ReportWire

Tag: Charles Schumer

  • Deal between the US and China is undoing damage from a self-inflicted trade war

    [ad_1]

    BUSAN, South Korea (AP) — Three-digit tariffs are off the table, but import duties on each other are higher than in January.

    Rare earth materials will flow more smoothly, but China has put in place an export permitting regime that it can tighten or loosen as needed.

    Port fees will go away, but only for one year.

    And Beijing is again buying U.S. soybeans after it had abruptly cut off American farmers.

    After months of posturing, arguing and threatening, U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping have essentially turned back the clock. While the meeting between the two leaders was hailed by Trump as a “roaring success,” the agreement that came out of it may only serve to undo some of the damages Trump inflicted with his trade war upon his return to the White House.

    “It is hard to see what major gains the U.S. has made in the bilateral relationship relative to where things stood before Trump took office,” said Eswar Prasad, an economist at Cornell University.

    On the Senate floor, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on Thursday denounced the deal out of South Korea as leaving the U.S. as “no better off.”

    “If anything, things are worse: Prices have gone up and China has agreed to nothing of substance that will improve trade between our nations,” the Democrat senator said, adding that Trump “started a trade war, created a giant mess for businesses, consumers, and soybean farmers, and then he celebrates for trying to clean up the very mess he created in the first place.”

    Stay up to date with the news and the best of AP by following our WhatsApp channel.


    Follow on

    Nevertheless, the deal has injected a degree of stability, giving the world’s two largest economies — as well as the rest of the world — time and room to readjust.

    Washington and Beijing still need to finalize their agreements, a process that always has the potential for fresh disputes. But for now, Xi appears interested in moving past the latest tensions.

    In an official statement, Xi referred to “recent twists and turns” that “offered some lessons for both sides.” He said they should be “focusing on the benefits of cooperation rather than falling into a vicious cycle of mutual retaliation.”

    Both sides reduce tariffs, resume soybean sales to China

    Trump fired the first shot in the trade war in February when he imposed an additional 10% tariff on Chinese goods over the allegation that Beijing failed to stem the flow of chemicals used to make fentanyl. That soared to as much as 145% after China retaliated, but Trump walked it back following market meltdowns.

    The two sides in May slashed their massive tariffs to 10% on each other, while Washington retained the 20% fentanyl-related tariff, and China its retaliatory tariffs of 10% or 15% on U.S. farm goods.

    Now, Trump said he has removed one 10% fentanyl tariff in exchange for Beijing’s cooperation in fighting the illicit drug.

    U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins said China would also withdraw the retaliatory tariffs on U.S. agricultural products. A spokesperson for the Chinese Ministry of Commerce said Beijing would “adjust accordingly” its countermeasures without giving details.

    In addition, China has agreed to buy 12 million metric tons of U.S. beans through January, and will buy at least 25 million metric tons annually for next three years, Rollins said on Thursday.

    That compares to China buying 17 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans in the first eight months of this year but importing zero in September. In 2024, China bought 22 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans, according to state media.

    Although China did not confirm the details of the latest soybean deal, the spokesperson for the Chinese commerce ministry said the two sides have reached “consensus” to expand agricultural trade.

    One-year truce on export controls and port fees

    In April, China used its monopoly power in the processing of critical minerals to institute a permitting requirement for the export of several rare earth elements. On October 9, Beijing expanded the export rules, apparently in response to the U.S. decision to extend export controls to businesses affiliated with already-blacklisted foreign companies.

    Furious, Trump threatened to impose a new 100% tariff on China, but the two sides managed to cool down in time for Trump to meet Xi in South Korea.

    Beijing on Thursday said it would pause for a year the rare earth export rules from October to “conduct research to refine specific plans,” while the U.S. will suspend its affiliate rule for one year.

    The delay by Beijing “provides just enough time for the United States to accelerate investment in capabilities and innovation for rare earths and permanent magnets,” said Wade Senti, president of the U.S. permanent magnet company AML. “This needs to be on warp speed and at a scale never seen before since the COVID-19 response,” he said.

    Another fresh thorn was the U.S. introduction of port fees in October targeting China-linked vessels, as part of a plan to restore America’s shipbuilding capabilitie s. Beijing answered with countermeasures against the U.S.

    The port fees on each other are not removed but will be suspended for one year, the Chinese commerce ministry said.

    The future is still uncertain

    Whether Trump accepts a return to the status quo or pushes to address fundamental issues that have persisted for years between the U.S. and China remains unclear. Nothing about Thursday’s meeting — the first between Trump and Xi in six years — affects Chinese manufacturing dominance that Trump has blamed for the loss of American blue collar jobs.

    Sean Stein, president of the U.S.-China Business Council, called the latest developments “very encouraging” and added: “We hope that future negotiations will address long-standing market access barriers, help level the playing field for U.S. companies, and bring long-term predictability to the bilateral trade relationship.”

    There are more opportunities on the horizon to keep working on these challenges. Trump said he will go to China in April and Xi will visit the U.S. after that.

    If Trump isn’t successful, this period could be remembered for a lot of sound and fury but no change in the basic trajectory of China’s ascendant economy.

    “Generally, Trump grows impatient with anything beyond the immediate, and it is the Chinese that play for longer term advantage,” said Kurt Campbell, a former deputy secretary of state in the Biden administration and now chairman of The Asia Group.

    ___

    Tang and Wiseman reported from Washington. AP writer Josh Funk in Omaha, Neb., contributed to the report

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • FACT FOCUS: Democrats did not shut down the government to give health care to ‘illegal immigrants’

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump and other high-ranking Republicans claim Democrats forced the government shutdown fight because they want to give free health care to immigrants in the U.S. illegally.

    Democrats are trying to extend tax credits that make health insurance premiums more affordable on marketplaces established by the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare, and reverse Medicaid cuts in Trump’s big bill passed this summer. But immigrants who entered the country illegally are not eligible for either program.

    Here’s a closer look at the facts:

    CLAIM: Democrats shut down the government because they want to give free health care to immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally.

    THE FACTS: This is false. Democrats say they are pushing for the inclusion of key health care provisions in the next congressional spending package. In particular, they are seeking an extension of tax credits that millions of Americans use to buy insurance on the Affordable Care Act exchange and a reversal of Medicaid cuts made in the bill Trump signed into law in July. However, immigrants in the U.S. illegally are not eligible for any federal health care programs, including insurance provided through the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid. Hospitals do receive Medicaid reimbursements — which would be reduced under Trump’s bill — for emergency care that they are obligated to provide to people who meet other Medicaid eligibility requirements but do not have an eligible immigration status, according to KFF, a nonprofit health policy research, polling and news organization. This spending accounted for less than 1% of total Medicaid spending between fiscal years 2017 and 2023.

    Sabrina Corlette, founder and co-director of Georgetown University’s Center on Health Insurance Reforms, called the Republicans’ claims “a flat-out lie.”

    “The law is very clear,” Corlette said.

    Speaking in the Oval Office on Tuesday about a deal with Pfizer to lower drug prices, Trump predicted the shutdown and made the false claim: ”We’ll probably have a shutdown because one of the things they want to do is they want to give incredible Medicare, Cadillac, the Cadillac Medicare, to illegal immigrants.” He added later that “they want to have illegal aliens come into our country and get massive health care at the cost to everybody else.”

    Asked by a reporter to clarify what his comments referred to, Trump said “when an illegal person comes, a person who came into our country illegally, therefore breaking the law,” adding that “we just as a country cannot afford to take care of millions of people who have broken the law coming in.”

    Other Republicans, including Vice President JD Vance and House Speaker Mike Johnson, have made similar claims.

    The Senate’s Democratic leader, Sen. Chuck Schumer, rebutted these allegations, calling them “a lie, plain and simple.”

    Immigrants in the U.S. illegally are not eligible for insurance bought on the Affordable Care Act exchange or for Medicaid. To qualify for the former, an enrollee must live in the U.S., be a U.S. citizen or have another lawful status and not be incarcerated. A Medicaid enrollee must meet certain financial requirements, be a resident of the state in which Medicaid is being received and be a U.S. citizen or have a qualifying lawful status.

    Health care premiums for millions of Americans could skyrocket if Congress fails to extend tax credits that many people use to buy insurance through Affordable Care Act marketplaces. Those subsidies were put in place during the COVID-19 pandemic but are set to expire.

    Among the Medicaid cuts Democrats are seeking to reverse is a reduction to reimbursements hospitals receive when they perform emergency care they are legally mandated to provide on people who would qualify for Medicaid if not for their immigration status. This would affect the 40 states, plus Washington, D.C., that have adopted a Medicaid expansion created by the Affordable Care Act.

    The law Trump signed would also restrict the eligibility of lawfully present immigrants such as refugees and asylees for insurance through the Affordable Care Act, Medicaid and Medicare.

    Some states use their own money, not federal funds, to provide health care to immigrants who don’t have lawful status. An earlier version of Trump’s tax breaks and spending cuts bill tried to curb these programs, but the provisions did not make it into the final version.

    “It’s a compelling talking point to say that Democrats want to provide health care to undocumented immigrants, but it’s just not true in terms of the cuts they’re trying to reverse,” said Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF.

    ___

    This story was first published on Oct. 1, 2025. It was published again on Oct. 3, 2025, to correct that to qualify for insurance bought on the Affordable Care Act exchange, not for Medicaid, an enrollee must live in the U.S., be a U.S. citizen or have another lawful status and not be incarcerated.

    ___

    Find AP Fact Checks here: https://apnews.com/APFactCheck.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The Clock Is Ticking on a Lose-Lose Government Shutdown

    [ad_1]

    Republicans have advertised, or perhaps threatened, that they will seize more power if there is a shutdown: Last Wednesday, Russell Vought, the head of the Office of Management and Budget, released a memo in which, according to Politico the office “told agencies to identify programs, projects and activities where discretionary funding will lapse Oct. 1 and no alternative funding source is available.” The memo also revealed that OMB was instructing agencies to begin planning so-called reduction-in-force plans “that would go beyond standard furloughs, permanently eliminating jobs in programs not consistent with President Donald Trump’s priorities in the event of a shutdown.”

    Lest you think Vought is making an idle threat, he is not. He is one of the architects of Project 2025. Vought believes that the federal government is “costly, inefficient, and deeply in debt.”

    “If I were a Democrat and Russ Vought was in charge of OMB, I would have nightmares about what Russ could do that you couldn’t undo when government reopens,” Erick Erickson, a conservative talk show host who’s reportedly known the OMB director for decades, told The Boston Globe’s Tal Kopan. “Russ has waited for this moment his whole life.”

    This is the threat Republicans used when government funding was running out earlier in the year, and ultimately Schumer and the Democrats ended up supporting an extension. But a lot has happened since March; the Big Beautiful Bill has expanded ICE to the tune of billions of dollars, and Republicans have continued to DOGE the federal government. And the ruling party’s popularity has been in decline.

    If the government shuts down, Vought and Trump “will have enormous latitude to determine which services, programs, and employees can be sidelined, decisions that could go far beyond what has occurred during past shutdowns,” writes Max Stier, chief executive of the Partnership for Public Service. This is a real worry; Democrats have a much lower pain threshold than Republicans. Republicans want to shrink the government because it’s part of their larger gestalt, whereas Democrats worry that if thousands of Americans lose access to health care it might be hard for them to get it again.

    When I talked to Democrats, it really felt like they wanted a deal and thought maybe they could push the administration into some kind of agreement. Probably all that was squashed last night when Trump posted a vulgar AI-generated deepfake video with mariachi music and Jeffries in a sombrero. Ultimately Democrats are going to have the same problem everyone else does when they’re negotiating with Trump: He’s Trump.

    [ad_2]

    Molly Jong-Fast

    Source link

  • Democrats Will Have to Shift on Israel. But When?

    [ad_1]

    Photo: Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

    Last week, the Democratic National Committee failed to advance two competing resolutions that would have clarified the party’s stance on Israel’s war in Gaza. One proposal, voted down, called for the suspension of military aid to Israel. A second resolution, advanced by DNC chair Ken Martin, called for “secure and unrestricted delivery of humanitarian assistance” in Gaza, reaffirmed the DNC’s backing of a cease-fire and the release of hostages, and stated the committee supports a two-state solution. Martin, though, withdrew his own resolution, hoping instead to discuss it with the committee further. “There’s divide in our party on this issue,” Martin said. “This is a moment that calls for shared dialog. It calls for shared advocacy.”

    DNC resolutions, on their own, mean little as Israel continues to bombard and starve out Gaza, where the death toll exceeds 60,000. Donald Trump controls the government, not the Democrats, and he has enabled, like his predecessor Joe Biden, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu at every turn, pumping the nation with armaments and sanctioning all military action. But the feebleness of the Democratic Party is notable; its leaders truly have no sense of the current moment. Half of Americans now believe Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, according to the latest Quinnipiac poll, and 60 percent oppose sending more military aid for its war against Hamas. The numbers are more stark when broken down along party lines: A stunning 75 percent of Democrats in the poll do not want to send more military aid.

    Martin, who took over the beleaguered party this year, can’t shoulder all the blame. He is straining to build consensus among party apparatchiks and a donor class that is badly out of touch. If the war in Gaza does not quite reach the scope of Vietnam — no American troops are deployed, and the protest marches aren’t nearly as large or intense — it is fast becoming a generation-defining issue that is threatening to leave the old-guard Democrats in the dust. Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries, the two Democratic leaders in Congress, wouldn’t dare oppose sending more military aid to Israel even though a full three-quarters of their party, in a nonpartisan poll, now demand this. The Israel hawk constituency is vanishing from the Democratic Party. Netanyahu’s disproportionate response to the October 7 attacks, which killed more than 1,100 Israeli civilians, is deeply alienating to the left, as is the general political orientation of the Jewish state. An American liberal has nothing in common with the right-wing, ethnonationalist parties in the government.

    For now, the bipartisan consensus around blind Israel support will hold because Democratic leaders are comfortable ignoring their constituents. DNC members, who represent a cloistered minority, can’t even bring themselves to back a resolution that would be common sense to most of the American electorate. The question remains how long this status quo can hold. The John Fetterman wing of the Democratic Party, which might just be a constituency of one very soon, will never budge. But other hawks are giving ground. Two Democrats very close to AIPAC, Ritchie Torres and Cory Booker, have acknowledged the starvation in Gaza with Torres going even further, likening the war in Gaza to the “quagmire” of the Iraq War. Even ardent defenders of Israel mostly admit now that Netanyahu’s version of total war — killing civilians indiscriminately, immiserating as many Gazans as possible — isn’t furthering the cause of the Jewish state or even leading to the release of all the hostages. Backers of the two-state solution understand that Netanyahu has no intention of ever granting the Palestinians their own functioning country with land in Gaza and the West Bank. The road ahead is very dark.

    Democratic leaders will eventually shift — it’s more a question of when. Jeffries, in 2027, may be Speaker of the House, and if rank-and-file lawmakers demand that the U.S. gets tougher with Israel, he will have to listen to them if he wants to keep control of his caucus. Barring an unforeseen shock, Zohran Mamdani, a 33-year-old democratic socialist, will be the next mayor of New York City. A pro-Palestine Democrat triumphing in the city with America’s largest Jewish population cannot be ignored, especially since plenty of non-Orthodox Jews were willing to vote for him. Before Mamdani, an Israel hawk could argue that pro-Palestine politics wouldn’t play well with a large electorate. Mamdani’s triumph in a primary in which more than 1 million voters put that to rest — and a general election win — would underscore the point even more powerfully. (Disclosure: In 2018, when I ran for office, Mamdani was my campaign manager.)

    In the near future, perhaps, the DNC will find the gumption to back a resolution that is in line with the rest of the electorate. The Democrats running for president in 2028 will be forced, in time, to cater to these voters — those who are against a taxpayer-funded slaughter. The old consensus around Israel will die, and it won’t come back.

    [ad_2]

    Ross Barkan

    Source link

  • FACT FOCUS: A look at claims made during the second night of the Democratic National Convention

    FACT FOCUS: A look at claims made during the second night of the Democratic National Convention

    [ad_1]

    The second night of the Democratic National Convention was filled with excitement as a celebratory roll call marked Vice President Kamala Harris’ nomination to be the party’s candidate for president. As speaker after speaker addressed the convention extolling her qualities to lead the country, they also spelled out differences with her opponents, former President Donald Trump and Ohio Sen. JD Vance, at times misrepresenting the Republicans’ stances.

    Here’s a look at the facts.

    Missing context on Vance and the child tax credit

    Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer: “Senate Republicans pretend to care about middle-class families, but they voted no on expanding the child tax credit. And JD Vance didn’t even show up to vote.”

    THE FACTS: Vance did indeed skip an August vote on a bill to expand the child tax credit and restore some tax breaks for businesses.

    The bill failed to advance in the Senate as Republicans largely opposed the measure, arguing that they would be in position to get a better deal next year, The Associated Press reported at the time.

    But there’s more to the story.

    Vance has also said he would support expanding the child tax credit, currently at $2,000, to $5,000. He said the Senate vote was a “show vote,” when bills are designed to fail but allow parties to highlight issues before voters.

    The cost of Trump’s economic plan

    Schumer on Trump’s plan to create tariffs: “He wants to impose what is, in effect, a national sales tax on everyday products and basic necessities that we import from other countries. It will mean higher prices on just about every one of your daily needs. Donald Trump’s plan would cost a typical family $3,900 a year.”

    THE FACTS: Trump has proposed imposing a tariff of anywhere from 10% to 20% on all imports and up to 60% on imports from China.

    It’s Day 3 of the DNC, and there are 75 days until Election Day. Here’s what to know:

    Economists do expect it would raise prices on many goods. The Tax Policy Center, a joint project of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution, estimates it would reduce average incomes in the top 60% of earners by 1.8%. And the Center for American Progress Action Fund, a progressive advocacy group, has calculated that the higher tariffs would cost households an extra $3,900 a year.

    However, Trump has said the tariff revenue could be used to cut other taxes, which would reduce the overall cost of the policy.

    Trump’s changing views on the Affordable Care Act

    New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham: “Donald Trump and JD Vance want to dismantle our healthcare system, repeal the Affordable Care Act, and limit protections for preexisting conditions.”

    New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham speaking during the Democratic National Convention Tuesday, Aug. 20, 2024, in Chicago. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

    THE FACTS: Trump has repeatedly promised to replace former President Barack Obama’s health care law with a plan of his own. For example, three years after a Congress fully controlled by Republicans failed to repeal “Obamacare” in 2017, Trump urged the Supreme Court to overturn it.

    More recently, the Republican presidential nominee threatened to reopen the contentious fight.

    “The cost of Obamacare is out of control, plus, it’s not good Healthcare,” he wrote in a November 2023 post on his Truth Social site. “I’m seriously looking at alternatives. We had a couple of Republican Senators who campaigned for 6 years against it, and then raised their hands not to terminate it. It was a low point for the Republican Party, but we should never give up!”

    But Trump backed off a potential repeal in April. He said in a video posted to Truth Social that he is “not running to replace the ACA” and that he intends to make it “much better, stronger and far less expensive.”

    Another misrepresentation of Trump’s bleach comment

    What to know about the 2024 Election

    Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, on Trump during the COVID-19 pandemic: “And Donald, well, Donald told us to inject bleach.”

    THE FACTS: This claim was also made on the first day of the Democratic National Convention by Rep. Robert Garcia of California.

    It’s an overstatement. Trump actually asked whether it would be impossible to inject disinfectant into the lungs.

    “And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in one minute,” he said at an April 2020 press conference. “And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning, because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it’d be interesting to check that, so that you’re going to have to use medical doctors with, but it sounds interesting to me. So, we’ll see, but the whole concept of the light, the way it kills it in one minute. That’s pretty powerful.”

    ___

    Find AP Fact Checks here: https://apnews.com/APFactCheck.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Guest lineups for the Sunday news shows

    Guest lineups for the Sunday news shows

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — ABC’s “This Week” — Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill.; Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson.

    ___

    NBC’s “Meet the Press” — Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y, and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.; Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, D-Mich.

    ___

    CBS’ “Face the Nation” — Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz.; Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio; Gov. Andy Beshear, D-Ky.; Anne Milgram, administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration; Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago President Austan Goolsbee.

    ___

    CNN’s “State of the Union” — Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y.; Govs. J.B. Pritzker, D-Ill., and Chris Sununu, R-N.H.

    ___

    “Fox News Sunday” — Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, Republican vice presidential nominee; Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House Republicans send Mayorkas impeachment articles to the Senate, forcing a trial

    House Republicans send Mayorkas impeachment articles to the Senate, forcing a trial

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON – House impeachment managers walked two articles of impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas across the Capitol to the Senate on Tuesday, forcing senators to convene a trial on the allegations that he has “willfully and systematically” refused to enforce immigration laws.

    While the Senate is obligated to hold a trial under the rules of impeachment once the charges are walked across the Capitol, the proceedings may not last long. Democrats are expected to try to dismiss or table the charges later this week before the full arguments get underway.

    After walking the articles to the Senate, the Republican prosecutors appointed by House Speaker Mike Johnson stood in the well of the Senate. The Senate sergeant-at-arms, the chamber’s top security official, called the session to order with a “hear ye! hear ye!” and a notice that “all persons are commanded to keep silence, on pain of imprisonment.”

    The House Homeland Security Committee chairman, Mark Green, a Tennessee Republican who is one of the impeachment managers, read the articles aloud as most senators sat in their seats, following along with their own paper copies.

    Republicans have argued there should be a full trial. As Johnson signed the articles Monday in preparation for sending them across the Capitol, he said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer should convene a trial to “hold those who engineered this crisis to full account.”

    Schumer “is the only impediment to delivering accountability for the American people,” Johnson said. “Pursuant to the Constitution, the House demands a trial.”

    After Tuesday’s ceremonial procession and presentation of the articles, the proceedings will not begin until Wednesday. Senators will be sworn in as jurors, turning the chamber into the court of impeachment. The Senate will then issue a summons to Mayorkas to inform him of the charges and ask for a written answer. He will not have to appear.

    The entire process could be done within hours on Wednesday. Majority Democrats have said the GOP case against Mayorkas doesn’t rise to the “high crimes and misdemeanors” laid out as a bar for impeachment in the Constitution, and Schumer probably has enough votes to end the trial immediately if he decides to do so.

    Schumer has said he wants to “address this issue as expeditiously as possible.”

    “Impeachment should never be used to settle a policy disagreement,” Schumer said. “That would set a horrible precedent for the Congress.”

    The House narrowly voted in February to impeach Mayorkas for his handling of the U.S.-Mexico border. House Republicans charged in two articles of impeachment that Mayorkas has not only refused to enforce existing law but also breached the public trust by lying to Congress and saying the border was secure. It was the first time in nearly 150 years a Cabinet secretary was impeached.

    Since then, Johnson has delayed sending the articles to the Senate for weeks while both chambers finished work on government funding legislation and took a two-week recess. Johnson had said he would send them to the Senate last week, but he punted again after Senate Republicans said they wanted more time to prepare.

    South Dakota Sen. John Thune, the Senate’s No. 2 Republican, has said the Senate needs to hold a full trial at which it can examine the evidence against Mayorkas and come to a conclusion.

    “This is an absolute debacle at the southern border,” Thune said. “It is a national security crisis. There needs to be accountability.”

    House impeachment managers previewed some of their arguments at a hearing with Mayorkas on Tuesday morning on President Joe Biden’s budget request for the department.

    Green, the chairman of the House Homeland Security panel, told the secretary that he has a duty under the law to control and guard U.S. borders, and “during your three years as secretary, you have failed to fulfill this oath. You have refused to comply with the laws passed by Congress, and you have breached the public trust.”

    Mayorkas defended the department’s efforts but said the nation’s immigration system is “fundamentally broken, and only Congress can fix it.”

    Other impeachment managers are Michael McCaul of Texas, Andy Biggs of Arizona, Ben Cline of Virginia, Andrew Garbarino of New York, Michael Guest of Mississippi, Harriet Hageman of Wyoming, Clay Higgins of Louisiana, Laurel Lee of Florida, August Plfuger of Texas and Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia.

    Exactly how Democrats will proceed on Wednesday is still unclear. Impeachment rules generally allow the Senate majority to decide how to manage the trial, and Schumer has not said exactly what he will do.

    After the jurors are sworn in, Senate Republicans are likely to try to raise a series of objections if Schumer calls a vote to dismiss or table, an effort to both protest and delay the move. But ultimately they cannot block a dismissal if majority Democrats have the votes.

    Some Republicans have said they would like time to debate whether Mayorkas should be impeached, even though debate time is usually not included in impeachment proceedings. Negotiations were underway between the two parties over whether Schumer may allow that time and give senators in both parties a chance to discuss the impeachment before it is dismissed.

    While most Republicans oppose quick dismissal, some have hinted they could vote with Democrats.

    Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, said last week he wasn’t sure what he would do if there were a move to dismiss the trial. “I think it’s virtually certain that there will not be the conviction of someone when the constitutional test has not been met,” he said.

    At the same time, Romney said he wants to at least express his view that “Mayorkas has done a terrible job, but he’s following the direction of the president and has not met the constitutional test of a high crime or misdemeanor.”

    In any case, Republicans would not be able to win the support of the two-thirds of the Senate that is needed to convict and remove Mayorkas from office. Democrats control the Senate, 51-49, and they appear to be united against the impeachment effort. Not one House Democrat supported it, either.

    Sen. Sherrod Brown, a Democrat who is facing a tough reelection bid in Ohio, called the impeachment trial a “distraction,” arguing that Republicans should instead support a bipartisan border compromise they scuttled earlier this year.

    “Instead of doing this impeachment — the first one in 100 years — why are we not doing a bipartisan border deal?” he said.

    If Democrats are unable to dismiss or table the articles, they could follow the precedent of several impeachment trials for federal judges over the last century and hold a vote to create a trial committee that would investigate the charges. While there is sufficient precedent for this approach, Democrats may prefer to end the process completely, especially in a presidential election year when immigration and border security are top issues.

    If the Senate were to proceed to an impeachment trial, it would be the third in five years. Democrats impeached President Donald Trump twice, once over his dealings with Ukraine and a second time in the days after the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. Trump was acquitted by the Senate both times.

    At a trial, senators would be forced to sit in their seats for the duration, maybe weeks, while the House impeachment managers and lawyers representing Mayorkas make their cases. The Senate is allowed to call witnesses, as well, if it so decides, and it can ask questions of both sides after the opening arguments are finished.

    ___

    Associated Press writer Farnoush Amiri contributed to this report.

    Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

    [ad_2]

    Mary Clare Jalonick And Stephen Groves, Associated Press

    Source link

  • Schumer to host first of three senator-only A.I. briefings as Congress considers how to regulate

    Schumer to host first of three senator-only A.I. briefings as Congress considers how to regulate

    [ad_1]

    U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York, speaks about China competitiveness legislation alongside Democratic Senate committee chairs at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., May 3, 2023.

    Saul Loeb | AFP | Getty Images

    Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is set to host the first of three educational sessions about artificial intelligence Tuesday as Congress considers how best to regulate the technology.

    Schumer announced Monday on the floor of the Senate that Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Antonio Torralba, a machine learning expert, would lead the first of the senators-only sessions. Tuesday’s talk is set to offer a general overview of AI and its current capabilities, Schumer said.

    Lawmakers across Congress are trying to learn more about the technology and figure out what new legislation might be needed to tackle its unique challenges. Hearings about AI have focused on topics ranging from its effects on intellectual property to human rights.

    Lawmakers heard from Sam Altman, the CEO of ChatGPT-maker OpenAI, in May. Since then, other experts in the field have hoped policymakers would engage with a diverse range of voices as they consider legislation, so as not to be overly swayed by an early business leader in the space.

    The series of talks was first announced in a Dear Colleague letter Schumer sent last week alongside Sens. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., and Todd Young, R-Ind. In the letter, the senators said the three discussions would ask the following questions:

    1. Where is AI today?
    2. What is the frontier of AI and how do we maintain American leadership?
    3. How do the Department of Defense and Intelligence Community use AI today and what do we know about how our adversaries are using AI[?]

    The third question would be tackled in a classified all-senators briefing, the first of its kind on AI.

    “The Senate must deepen our expertise in this pressing topic. AI is already changing our world, and experts have repeatedly told us that it will have a profound impact on everything from our national security to our classrooms to our workforce, including potentially significant job displacement,” the group wrote. “We must take the time to learn from the leading minds in AI, across sectors, and consider both the benefits and risks of this technology.”

    In his remarks on the floor Monday, Schumer reiterated, “It’s imperative that we senators take the time to educate ourselves on AI and its implications, so that we can ensure it becomes a force for human prosperity, while mitigating its very real risks.”

    Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

    WATCH: Can China’s ChatGPT clones give it an edge over the U.S. in an A.I. arms race?

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • U.S. can avoid default in July if Treasury can make it through June cash crunch, Congressional Budget Office says

    U.S. can avoid default in July if Treasury can make it through June cash crunch, Congressional Budget Office says

    [ad_1]

    People walk and ride bicycles past the US Capitol in Washington, DC, on May 11, 2023.

    Jim Watson | AFP | Getty Images

    WASHINGTON — The Congressional Budget Office on Friday said tax revenues and emergency measures after June 15 “will probably allow the government to continue financing operations through at least the end of July.”

    The updated guidance otherwise reiterated the CBO’s earlier uncertainty about the debt ceiling during the first few weeks of June. Even though mid-June tax revenues could ease pressure on the Treasury through July, there’s still the risk of default in the first few weeks of June, the key government forecaster said.

    related investing news

    CNBC Investing Club

    “If the debt limit remains unchanged, there is significant risk that at some point in the first two weeks of June, the government will no longer be able to pay all of its obligations,” said the CBO report.

    The new report came as the White House and congressional leaders postponed a scheduled Friday meeting to continue negotiations, citing little progress so far over any deal to cut spending and pair that with a debt limit hike.

    Read more: Confused about the debt ceiling? Here’s what you need to know

    “The extent to which the Treasury will be able to fund the government’s ongoing operations will remain uncertain throughout May, even if the Treasury ultimately runs out of funds in early June. That uncertainty exists because the timing and amount of revenue collections and outlays over the intervening weeks could differ from CBO’s projections,” said the latest report.

    The CBO also issued an updated projection of the federal budget deficit for 2023, raising it to $1.5 trillion.

    The office warned that there was still “a great deal of uncertainty” around the deficit figure, in part due to an expected Supreme Court ruling on President Joe Biden‘s student loan forgiveness plan.

    Legal experts told CNBC the nation’s highest court is likely to strike down the $400 billion debt forgiveness plan, given the court’s conservative majority.

    If that happens, the administration would likely record the money it set aside for the loan forgiveness last year as a reduction in outlays this year, the CBO reported.

    The CBO is a nonpartisan federal agency that provides objective budget and economic data to Congress, typically to inform legislation.

    The debt ceiling talks were postponed less than a day before Biden was set to sit down with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y.

    That meeting was to be the second this week, after a Tuesday huddle failed to produce any significant developments.

    It was unclear Friday what impact, if any, the new report would have on talks currently underway at the staff level, between aides to the four congressional leaders and White House liaisons.

    As both the House and Senate prepared to leave for the weekend on Thursday, McCarthy said he had not seen “a seriousness” from the White House regarding any potential deal. “It seems like they want to default more than they want a deal,” the California Republican told reporters in the Capitol.

    Democrats appeared equally dug in, as Schumer indicated in a letter to his caucus Friday, in which he said staff level talks would continue in the coming days.

    CNBC Politics

    Read more of CNBC’s politics coverage:

    Yet even as aides worked to find common ground, Schumer said Democratic senators would keep “highlighting the devastating impact” of cuts to the federal budget that are part of a bill passed by House Republicans last month.

    Central to the partisan impasse is the White House’s insistence that Congress vote to raise the debt limit without preconditions, and House Republicans’ demand that any debt limit hike be paired with sweeping cuts to federal spending and new work requirements for social safety net programs.

    Failure to raise the debt ceiling before the U.S. runs out of available cash and emergency measures would cause an “economic catastrophe,” Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said Monday.

    “That is something that could produce financial chaos, it would drastically reduce the amount of spending and would mean that Social Security recipients and veterans and people counting on money from the government that they’re owed, contractors, we just would not have enough money to pay the bills,” Yellen told CNBC’s “Closing Bell: Overtime.”

    Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen: 'There is no good option' other than raising the debt ceiling

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Senate holds first hearing on bill – Medical Marijuana Program Connection

    Senate holds first hearing on bill – Medical Marijuana Program Connection

    [ad_1]

    Aaron Smith, CEO of the National Cannabis Industry Association, speaks during a news conference on the Safe Banking Act outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Sept. 14, 2022.

    Ting Shen | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    The Senate banking committee is holding its first-ever hearing Thursday on a bipartisan bill that would allow the cannabis industry to access traditional banking services, which marijuana businesses see as critical to their survival.

    The meeting, titled Examining Cannabis Banking Challenges of Small Businesses and Workers, will hear testimony from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, including Sens. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., and Steve Daines, R-Mont., who reintroduced the stand-alone bill last week. The committee will also hear from witnesses including the Cannabis Regulators of Color Coalition, Drug Policy Alliance and the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union.

    Thursday’s hearing will determine next steps in getting the bill to the Senate floor for a vote, as Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and other key lawmakers express support for it. It comes as the marijuana industry, which is facing a downturn even as more states approve legal markets, has pushed Congress to take action on the issue.

    “Without full access to the banking and payments system, legal cannabis businesses are forced to operate in the shadows,” said Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, who is also chair of the committee.

    Many business owners also rely on funds from friends and family in lieu…

    [ad_2]

    MMP News Author

    Source link

  • Democrats harden their message on the debt ceiling while quietly paving the way for a deal

    Democrats harden their message on the debt ceiling while quietly paving the way for a deal

    [ad_1]

    US Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) speaks to the press as US House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) (L) listens, after meeting with US President Joe Biden at the White House in Washington, DC, on January 24, 2023.

    Andrew Caballero-Reynolds | AFP | Getty Images

    WASHINGTON — Democrats responded to the news that the U.S. could default on its debt as early as June 1 by hardening their public positions, accusing Republicans of holding the nation’s economic welfare hostage to demands for federal budget cuts.

    But behind the scenes, President Joe Biden, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries have all taken steps in the past day that could pave the way for an 11th hour deal with a small group of Republicans to avert a default, by raising or suspending the nation’s debt limit.

    related investing news

    CNBC Investing Club

    The moves underscore a growing disconnect between the political rhetoric of the debt ceiling debate and the private reality of a potentially catastrophic U.S. default that now appears closer than it did just 24 hours ago.

    The White House insisted Tuesday that Biden will not use a meeting he set up with congressional leaders for May 9 to negotiate over the debt ceiling. “He’s going to make it very clear how it is Congress’s constitutional duty to act,” said White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre. “He is not going to negotiate on the debt ceiling, that is not going to change.”

    But the very fact that Biden is meeting with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy at all, however, signals a significant change. It comes after months of Biden and the White House demanding that McCarthy produce a Republican budget and agree to take debt default off the table, neither of which the speaker has done.

    Schumer’s maneuvers

    In the Senate, where Democrats have the majority, Schumer ripped a bill House Republicans passed last week. The measure would raise the debt ceiling in exchange for massive cuts to discretionary federal spending. It squeezed through the slim GOP-majority House despite opposition from every Democrat and four Republicans.

    Schumer said the Republican bill “would tear at the fabric of American society, impose dramatic cuts to our public security and cut law enforcement dramatically at a time when we need help from them.” He argued that it would result in the “abandonment of veterans [and] terrible job losses.”

    Yet moments before Schumer delivered his scathing condemnation of the House GOP bill, he entered that same bill onto the Senate calendar under a special rule that allows it to bypass the Senate committee process and move right to the floor for consideration.

    Schumer also moved a separate piece of legislation to the floor – a Democratic bill to suspend the debt limit through Dec. 31, 2024.

    There are two ways for Congress to avoid a looming debt default: The first is by voting to raise the statutory debt limit, currently set at $31.4 trillion. The second is by voting to suspend the limit for a set amount of time, essentially stopping the clock on default.

    For House and Senate Republicans who have promised constituents they will not vote to raise the debt limit without first securing major concessions from Democrats on spending, the option of voting to suspend the debt limit could offer them some room to maneuver without breaking their pledge to voters.

    Later in the day, Schumer told reporters that after the Senate passed a so-called “clean” debt ceiling suspension bill, “then we could use [the House GOP bill) for a proper discussion of the appropriations and budget process.”

    Jeffries and McConnell weigh in

    As Democrats explored their options, Republicans were largely muted on Tuesday. When Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell spoke on the Senate floor immediately after Schumer, he did not mention the debt ceiling.

    He later insisted that any negotiations must take place between McCarthy and Biden. “The ultimate solution will be between the Republican House and the president, and the sooner the president and the speaker get about it, the better off the country will be,” McConnell told reporters at a press briefing.

    Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) speaks at the the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) in New York City, U.S., April 17, 2023. 

    Brendan Mcdermid | Reuters

    On the House side, plans were also in motion Tuesday to begin work on a way for Democrats to move a bill to raise the debt limit to the floor without the support of GOP majority leadership using a legislative vehicle known as a discharge petition.

    Specifically, Jeffries said in a letter to his Democratic colleagues that Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., “just filed a special rule that would allow for Floor consideration of a bipartisan measure to avoid a dangerous default.”

    “The filing of a debt ceiling measure to be brought up on the discharge calendar preserves an important option,” wrote Jeffries.

    A Democratic discharge petition would still face major hurdles, starting with challenge of convincing at least a half dozen House Republicans to abandon to dramatically cross the aisle to vote for a Democratic bill. If it were to pass the House, any bill would then face the 60-vote filibuster threshold in the Senate.

    Senate math will be further complicated by the ongoing absence of California Democrat Dianne Feinstein, who has been away from Washington since February on a medical absence, with no immediate plans to return.

    CNBC Politics

    Read more of CNBC’s politics coverage:

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Officers to receive Congressional Gold Medals for Jan. 6

    Officers to receive Congressional Gold Medals for Jan. 6

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — Top House and Senate leaders will present law enforcement officers who defended the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 with Congressional Gold Medals on Tuesday, awarding them Congress’s highest honor nearly two years after they fought with former President Donald Trump’s supporters in a brutal and bloody attack.

    To recognize the hundreds of officers who were at the Capitol on Jan. 6, the medals will be placed in four locations — at U.S. Capitol Police headquarters, the Metropolitan Police Department, the Capitol and the Smithsonian Institution. President Joe Biden said when he signed the legislation last year that a medal will be placed at the Smithsonian museum “so all visitors can understand what happened that day.”

    The ceremony in the Capitol Rotunda comes as Democrats, just weeks away from losing their House majority, race to finish a nearly 18-month investigation of the insurrection. Democrats and two Republicans conducting the probe have vowed to uncover the details of the attack, which came as Trump tried to overturn his election defeat and encouraged his supporters to “fight like hell” in a rally just before the congressional certification.

    Awarding the medals will be among House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s last ceremonial acts as she prepares to step down from leadership. When the bill passed the House more than a year ago, she said the law enforcement officers from across the city defended the Capitol because they were “the type of Americans who heard the call to serve and answered it, putting country above self.”

    “They enabled us to return to the Capitol,” and certify Biden’s presidency, she said then, “to that podium that night to show the world that our democracy had prevailed and that it had succeeded because of them.”

    Dozens of the officers who fought off the rioters sustained serious injuries. As the mob of Trump’s supporters pushed past them and into the Capitol, police were beaten with American flags and their own guns, dragged down stairs, sprayed with chemicals and trampled and crushed by the crowd. Officers suffered physical wounds, including brain injuries and other lifelong effects, and many struggled to work afterward because they were so traumatized.

    Four officers who testified at a House hearing last year spoke openly about the lasting mental and physical scars, and some detailed near-death experiences.

    Metropolitan Police Officer Daniel Hodges described foaming at the mouth, bleeding and screaming as the rioters tried to gouge out his eye and crush him between two heavy doors. Metropolitan Police Officer Michael Fanone, who rushed to the scene, said he was “grabbed, beaten, tased, all while being called a traitor to my country.” Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn said a large group of people shouted the N-word at him as he was trying to keep them from breaching the House chamber.

    At least nine people who were at the Capitol that day died during and after the rioting, including a woman who was shot and killed by police as she tried to break into the House chamber and three other Trump supporters who suffered medical emergencies. Two police officers died by suicide in the days that immediately followed, and a third officer, Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick, collapsed and later died after one of the rioters sprayed him with a chemical. A medical examiner determined he died of natural causes.

    Several months after the attack, in August 2021, the Metropolitan Police announced that two more of their officers who had responded to the insurrection had died by suicide. The circumstances that led to their deaths were unknown.

    The June 2021 House vote to award the medals won widespread support from both parties. But 21 House Republicans voted against it — lawmakers who had downplayed the violence and stayed loyal to Trump. The Senate passed the legislation by voice vote, with no Republican objections.

    Pelosi, House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell will attend the ceremony and award the medals. Capitol Police Chief Thomas Manger and Metropolitan Police Department Chief Robert Contee are also expected to attend.

    The Congressional Gold Medal, the highest honor Congress can bestow, has been handed out by the legislative branch since 1776. Previous recipients include George Washington, Sir Winston Churchill, Bob Hope and Robert Frost. In recent years, Congress has awarded the medals to former New Orleans Saints player Steve Gleason, who became a leading advocate for people struggling with Lou Gehrig’s disease, and biker Greg LeMond.

    Signing the bill at the White House last year, Biden said the officers’ heroism cannot be forgotten.

    The insurrection was a “violent attempt to overturn the will of the American people,” and Americans have to understand what happened, he said. “The honest and unvarnished truth. We have to face it.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Schumer says he and Pelosi were ‘resolute’ about calling in the military to stop ‘hooligans’ on Jan. 6

    Schumer says he and Pelosi were ‘resolute’ about calling in the military to stop ‘hooligans’ on Jan. 6

    [ad_1]

    Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) attends a press conference at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S., September 28, 2022. 

    Mary F. Calvert | Reuters

    Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer spoke Sunday about his experience during the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, stating that he, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi “were resolute” about calling in the military and continuing the electoral vote count.

    “Speaker Pelosi and I were resolute that first the military should come in and remove people from the Capitol. The Capitol Police were overwhelmed,” Schumer said according to reports from NBC News. “And we called the Secretary of Defense. We call[ed] the governors of Virginia and Maryland who had national guard as well as the D.C. police and urge[d] them to send reinforcements to the Capitol to make sure that these hooligans were removed.” 

    Schumer’s account follows the Jan. 6 House select committee’s ninth public hearing Thursday afternoon, where members took a broad look at the findings from its investigation, interspersed with new clips and information.

    The hearing showed new clips of Pelosi and others calling multiple Trump administration officials, including Vice President Mike Pence, to urge them to take action to quell the riot as they hid from the mob that overran the Capitol.

    Some of the footage, captured by Pelosi’s daughter, showed Schumer and other members of Congress running to a secure location, according to NBC News.

    Schumer said that one good moment from the day came when Republicans and Democrats came together and decided to continue counting the electoral vote.

    “One good moment was when the four leaders, two Democrats and two Republicans got together at about five o’clock and said we are not going to let these hooligans stop the government process,” he said. “They would have succeeded. If we would have delayed counting the electoral vote, lord knows what would have happened.” 

    The House select committee unanimously voted Thursday to subpoena former President Donald Trump about his actions surrounding the insurrection in a move that has been under consideration for some time.

    The vote marks the boldest step yet for the bipartisan panel, which has so far issued more than 100 subpoenas and interviewed more than 1,000 people throughout its investigation.

    [ad_2]

    Source link