siding with abortion foes in an unprecedented lawsuit and potentially upending nationwide access to the pill widely used to terminate pregnancies.
In a competing opinion late Friday, a federal judge in Washington state ruled in a separate case involving mifepristone that the drug is safe and effective. U.S. District Judge Thomas Rice ordered the Food and Drug Administration to preserve “the status quo” and retain access in the 17 states — along with D.C. — that are behind the lawsuit seeking to protect medication abortion.
It seems inevitable the issue will move to the Supreme Court, and the dueling opinions and appeals could make that sooner rather than later.
The highly anticipated ruling from Texas puts on hold the FDA’s approval of mifepristone, a medication first cleared for use in the United States in 2000. It was the first time a court ordered the FDA to remove a medication from the market despite opposition from the agency and the drug’s manufacturer. The ruling will not go into effect for seven days to give the government time to appeal.
U.S. District Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk, a nominee of President Donald Trump with long-held antiabortion views, agreed with the conservative groups seeking to reverse the FDA’s approval of mifepristone as safe and effective, including in states where abortion rights are protected.
“The Court does not second-guess FDA’s decision-making lightly,” Kacsmaryk wrote in the 67-page opinion. “But here, FDA acquiesced on its legitimate safety concerns — in violation of its statutory duty — based on plainly unsound reasoning and studies that did not support its conclusions.” He added that the agency had faced “significant political pressure” to “increase ‘access’ to chemical abortion.”
Biden administration officials said they were reviewing both decisions Friday to determine next steps. The pair of lawsuits followed the Supreme Court’s elimination of the constitutional right to abortion last June, which allowed states to outlaw or sharply restrict the procedure.
The dueling and complicated rulings would put pressure on the FDA and the Biden administration on how to enforce the new mandates set by these rulings.
Medication-induced abortion — the most common method of abortion in the United States — has become increasingly contentious since the high court overturned Roe v. Wade.
Jobapalooza, Circus Of The Damned Edition
Nonfarm payrolls rose about in line with expectations in March as the labor market showed increased signs of slowing.
The Labor Department reported Friday that payrolls grew by 236,000 for the month, compared to the Dow Jones estimate for 238,000 and below the upwardly revised 326,000 in February.
The unemployment rate ticked lower to 3.5%, against expectations that it would hold at 3.6%, with the decrease coming as labor force participation increased to its highest level since before the Covid pandemic.
Though it was close to what economists had expected, the total was the lowest monthly gain since December 2020 and comes amid efforts from the Federal Reserve to slow labor demand in order to cool inflation.
Along with the payroll gains came a 0.3% increase in average hourly earnings, pushing the 12-month increase to 4.2%, the lowest level since June 2021.
It was midway through Representative Kevin McCarthy’s drawn-out battle for the House speakership when Representative Jodey C. Arrington of Texas, one of his public supporters, began quietly approaching colleagues to see whether they would be open to backing his No. 2, Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana, instead.
The support was not there. When Mr. Arrington, a fourth-term Republican who chairs the Budget Committee, floated the idea with Representative Jim Banks of Indiana, for instance, the answer was a hard no. Mr. Banks promised to lead the opposition if Mr. Scalise tried to mount a serious challenge to Mr. McCarthy, according to two people who said Mr. Banks told them about the incident. They spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private discussions.
Mr. McCarthy eventually won the speakership and promised not to bear grudges against the right-wing holdouts, who extracted major policy and personnel concessions in exchange for their votes. But the suspicions and divisions exposed during that process remain and are spilling out into the open as Mr. McCarthy faces his most consequential test: reaching a deal with President Biden to avert a catastrophic default on the nation’s debt as soon as this summer.
Mr. McCarthy has told colleagues he has no confidence in Mr. Arrington, the man responsible for delivering a budget framework laying out the spending cuts that Republicans have said they will demand in exchange for any move to increase the debt limit.
Aside from the perceived disloyalty, Mr. McCarthy regards Mr. Arrington, a former official in the George W. Bush administration, as incompetent, according to more than half a dozen people familiar with his thinking, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private conversations.
The tension has burst into public view, contributing to confusion and mixed messages from Republican leaders about what their plan is and when they might be ready to share it.
In a sign of how difficult things could get for GOP leaders, members of the hardline House Freedom Caucus are already talking about the cudgels they have at their disposal to use in those upcoming fights – namely, the power of any single member to force a floor vote on ousting the speaker. Restoring the procedural tool, known as the “motion to vacate,” was one of the key concessions Kevin McCarthy made in his bid to become speaker.
“It hasn’t come up as far as in a serious conversation, as this needs to be enacted. But as we look at these issues … It does come up from time to time, as we game plan and we look at all of the alternatives and contingency plans that could play out over the next two years,” said freshman Rep. Eli Crane of Arizona, one of the McCarthy holdouts who ended up voting “present” on the last ballot.
Racist Top Tennessee
In an extraordinary move, Tennessee's Republican-led House voted Thursday to expel two of three Democratic lawmakers who recently led a raucous protest from the House floor calling for gun law reforms.
Reps. Justin Jones, D-Nashville, and Justin Pearson, D-Memphis, were both removed from the body with votes falling along party lines, in a disciplinary measure that's only been used twice since the 1800s. The votes were 72 - 25 and 69 - 26 respectively. Together, they represent a combined constituency of about 130,000 people.
Rep. Gloria Johnson, D-Knoxville, who represents about 70,000 Tenneseans, escaped the same fate by a single vote, with a final count of 65 - 30.
Following the failed vote, Johnson was asked by reporters if she thought there was a reason she'd had a different outcome. "I'll answer your question," she said. "It might have to do with the color of our skin."
Both Jones and Pearson are Black and Johnson is white.
The expelled lawmakers conceded they didn't follow decorum by walking on the floor — what is called the well — and speaking without being formally recognized.
Republicans said the trio's actions amounted to an insurrection.
The trio, whom supporters call "The Tennessee Three," have already been stripped of their committee assignments.
I'm thinking this was done not only because of the fact these were the two youngest members of the Tennessee House, Black, Democrats, and willing to speak out, but as retribution for a Black DA in Manhattan daring to charge Donald Trump. The justification was of course "insurrection", and the message is pretty clear, that Republicans will do what they can to hurt Democrats that speak out now because it's "worse than January 6th".
This is petty, openly racist retribution and naked authoritarianism, and more of it is coming, because these assholes will not stop until they have complete power.
Thursday, April 6, 2023
Here Comes...And There Goes...The Judge
Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Janet Protasiewicz was elected to the Wisconsin Supreme Court on Tuesday, giving liberals control of the court for the first time in 15 years — but some Republican lawmakers are already eyeing a potential impeachment after winning a supermajority in the state Senate.
Wisconsin Republicans won in a separate race this week — the state Senate's 8th District — giving them a supermajority in the chamber. That means that the GOP will have the ability to pursue removal proceedings of certain elected officials if the Assembly votes to impeach them, NBC News reports.
Republican Assemblyman Dan Knodl, who won the 8th district, said in the final days of his campaign that he would consider impeaching Protasiewicz from her position as a judge if he was elected.
In an interview with WISN-TV last week, Knodl said that the GOP's supermajority in the state Senate would give them "more authority in the areas of oversight and accountability of elected officials and appointed officials."
"If there are some that are out there that are corrupt, that are failing at their tasks, then we have the opportunity to hold them accountable … up to impeachment," Knodl said. "Janet Protasiewicz is a Circuit Court judge right now in Milwaukee, and she has failed."
When asked if he would support her impeachment, Knodl replied, "I certainly would consider it." However, it is not clear whether he was only referring to her position on the Milwaukee Circuit Court, or if he would also consider impeaching her if she won the Supreme Court race.
Democrats are now concerned that Knodl's remarks are a precursor to Republicans trying to impeach statewide elected officials, like Protasiewicz, with their new Senate supermajority.
"There's going to be a supermajority in the state Senate that will allow the legislators in control of the state Senate to do what they were threatening back in November, which is to start impeachment proceedings," said Jodi Habush Sinykin, who lost to Knodl, in an interview with WISN-TV before the election.
Knodl is one of the 15 Wisconsin state lawmakers who tried to get former Vice President Mike Pence to refuse to certify the 2020 election results. He narrowly won the election on Tuesday after the seat was left vacant by Republican incumbent Alberta Darling, who retired in November.
His win gave Republicans a two-thirds majority in the Senate, giving them the ability to override vetoes from the governor, and convict and remove officials in impeachment trials.
The Wisconsin Constitution outlines that the state Assembly can impeach with a simple majority "all civil officers of this state for corrupt conduct in office, or for crimes and misdemeanors," and the Wisconsin Supreme Court has previously ruled that those officers include the governor, lieutenant governor and judges.
"A spokesperson for the Wisconsin Republican Party referred NBC News to recent comments from another GOP state senator who indicated that the Senate would not advance any prospective impeachment proceedings against Protasiewicz," the outlet reported.
Given the importance of the race, I nearly guarantee you that Republicans are going to try this, if only to stop the new 4-3 majority from ruling against the worst gerrymander in the country. They have to get rid of her, or she'll expose the WI GOP as the racketeering operation that it is.
A Test Run For Tester's Run
A Republican-backed bill to create a “jungle primary” that would box-out third party candidates in the next U.S. Senate race in Montana has advanced.
Senate Bill 566 would create a primary system in which the top two candidates who win the most votes advance to the general election, regardless of party. Right now, each party has separate primaries and advances a winner.
Sen. Greg Hertz, a Republican from Polson, said the bill aims to ensure the most popular candidate wins for a high profile office.
“These are six year terms and to me, if we’re going to send someone to Washington, D.C., they should have the majority support of our voters,” Hertz said.
Hertz called his bill a test run as it includes a sunset date in 2025.
The bill would take effect ahead of the 2024 campaign, when U.S. Sen. Jon Tester is up for reelection. Tester is the last remaining statewide elected Democrat and his bid to hold office is expected to be highly competitive.
In 2012, Tester faced both a Republican and Libertarian candidate. Rep. Hertz highlighted that election saying Tester won with less than 50% of the vote.
Senate Minority Leader Pat Flowers pointed out that in 2022, U.S. Congressman Ryan Zinke also won with less than 50% of the vote due to a third-party candidate, but the bill won’t address U.S. House races. Flowers said it’s obvious the bill is targeted at Tester.
“Let’s not kid ourselves, this is just brazen partisanship targeting a single race. This isn’t fair, this isn’t what Montanans want, they don’t want one party rule,” Flowers said.
The Montana Libertarian Party said in a statement that they oppose the bill, calling it an unabashed attempt to eliminate Libertarian access to the ballot. Libertarians tend to pull votes from Republican candidates.
A Supremely Kept Man
For more than two decades, Thomas has accepted luxury trips virtually every year from the Dallas businessman without disclosing them, documents and interviews show. A public servant who has a salary of $285,000, he has vacationed on Crow’s superyacht around the globe. He flies on Crow’s Bombardier Global 5000 jet. He has gone with Crow to the Bohemian Grove, the exclusive California all-male retreat, and to Crow’s sprawling ranch in East Texas. And Thomas typically spends about a week every summer at Crow’s private resort in the Adirondacks.
The extent and frequency of Crow’s apparent gifts to Thomas have no known precedent in the modern history of the U.S. Supreme Court.
These trips appeared nowhere on Thomas’ financial disclosures. His failure to report the flights appears to violate a law passed after Watergate that requires justices, judges, members of Congress and federal officials to disclose most gifts, two ethics law experts said. He also should have disclosed his trips on the yacht, these experts said.
Thomas did not respond to a detailed list of questions.
In a statement, Crow acknowledged that he’d extended “hospitality” to the Thomases “over the years,” but said that Thomas never asked for any of it and it was “no different from the hospitality we have extended to our many other dear friends.”
Through his largesse, Crow has gained a unique form of access, spending days in private with one of the most powerful people in the country. By accepting the trips, Thomas has broken long-standing norms for judges’ conduct, ethics experts and four current or retired federal judges said.
“It’s incomprehensible to me that someone would do this,” said Nancy Gertner, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. When she was on the bench, Gertner said, she was so cautious about appearances that she wouldn’t mention her title when making dinner reservations: “It was a question of not wanting to use the office for anything other than what it was intended.”
Virginia Canter, a former government ethics lawyer who served in administrations of both parties, said Thomas “seems to have completely disregarded his higher ethical obligations.”
“When a justice’s lifestyle is being subsidized by the rich and famous, it absolutely corrodes public trust,” said Canter, now at the watchdog group CREW. “Quite frankly, it makes my heart sink.”
ProPublica uncovered the details of Thomas’ travel by drawing from flight records, internal documents distributed to Crow’s employees and interviews with dozens of people ranging from his superyacht’s staff to members of the secretive Bohemian Club to an Indonesian scuba diving instructor.
Federal judges sit in a unique position of public trust. They have lifetime tenure, a privilege intended to insulate them from the pressures and potential corruption of politics. A code of conduct for federal judges below the Supreme Court requires them to avoid even the “appearance of impropriety.” Members of the high court, Chief Justice John Roberts has written, “consult” that code for guidance. The Supreme Court is left almost entirely to police itself.
There are few restrictions on what gifts justices can accept. That’s in contrast to the other branches of government. Members of Congress are generally prohibited from taking gifts worth $50 or more and would need pre-approval from an ethics committee to take many of the trips Thomas has accepted from Crow.
Thomas’ approach to ethics has already attracted public attention. Last year, Thomas didn’t recuse himself from cases that touched on the involvement of his wife, Ginni, in efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. While his decision generated outcry, it could not be appealed.
Crow met Thomas after he became a justice. The pair have become genuine friends, according to people who know both men. Over the years, some details of Crow’s relationship with the Thomases have emerged. In 2011, The New York Times reported on Crow’s generosity toward the justice. That same year, Politico revealed that Crow had given half a million dollars to a Tea Party group founded by Ginni Thomas, which also paid her a $120,000 salary. But the full scale of Crow’s benefactions has never been revealed.
Long an influential figure in pro-business conservative politics, Crow has spent millions on ideological efforts to shape the law and the judiciary. Crow and his firm have not had a case before the Supreme Court since Thomas joined it, though the court periodically hears major cases that directly impact the real estate industry. The details of his discussions with Thomas over the years remain unknown, and it is unclear if Crow has had any influence on the justice’s views.
Wednesday, April 5, 2023
Last Call For A Pence-ive Decision
Mike Pence has essentially cut a deal to testify against Donald Trump about January 6th, as the feds have put him in a corner and given him precisely one way out.
Former Vice President Mike Pence will not appeal a federal judge’s order that he testify in the special counsel’s probe of former President Donald Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election, his adviser announced Wednesday.
The decision not to fight the order could provide special counsel Jack Smith with remarkable access to one of the key people with critical insight into Trump’s thinking and efforts to cling to power.
Last week, Judge James Boasberg, the chief judge of U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, largely dismissed efforts mounted by Pence and Trump to limit his testimony and avoid handing over documents.
Boasberg acknowledged a constitutional argument against forcing Pence to testify in front of a grand jury about matters related to his role as Senate president during the certification of the election on Jan. 6, but nevertheless concluded that immunity should not prevent Pence from testifying about conversations related to alleged “illegality” on Trump’s part.
“Vice President Mike Pence swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution, and his claim that the Biden Special Counsel’s unprecedented subpoena was unconstitutional under the Speech or Debate Clause was an important one made to preserve the Separation of Powers outlined by our Founders,” Pence adviser Devin O’Malley said in a statement Wednesday. “In the Court’s decision, that principle prevailed. The Court’s landmark and historic ruling affirmed for the first time in history that the Speech or Debate Clause extends to the Vice President of the United States. Having vindicated that principle of the Constitution, Vice President Pence will not appeal the Judge’s ruling and will comply with the subpoena as required by law.”
It’s unclear exactly when Pence will appear before the grand jury in Washington, according to a source familiar with the matter, and the case remains under seal. Trump’s attorneys could still appeal Boasberg’s ruling. Last week, his legal team filed an appeal to block the testimony of several of his senior aides.
We'll see where things go from here.