[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Hong Kong
CNN
—
A proposal to ban TikTok in the United States “should be looked at,” according to US Senator Chuck Schumer.
“We do know there’s Chinese ownership of the company that owns TikTok. And there are some people in the Commerce Committee that are looking into that right now,” Schumer, the Senate majority leader, told George Stephanopoulos of ABC News in a Sunday interview. “We’ll see where they come out.”
US lawmakers Marco Rubio, a Republican senator from Florida, and Angus King, an independent from Maine, said Friday they had reintroduced new legislation that aims to ban TikTok from operating in the United States, unless it cut ties to its current owner.
TikTok is owned by ByteDance, one of the most valuable private companies in China.
US officials have raised concerns that China could use its laws to pressure TikTok or ByteDance to hand over US user data that could be used for intelligence or disinformation purposes.
Those worries have prompted the US government to ban TikTok from official devices, and more than half of US states have taken similar measures, according to a CNN analysis.
TikTok has previously pushed back on the claims, saying it doesn’t share information with the Chinese government, and that a US-based security team decides who can access US user data from China.
The company did not immediately respond to a new request for comment on Monday morning Asia time.
TikTok’s Singaporean CEO, Shou Zi Chew, is slated to testify before Congress in March, on topics including TikTok’s privacy and data security practices, its impact on young users and its “relationship to the Chinese Communist Party,” according to a House committee statement.
The company has previously said that it welcomes “the opportunity to set the record straight about TikTok, ByteDance, and the commitments we are making.”
“We hope that by sharing details of our comprehensive plans with the full Committee, Congress can take a more deliberative approach to the issues at hand,” the TikTok spokesperson added.
-— CNN’s Brian Fung contributed to this report.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
CNN
—
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Sunday he would push to confirm President Joe Biden’s pick to lead the Federal Aviation Administration, following a computer system failure that triggered the delay of more than 10,000 flights last week.
Phillip Washington, Biden’s pick to lead the FAA, has yet to receive a confirmation hearing in the Democratic-controlled Senate.
“There is no doubt about it: it’s time to clear the runway for President Biden’s choice for FAA Administrator, Phil Washington. With recent events, including airline troubles and last week’s tech problem, this agency needs a leader confirmed by the Senate immediately,” Schumer said in a statement Sunday. “I intend to break this logjam, work to hold a hearing for Mr. Washington, where he can detail his experience and answer questions and then work towards a speedy Senate confirmation.”
Washington has faced questions about his limited aviation experience and, in September, was named in a search warrant issued as part of a political corruption investigation in Los Angeles. But Schumer’s Sunday announcement appears to show he’s prepared to push past those issues.
If confirmed, Washington would be the first Black permanent administrator of the agency. He is currently the CEO of Denver International Airport – the third-busiest airport in the world. Washington previously held leadership roles a municipal transit organizations, including in Denver and Los Angeles, focused on bus and rail lines.
Because his nomination wasn’t acted upon during the last Congress, Biden faced a choice this year of whether to resubmit his name for consideration or identify a new nominee.
Biden renominated Washington earlier this month, signaling the administration’s continued support for him.
The FAA has been without a permanent administrator since March, when former President Donald Trump’s appointee, Stephen Dickson, stepped down midway through his five-year term.
The agency is facing increased scrutiny after it was forced to ground thousands of flights starting Wednesday when air traffic control officials opted to shutdown the central database for all NOTAMs (Notice to Air Missions) nationwide after they found a corrupt file in the system. That plan and the outage led to massive flight delays and the first nationwide stop of air traffic in more than 20 years.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
CNN host Don Lemon went after Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) for indicating that the network wanted to “buzz around” about President Joe Biden’s classified documents case. (You can watch Lemon’s response below.)
The heated moment came toward the end of a week marked by reports of classified document discoveries at Biden’s home and in an office he used, in a matter that has sparked a special counsel investigation.
Lawyers found more documents during another search of his home library, the White House said on Saturday. While the White House had previously announced that Biden’s personal lawyers found one document there on Wednesday, a White House lawyer said he found additional pages when there on Thursday, resulting in six total pages from the library.
Lemon fired back at Schumer on Friday’s “CNN This Morning” program, telling him that the handling of classified material by the president is “serious stuff.”
“It’s not just, hold on, it’s not just us buzzing around — you’re the Democratic head of the Senate,” said Lemon after Schumer remarked that all the hosts want to do is “buzz around” on the case.
“This is a really important issue. It’s not just buzzing around. This is serious stuff.”
Schumer said prosecutors will get to the bottom of the matter and suggested that if there wasn’t a special counsel there’d be a “different thing to say” on the situation.
“I think we should have a special prosecutor on each,” said Schumer regarding both Biden’s case and former President Donald Trump’s case involving classified materials at Mar-a-Lago.
“I don’t mind [that] you’re asking these questions, but my view is I’m not going to say anything. Let the special prosecutors do their job,” the Senate Democratic leader said.
CNN’s Poppy Harlow later asked the Democrat what he would like to see the White House do in regard to it initially addressing documents discovered in November and not those discovered in December, a finding that was made public after the White House’s acknowledgment.
You can watch Harlow’s question to Schumer and his response around the 0:53 mark in the video below.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Clean energy and water. High-tech innovation. Next-generation jobs, thanks to investments in science and technology.
These are some of the big priorities elected officials and leaders presented to the business community during Long Island Association’s 2023 State of the Region on Friday. Held at the Crest Hollow Country Club in Woodbury, the event drew more than 1,100 people.
The region is benefitting from federal, state and local dollars, officials said.
“Long Island is going to be the capital for offshore wind, not just in New York but the whole country,” U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer told the crowd.
The Senate majority leader said innovations such as offshore wind would fuel new companies and “new frontier jobs,” and that federal bills provided money for training for these jobs.
“Once we have these windmills installed, the price [for energy] isn’t going to go up and down the way we have suffered through in the last few years, and the way it has been through our history,” he said.
He also said that the CHIPS and Science Act, signed into law by President Joe Biden in August, “is the largest down payment in a long time” in technology and innovation.
And with the region’s high tech research centers, including Cold Spring Harbor Lab and Brookhaven National Laboratory and Stony Brook University and others, “Long Island can be a center of chip-related research and production,” with the centers in the region already “cutting edge in the world,” and poised for growth.
He said the same levels of opportunities were present in medical science, including at Northwell Health.
In Suffolk County, the Midway Crossing Ronkonkoma – accessible by highway, rail and air – would fuel innovation, with Northwell Health and Applied DNA already committed to building there, said Suffolk County Executive Steve Bellone said,
Right now, there is a “unique, once in a generation” level of “cooperation and coordination that I’ve never seen in a project of this significance,” Bellone said, referring to efforts by labor, business, academia and elected officials. “They’re putting politics aside. They made the decision that Long Island’s future is more important.
And he said, protecting the environment and water quality is a “bipartisan commitment” that has public support, he said.
Schumer said there was money to provide “real sewage systems in places that don’t have them” and that would prevent aquifer contamination and protect surrounding bays and waters, including Long Island Sound.
“What happens on the federal, state, and local levels of government impact us here on Long Island, and that’s why the LIA will continue to play its role as a primary advocate for our region’s economic advancement and successful business community,” said LIA President and CEO Matt Cohen.
Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman, addressed the group by video. He was unable to attend the State of the Region breakfast “due to a family obligation” that was scheduled earlier last week, “but due to airline cancellations had to be postponed and couldn’t be changed,” Cohen said.
In the video, he said would present a plan for the redevelopment of the Nassau County Hub.
Schumer said the region has to do more about housing, allowing the private sector to more affordably build “a lot more housing.”
Cohen said the LIA would pursue “economic development opportunities to address challenges like our high cost of living, developing more affordable housing options, expanding our commercial tax base through helping grow businesses, and retaining young professionals to keep Long Island vibrant and sustainable.”
Cohen pointed out that the LIA has long-supported fostering “a clean energy economy. He said that “South Fork Wind is projected to power Long Island homes by the end of this year and other are in the pipeline to serve our region.”
What’s more, New York State has allocated $350 million to “new state economic development funds being invested in our region, some of which has already been awarded to Northwell’s Feinstein Institutes, Long Island University, Farmingdale State College, and Stony Brook University with Brookhaven National Lab.”
But, he said, that “we also need to ensure the Long Island region gets an equitable share of funding and attention from all levels of government. We have sent much more to DC and Albany every year than we get back and it’s time we change that.”
[ad_2]
Adina Genn
Source link

[ad_1]
The two biggest antitrust bills in more than 50 years are dead after they were not included in year-end congressional spending legislation released Tuesday, angering anti-monopolists who believe Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) killed the best chance for this Congress to meaningfully limit corporate power.
While a pair of smaller provisions in the omnibus will help antitrust advocates take on the nation’s largest tech companies in the future, the death of the Open App Markets Act and the American Innovation and Choice Online Act — both of which had the necessary support to pass the Senate, advocates insist — amounts to a massive win for Big Tech’s well-funded lobbying and influence machine.
Antitrust advocates blame Schumer for promising Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) a vote on her American Innovation and Choice Online Act, postponing action for nearly a year, and then finally failing to deliver on his pledge by excluding it from the omnibus spending bill.
“Schumer has erased much of the goodwill he formed with the tech startup ecosystem during the net neutrality debates. He spent a full year running interference for the most powerful companies in the world and repeating the myth that this broadly bipartisan legislation ‘didn’t have the votes,’” Luther Lowe, the senior vice president for public policy at Yelp, told HuffPost.
“Thanks to him, Europe will lead the global rule-making for the internet indefinitely, and European consumers are enjoying better protections than U.S. consumers.”
The European Union adopted far-reaching antitrust legislation in March, against the wishes of Big Tech companies. The new law included provisions that died on the vine in the U.S. Senate, such as rules barring companies like Apple and Google from requiring smartphone owners to use their respective app stores for digital purchases.
David Segal, a co-founder of liberal advocacy organization Demand Progress, suggested that the demise of the antitrust bills could lead progressives to doubt future promises from Schumer, who worked throughout the past two years to keep the left satisfied on issues like student debt cancellation.
“Unfortunately, Schumer’s behavior made it clear that he was never serious about keeping this commitment,” Segal said. “Activists should be even warier of commitments he purports to make going forward.”
“They had bipartisan support and would’ve helped rein in an industry that in too many areas is out of control.”
– Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
At least one prominent antitrust advocate withheld criticism and praised the omnibus legislation’s smaller wins. One measure allows state attorneys general to keep antitrust cases in the state where they’re filed, which should prevent Big Tech from working to combine cases in a way that slow-walks the eventual decisions.
Another provision increases the filing fees that companies pay to antitrust agencies like the Federal Trade Commission when they merge, giving those regulators a funding boost.
“Big Tech, Big Ag and Big Pharma spent extraordinary sums in an unprecedented effort to keep Congress from delivering on antitrust reform and undermine the ability of state and federal enforcers to uphold the law — and they lost,” said Sarah Miller, the executive director of the antitrust-focused American Economic Liberties Project. She noted that the filing fee hike would be the first congressional action to strengthen antitrust enforcement since 1976.
Even that provision, however, is weaker than it could be. The increased filing fees won’t go into effect for another two years, giving corporations time to kill them and depriving antitrust advocates in President Joe Biden’s administration — including FTC Chair Lina Khan and Jonathan Kanter, the assistant attorney general for antitrust enforcement at the Justice Department — of resources as they battle Google and Apple.
“Including Merger Filing Fees is an important step forward for Lina Khan and Jonathan Kanter’s ability to crack down on monopolies and fight for consumers – but the unnecessary two-year delay means we must hold onto the White House in 2024 to ensure this funding is used to enforce our antitrust laws,” said Emma Lydon, the managing director of the progressive group P Street.
Other antitrust proponents had more mixed reactions, expressing disappointment in Democratic leaders in Congress without dismissing the new funding for enforcement.
Segal argued that the new revenue would help Khan and Kanter continue to “push the bounds within the existing jurisprudence in order to ensure that antimonopoly policy works for everyday people and our broader economy.”
Lowe also acknowledged that the additional funding was a positive sign, noting that the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division will now get specific appropriations in congressional funding.
“I don’t see how as a Big Tech CEO you feel great about the broader trends across the globe in terms of greater enforcement of anticompetitive behavior,” he said.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who proposed full-on breakups of major tech companies during her 2020 presidential run, avoided directly criticizing the majority leader but made clear that she thought the antitrust bills deserved stand-alone votes from the omnibus legislation.
“The ones that were omitted should’ve been included. We should’ve voted on them over the past several months,” Warren told HuffPost. “They had bipartisan support and would’ve helped rein in an industry that in too many areas is out of control.”
Warren was unsure about the effectiveness of the antitrust provisions that did survive. “We’re still reading the fine print,” she said. “The devil’s in the details.”
The pair of bipartisan bills that Schumer effectively killed would have provided Khan, Kanter and other antitrust enforcement officials with additional tools to curb the abuses of Big Tech.
Klobuchar’s American Innovation and Choice Online Act would have barred major platforms, such as Google and Amazon, from providing preferential treatment to their own products. The bill — which was backed by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee — advanced out of committee on a 16-6 vote in January.
The Open App Markets Act, introduced by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), would have prohibited companies like Apple and Google from engaging in restrictive contracts with app developers that, among other things, prevent them from selling their apps in competitors’ stores. That bill had even greater bipartisan support, advancing out of committee on a 20-2 vote in February.
However, a person familiar with the negotiations said Friday that the legislation was dead at the behest of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)— an assertion viewed skeptically by progressives wary of Schumer. McConnell’s office did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment.
The powerful tech platforms Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon — sometimes identified collectively by the acronym GAFA — argue that such bills restrict the organic growth that has enabled the United States to become a world leader in technological innovation. They compare Amazon giving preference to its own branded merchandise with supermarkets giving prominent placement to generic store brand goods alongside other products.
But anti-monopolists maintain that the opposite is true, contending that the kind of innovation seen in Silicon Valley during the 1980s and ’90s would likely not be possible today amid the barriers to competition that tech giants have erected to protect their profit streams.
For example, they point to Meta’s Facebook co-opting the original features of newer platforms like Snapchat and acquiring would-be competitors like Instagram and WhatsApp. Meanwhile, Amazon’s preferential treatment of its own products, they say, goes far beyond what supermarkets do — both because of the leverage that Amazon has over sellers on its platform and the information it culls from sellers in the interest of undercutting them. (Amazon’s particular tactics were the focus of an influential paper by Khan as a student at Yale Law School.)
“These guys are gatekeepers in the economy,” said Lowe, whose company, Yelp, has spent years battling what it sees as Google’s abuses. “They have a special ability to distort the entire market place and bend it to their own ends.”
As much as Schumer has courted those on the left in recent years, they’ve long been suspicious of his intentions around Big Tech companies. The businesses are a major source of campaign funding, and the electorally conscious Schumer would be wary of losing access to their cash or having the money turned against vulnerable Democratic incumbents.
In July, antitrust advocates aired a television ad targeting Schumer on cable channels in Washington, backed by a relatively small buy that further underscored the forces they were up against. The Big Four tech companies, or groups they fund, had spent $120 million on television ads attacking the proposed antitrust legislation and $95 million lobbying against it.
Arthur Delaney contributed reporting.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
CNN
—
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema’s surprise decision to become an independent has Democratic leaders struggling to answer a basic question: How should they deal with her if she runs for reelection in Arizona?
In interviews with top party leaders and rank-and-file members on Monday, Democrats were sidestepping the sensitive question and handling the politically fraught situation delicately, knowing that a misstep could backfire and have serious ramifications for their party.
“When they call me for advice, I’ll give it in confidence,” said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, the chamber’s No. 2 Democrat, told CNN when asked if party leaders should stay out of the race.
Durbin added: “I plan to stay out of Arizona politics.”
If Sinema runs for a second term but party leaders put their muscle behind a Democratic candidate instead, the electorate could splinter in the purple state and help Republicans win back a critical seat. Plus, backing a Democrat in the race could risk alienating Sinema whose decision to continue to align with her former party on her committee assignments essentially solidifies their 51-49 majority.
But if they get behind Sinema or stay neutral in the race, as they’ve done with other independents who caucus with them, they would infuriate progressives eager to knock off the moderate Sinema over her refusal to gut the Senate filibuster and approve many of their priorities over the last two years.
And no matter how they handle the mercurial senator, they could be left with a messy, three-way race in 2024 at a time when they will be battling to defend 23 seats compared to 11 for the GOP – all of which has caused anxiety in the Democratic ranks.
For now, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and his top deputies said they are in a wait-and-see mode, planning to see how the field forms and whether Sinema will indeed run as an independent in the 2024 cycle. Then, they said, they will begin to make some critical decisions.
“When she says she’s gonna run, you come back to me,” Sen. Patty Murray, a Democrat from Washington state and a member of her party’s leadership, told reporters.
But already, the field appears to be taking shape.
Rep. Ruben Gallego, a member of the Arizona House delegation, told CNN that “We’re already putting the team together,” and he’d make a decision about a run sometime next year. He said he would soon reach out to Schumer and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee – and he dismissed the possibility that Sinema could win as a third-party candidate or that a Republican could pull off a victory in a three-way race. He contended that a Sinema candidacy “assures a Democrat wins.”
“They could do what they want,” Gallego said when asked about party leaders’ decision on how to handle the race. “But it’s going be a waste of money to try to prop up a third-party candidate because it’s just not going to happen. Not in Arizona.”
But Gallego could have a challenge in the primary – potentially from Democratic Rep. Greg Stanton, who won reelection in his swing district in the fall.
Stanton told CNN on Monday he is “taking a serious look” at the race.
“My focus until recently has been winning my 2022 frontline reelection,” Stanton said. “Sen. Sinema’s recent decision to leave the Democratic Party has no bearing on my thinking.”
But it’s a decision that has Republicans and Democrats alike weighing what comes next.
Sen. Gary Peters, the current chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, plans to step aside from that post in the 2024 cycle, and no new senator has announced plans to take that position as of yet.
“At this moment, I’m really happy to say that’s the job of the next DSCC chair to make that determination,” the Michigan Democrat said when asked how the party committee should handle an independent run, given that it typically backs Democratic incumbents.
Sinema, who has a sizable war chest with nearly $8 million in cash, has not tipped her hand about whether she will run again, though many suspect she left the party in order to spare herself a grueling primary fight in 2024.
“I’m just not worried about folks who may not like this approach,” Sinema told CNN on Thursday. “What I am worried about is continuing to do what’s right for my state. And there are folks who certainly don’t like my approach, we hear about it a lot. But the proof is in the pudding.”
On Monday, Sinema made a brief appearance on the Senate floor, casting a vote for a Biden judicial nominee before she headed out and ignored reporters’ questions.
But in the halls of the Capitol, the two sides were assessing how her move could scramble the 2024 map.
“It’s going to be a competitive state in 2024,” said Sen. Steve Daines, a Montana Republican who will chair the National Republican Senatorial Committee in the coming cycle.
Republicans are hopeful that the progressive push to oust Sinema will only bolster their chances to take the seat.
Indeed, Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent, attacked Sinema as a “corporate Democrat” who “helped sabotage” the Biden agenda.
On Monday, he wouldn’t say if he believes Democratic leaders should try to knock her off in 2024.
“I think that decision rests with the people of Arizona,” Sanders said Monday.
A like-minded liberal, Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, also punted on the question.
“I am just not focused on that,” Warren said. “I am focused on what we need to do in the next two weeks. That’s my responsibility.”
For the last two years, Sinema has been a complicated and polarizing figure for Democrats. The newly independent senator has helped clinch victories for the Biden administration on a major infrastructure package, prescription drug pricing, same-sex marriage legislation and the first gun violence law in a generation. But she also rebuffed Democratic efforts to raise tax rates on corporations and individuals – and she, along with Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, stood their ground against Democratic efforts to gut the filibuster and pass a voting rights bill, saying the 60-vote threshold is essential to preserving the rights of the minority to shape legislation.
Like Sinema, party leaders are now watching Manchin closely as he weighs whether to run in 2024. On Monday, he would not ruling out joining Sinema and spurning his Democratic Party label and becoming an independent.
“I’ll look at all of these things,” Manchin told CNN. “I’ve always looked at all those things, but I have no intention of doing anything right now. Whether I do something later, I can’t tell you what the future is going to bring.”
In private meetings, Schumer has been careful not to criticize Sinema, according to senators who have spoken to him. In the White House and Schumer statements Friday, both praised Sinema’s record in the Senate and made clear they’d continue to work with her. It’s a message several senior Democrats also echoed on Monday.
Sen. Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, a member of party leadership, said she and Sinema have worked together on mental health provisions central to the gun legislation, among other issues.
And when asked if she will get behind Sinema, Stabenow wouldn’t say.
“That’s something that that you know I’m sure will be talked about down the road.”
“That’s a call for somebody else,” Sen. Jon Tester, a Montana Democrat, added when asked about the party backing Sinema in 2024.
Even Sen. Mark Kelly, the newly reelected Arizona Democrat, steered clear of the sensitive topic on Monday.
“I worked very closely with Sen. Sinema – two years now to get stuff done,” Kelly said. “The DSCC, and what that they do over there, is outside my area of expertise.”
Kelly would not say he would support her if she ran.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
CNN
—
Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema is leaving the Democratic Party and registering as a political independent, she told CNN’s Jake Tapper in an exclusive TV interview.
“I’ve registered as an Arizona independent. I know some people might be a little bit surprised by this, but actually, I think it makes a lot of sense,” Sinema said in a Thursday interview with Tapper in her Senate office.
“I’ve never fit neatly into any party box. I’ve never really tried. I don’t want to,” she added. “Removing myself from the partisan structure – not only is it true to who I am and how I operate, I also think it’ll provide a place of belonging for many folks across the state and the country, who also are tired of the partisanship.”
Sinema’s move away from the Democratic Party is unlikely to change the power balance in the next Senate. Democrats will have a narrow 51-49 majority that includes two independents who caucus with them: Sens. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Angus King of Maine.
While Sanders and King formally caucus with Democrats, Sinema declined to explicitly say that she would do the same. She did note, however, that she expects to keep her committee assignments – a signal that she doesn’t plan to upend the Senate composition, since Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer controls committee rosters for Democrats.
“When I come to work each day, it’ll be the same,” Sinema said. “I’m going to still come to work and hopefully serve on the same committees I’ve been serving on and continue to work well with my colleagues at both political parties.”
But Sinema’s decision to become a political independent makes official what’s long been an independent streak for the Arizona senator, who began her political career as a member of the Green Party before being elected as a Democrat to the US House in 2012 and US Senate in 2018. Sinema has prided herself on being a thorn in the side of Democratic leaders, and her new nonpartisan affiliation will further free her to embrace an against-the-grain status in the Senate, though it raises new questions about how she – and Senate Democrats – will approach her reelection in 2024 with liberals already mulling a challenge.
Sinema wrote an op-ed in the Arizona Republic released Friday explaining her decision, noting that her approach in the Senate has “upset partisans in both parties.”
“When politicians are more focused on denying the opposition party a victory than they are on improving Americans’ lives, the people who lose are everyday Americans,” Sinema wrote.
“That’s why I have joined the growing numbers of Arizonans who reject party politics by declaring my independence from the broken partisan system in Washington.”
Sinema is up for reelection in 2024 and liberals in Arizona are already floating potential challengers, including Arizona Rep. Ruben Gallego, who said earlier this year that some Democratic senators have urged him to run against Sinema.
“Unfortunately, Senator Sinema is once again putting her own interests ahead of getting things done for Arizonans,” Gallego said in a statement following Sinema’s announcement.
Sinema declined to address questions about her reelection bid in the interview with Tapper, saying that simply isn’t her focus right now.
She also brushed aside criticism she may face for the decision to leave the Democratic Party.
“I’m just not worried about folks who may not like this approach,” Sinema said. “What I am worried about is continuing to do what’s right for my state. And there are folks who certainly don’t like my approach, we hear about it a lot. But the proof is in the pudding.”
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre called Sinema a “key partner” following her decision and said the White House has “every reason to expect that we will continue to work successfully with her.”
Sources familiar with the matter tell CNN that Sinema gave the White House a heads up that she was leaving the Democratic Party. Schumer said in a statement he also was aware of Sinema’s bombshell announcement ahead of Friday morning.
“She asked me to keep her committee assignments and I agreed,” Schumer said. “Kyrsten is independent; that’s how she’s always been. I believe she’s a good and effective Senator and am looking forward to a productive session in the new Democratic majority Senate.”
Schumer also outlined how he did not expect Sinema’s decision to impact Democrats’ plans for next year, saying in his statement, “We will maintain our new majority on committees, exercise our subpoena power, and be able to clear nominees without discharge votes.”
The Biden White House is offering a muted reaction Friday morning and insisting that they expect to continue having a productive working relationship with the senator.
One White House official tells CNN that the move “doesn’t change much” other than Sinema’s own reelection calculations.
“We’ve worked with her effectively on a lot of major legislation from CHIPS to the bipartisan infrastructure law,” the official said. The White House, for now, has “every reason to expect that will continue,” they added.
Sinema has long been the source of a complex convergence of possibility, frustration and confusion inside the White House.
“Rubik’s cube, I guess?” was how one former senior White House official described the Arizona senator who has played a central role in President Joe Biden’s largest legislative wins and also some of his biggest agenda disappointments.
There was no major push to get Sinema to change her mind, a White House official said, noting that it wouldn’t have made a difference.
“Nothing about the last two years indicates a major effort would’ve made helped – the exact opposite actually,” a White House official said.
The most urgent near-term effort was to quietly find out what it meant for their newly expanded Senate majority, officials said.
While there were still clear details to figure out about process, “I think people exhaled when we had a better understanding of what she meant,” one source familiar with the discussion said.
Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota told “CNN This Morning” that “Senator Sinema has always had an independent streak,” adding that “I don’t believe this is going to shake things up quite like everyone thinks.”
She added, “Senator Sinema has been an independent in all intents and purposes.”
Sinema and West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin have infuriated liberals at various points over the past two years, standing in the way of Biden’s agenda at a time when Democrats controlled the House, Senate and White House.
Sinema and Manchin used their sway in the current 50-50 Senate – where any single Democrat could derail a bill – to influence a host of legislation, especially the massive $3.5 trillion Build Back Better bill that Biden proposed last year. Sinema’s objections to increasing the corporate tax rate during the initial round of negotiations over the legislation last year particularly rankled liberals.
While Sinema was blindsided by the surprise deal that Manchin cut with Schumer in July on major health care and energy legislation, she ultimately backed the smaller spending package that Biden signed into law before the election.
Both Manchin and Sinema also opposed changes to the Senate’s filibuster rules despite pressure from their Senate colleagues and Biden to change them. After a vote against filibuster changes in January, the Arizona Democratic Party’s executive board censured Sinema.
Sinema has been in the middle of several significant bipartisan bills that were passed since Biden took office. She pointed to that record as evidence that her approach has been an effective one.
“I’ve been honored to lead historic efforts, from infrastructure, to gun violence prevention, to protecting religious liberty and helping LGBT families feel secure, to the CHIPs and science bill to the work we’ve done on veterans’ issues,” she told CNN. “The list is really long. And so I think that the results speak for themselves. It’s OK if some people aren’t comfortable with that approach.”
Sinema’s announcement comes just days after Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock won reelection in Georgia, securing Democrats a 51st Senate seat that frees them from reliance on Vice President Kamala Harris’ tiebreaking vote.
Sinema declined to address questions about whether she would support Biden for president in 2024, and she also said she’s not thinking about whether a strong third party should emerge in the US.
This story has been updated with additional developments.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Truth be told, I’ve never really felt like I fit the mold of the Democratic Party. As a proud senator of Arizona, I’ve always voted for what I think is right, whether my high-powered colleagues agree with me or not. That’s why, today, I—Kyrsten Sinema—am proud to announce that I have made the decision to leave the…
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
CNN
—
A packed legislative to-do list awaits Congress when it returns to session after the midterms – and Democrats, who currently control both chambers, will face a ticking clock to enact key priorities if Republicans win back the House or manage to flip the Senate in the upcoming elections.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has predicted an “extremely busy” lame duck session – the period of time after the midterms and before a new Congress begins in January.
“We still have much to do and many important bills to consider,” Schumer said in remarks on the Senate floor at the end of September. “Members should be prepared for an extremely, underline extremely, busy agenda in the last two months of this Congress.”
The jam-packed agenda for the lame-duck session includes: Funding the government to avert a shutdown before the end of the calendar year, passage of the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, the annual must-pass legislation that sets the policy agenda and authorizes funding for the Department of Defense, as well as a vote in the Senate to protect same-sex marriage and the potential consideration of other key pieces of legislation.
Democrats are still limited in what they can achieve, however, given their narrow majorities in both chambers. With a 50-50 partisan split in the Senate, Democrats lack the votes to overcome the filibuster’s 60-vote threshold – and do not have the votes to abolish the filibuster. As a result, major priorities for liberal voters – like the passage of legislation protecting access to abortion after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade – will still remain out of reach for the party for the foreseeable future.
Government funding is the most pressing priority that lawmakers will confront during the lame duck. The current deadline for the expiration of funding is December 16 after the House and Senate passed an extension to avert a shutdown at the end of September.
Since the funding bill is viewed as must-pass legislation it will likely become a magnet for other priorities that lawmakers may try to tack on to ride along with it. It’s possible that further aid for Ukraine could come up as Ukraine continues to counter Russia’s invasion of the country. While that funding has bipartisan support, some conservatives are balking at the pricey contributions to Ukraine and may scrutinize more closely additional requests from the administration, a dynamic that is dividing Republicans on this key issue.
Democrats also want more funding for pandemic response, but Republicans have pushed back on that request.
One issue that may come up during the government funding effort is money for the Department of Justice investigation into the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.
A House Democratic aide told CNN that final fiscal year 2023 funding levels have yet to be determined. Justice Department needs and resources are part of this ongoing conversation, but under the leadership of Rep. Matt Cartwright, chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee on commerce, justice, science, and related agencies, the House bill included $34 million that would allow DOJ to fund these prosecutions without reducing their efforts in other areas.
House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Rosa DeLauro told CNN in a statement, “I look forward to working with my colleagues on the House and Senate appropriations committees and passing a final 2023 spending package by the December 16th deadline.”
Meanwhile, the Senate has begun work on the NDAA, and is expected to pass the massive piece of legislation during the lame duck. Consideration of the wide-ranging bill could spark debate and a push for amendments over a variety of topics.
Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa has called for punishing OPEC for its production cut by passing legislation that would hold foreign oil producers accountable for colluding to fix prices – and the senator has said he believes the measure can pass as an amendment to the NDAA. The legislation would clear the way for the Justice Department to sue Saudi Arabia and other OPEC nations for antitrust violations.
Senate Democrats will also continue confirming judges to the federal bench nominated by President Joe Biden, a key priority for the party.
A Senate vote to protect same-sex marriage is also on tap for the lame-duck session. In mid-September, the chamber punted on a vote until after the November midterm elections as negotiators asked for more time to lock down support – a move that could make it more likely the bill will ultimately pass the chamber.
The bipartisan group of senators working on the bill said in a statement at the time, “We’ve asked Leader Schumer for additional time and we appreciate he has agreed. We are confident that when our legislation comes to the Senate floor for a vote, we will have the bipartisan support to pass the bill.” The bill would need at least 10 Republican votes to overcome a filibuster.
Schumer has vowed to hold a vote on the bill, but the exact timing has not yet been locked in. Democrats have pushed for the vote after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, sparking fears that the court could take aim at same-sex marriage in the future.
The Senate could take up legislation during the lame duck in response to the January 6, 2021, attack by a mob of pro-Trump supporters attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.
Over the summer, a bipartisan group of senators reached a deal to make it harder to overturn a certified presidential election. The proposal would still need, however, to be approved by both chambers. Notably, the Senate proposal has the backing of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican.
“I strongly support the modest changes that our colleagues in the working group have fleshed out after literally months of detailed discussions,” McConnell said at the end of September. “I’ll proudly support the legislation, provided that nothing more than technical changes are made to its current form.”
If the bill passes the Senate, it would also need to clear the House, which in September, passed its own version of legislation to make it harder to overturn a certified presidential election in the future by proposing changes to the Electoral Count Act.
Passing a bill to to restrict lawmakers from trading stocks is a priority for a number of moderate House Democrats – who may continue to push for the issue to be taken up during the lame duck, though whether there will be a vote is still to be determined and other pressing must-pass items like government funding could crowd out the issue. The House did not vote on a proposal prior to the midterm elections.
“It’s a complicated issue, as you can imagine, as a new rule for members they have to follow, and their families as I understand, so I think it deserves careful study to make sure if we do something, we do it right,” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told CNN last month.
Meanwhile, it’s not yet clear when exactly the nation will run up against the debt limit and it appears unlikely for now that Congress will act to resolve the issue during the lame-duck session, especially as other must-pass bills compete for floor time. But political battle lines are already being drawn and maneuvering is underway in Washington over the contentious and high-stakes issue.
A group of House Democrats recently sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Schumer calling for legislation to “permanently undo the threat posed by the debt limit” during the post-election lame-duck session. The letter, led by Pennsylvania Rep. Brendan Boyle, was signed by several prominent House Democrats, including Caucus Chair Hakeem Jeffries of New York.
Biden on Friday gave a window into how he’s preparing for a looming political showdown over the debt ceiling, stating unequivocally that he will not relent to Republican lawmakers threatening to send the nation into default if he doesn’t meet their demands, but adding that he doesn’t support efforts from within his own party to abolish the debt limit entirely.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
CNN
—
Just a week after her return to the United States Senate after a roughly three month absence, questions continue to swirl around Sen. Dianne Feinstein and her mental capacity to serve in the world’s greatest deliberative body.
The 89-year-old Democrat had been recovering from shingles at home in California, and had been absent from the Hill since February.
Her long-awaited return on May 10 not only meant that the Senate Democratic Caucus would be at full attendance – since both Feinstein and Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman had been absent for much of the spring – but that the one-seat margin Democrats held on the powerful Judiciary Committee would be reconstituted to help advance President Joe Biden’s judicial nominations.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer greeted the frail Feinstein personally upon her return, when she was wheeled into the Capitol for a vote accompanied by staff on and off the floor. Schumer said Feinstein was “exactly where she wants to be, ready to do the things she loves the most – serving the people of California.” First elected to the Senate in 1992, she is the longest-serving woman senator in US history.
But questions quickly sprang up on whether Feinstein, though present, would really be able to resume her demanding job. In a statement released by her office last week, Feinstein said that she is still “experiencing some side effects” from shingles and her doctors have advised her to “work a lighter schedule” as she returned to the Senate. During her arrival at the Capitol for votes, she appeared confused and was heard asking staff, “Where am I going?”
And in an interaction with reporters Tuesday, as reported by the Los Angeles Times and Slate, Feinstein appeared confused by questions about her absence, saying, “I haven’t been gone. I’ve been here, I’ve been voting. Please, either know or don’t know.” It is not clear if Feinstein was referring to just the past week since her return or referring to the past several months while she was recovering at home.
Feinstein’s office was asked for comment but indicated the senator did not have one at this time.
Fellow Democrats remain unwilling to discuss Feinstein’s ability to serve, saying only they are glad to have a colleague back in the chamber.
“I’m happy she’s returned, and that’s all I’m going to say about it,” Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono told CNN.
Illinois Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin, who replaced Feinstein as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said, “We certainly hope” that Feinstein will be able to serve the remainder of her term in the chamber, but demurred when asked if he is confident that she can serve.
“I can’t be the judge of that. But I will tell you that she has to make that decision for herself and her family as to going forward, but we’re happy to have her back,” he said. “We’re monitoring her medical condition almost on a daily basis. Our staff is in touch with her staff.”
The top Republican on the panel, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, said of Feinstein, “She’s a dear friend. As a friend, you can see she’s hurting.”
Other Republicans echoed that sentiment, wishing Feinstein well, but reluctant to weigh in on her mental acuity.
“I have a lot of respect for Dianne Feinstein. She’s been great to work with. She’s a great committee member,” North Carolina Republican Thom Tillis told CNN’s Manu Raju, but said that “I haven’t had the chance to speak with her, so I couldn’t really comment on it.”
“If you just take a look at anybody that spent ten months with a chronic case of shingles, that has a huge impact, I don’t care how old you are, but again I just haven’t spoken with her,” he said.
Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn said that he is “not qualified to render a diagnosis,” but criticized some Democrats for calling on her to resign.
“That seems a little harsh to me. I think that decision ought to be made by Senator Feinstein,” he said.
Questions about a Senator’s health, and whispers about their fitness to serve, are not new. In the past decades, the median age of the Senate has ticked increasingly upward, with the 118th Congress median age at 65.3 years, according to the Pew Research Center.
The current Senate has multiple members in their eighties, including Feinstein, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, and Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley. Another 41 Senators are at least sixty-seven years old, the official retirement age in the United States.
In recent years, there have been prolonged absences by members of the Senate, notably Arizona Sen. John McCain, who battled brain cancer and was absent from the Senate almost eight months, but never faced calls from his colleagues to resign his seat.
The late Mississippi Sen. Thad Cochran was also out for several weeks with lingering health issues in the fall of 2017, and faced questions about his metal fitness, appearing frail and pale when he returned. The then-chairman of the influential Senate Appropriations Committee, told reporters that he was fit to serve, and said at the time that he planned to run again in 2020, saying “it’s up to the people to decide. I think I am.”
But the 79-year old Republican needed to be guided by staffers to a “Senators Only” elevator to find his way to the Senate floor. Cochran resigned from the Senate the following March.
“I regret my health has become an ongoing challenge,” Cochran said in a statement announcing the end of a four-decade long career in the Senate. “I intend to fulfill my responsibilities and commitments to the people of Mississippi and the Senate through the completion of the 2018 appropriations cycle, after which I will formally retire from the U.S. Senate.”
It is unclear if Feinstein will be given the same gentle off ramp afforded to her colleagues.
On November 2020, Feinstein relented to pressure from other Democrats to give up the chair of the Judiciary Committee. In November 2022, under similar pressure, she announced that she would not want to serve as the Senate Pro Tempore, a high-ranking constitutional position granted to the longest-serving member of the Senate majority. Feinstein also announced the following February that she would not run for re-election in 2024. Her February 16, 2023 votes on the Senate floor would prove to be her last ones for months.
Criticisms for Feinstein’s long absence started in earnest in April when fellow California Democrat Rep. Ro Khanna tweeted, “it’s time for @SenFeinstein to resign. We need to put the country ahead of personal loyalty.” Feinstein’s office pushed back on the criticism, arguing that there had not been a significant delay in advancing and confirming judicial nominees.
After Fetterman and McConnell – who was injured in a fall and spent nearly two weeks in a rehabilitation facility – returned to the Senate, but Feinstein did not, it prompted more questions about the impasse created by her absence and Feinstein asked Schumer to temporarily replace her on the Judiciary Committee. Schumer proposed that Maryland Sen. Ben Cardin take her spot, but Senate Republicans blocked the effort, saying the move would allow judicial nominees they opposed to advance.
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Washington
CNN
—
The US Senate is inching forward on a plan to regulate artificial intelligence, after months of seeing how ChatGPT and similar tools stand to supercharge — or disrupt— wide swaths of society.
But despite outlining broad contours of the plan, senators are still likely months away from introducing a comprehensive bill setting guardrails for the industry, let alone passing legislation and getting it signed into law. The deliberate pace of progress contrasts with the blistering speed with which companies and organizations have embraced generative AI, and the flood of investment into the industry.
The Senate’s plan calls for briefing lawmakers on the basic facts of artificial intelligence over the summer, before beginning to consider legislation in the following months, even as some senators have begun to pitch proposals.
The efforts reflect how, despite urgent calls by civil society groups and industry for guardrails on the technology, many lawmakers are still getting up to speed.
To help educate members, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer on Tuesday announced a series of three senators-only information sessions to take place in the coming weeks.
The closed-door briefings will cover topics ranging from AI’s current capabilities and competition in AI development to how US national security and defense agencies are already putting the technology to use. The latter session, Schumer said, will be the first-ever classified senators’ briefing on AI.
“The Senate must deepen our expertise in this pressing topic,” Schumer wrote in a letter to colleagues announcing the briefings. “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.”
Schumer had earlier kicked off a high-level push for AI legislation in April, when he proposed shaping any eventual bill around four principles promoting transparency and democratic values.
The information sessions are expected to wrap up by the time Congress breaks for August recess, according to South Dakota Republican Sen. Mike Rounds, one of three other senators Schumer has tapped to lead on a comprehensive AI bill.
By that point, Rounds told reporters Wednesday on the sidelines of a Washington conference, there may be “lots of different ideas floating” but not necessarily a bill to speak of.
Schumer, Rounds and the other leading lawmakers on the AI working group — New Mexico Democratic Sen. Martin Heinrich and Indiana Republican Sen. Todd Young — haven’t settled on how to coordinate various legislative proposals yet.
Options include forming a select committee to craft a comprehensive AI bill, or “splitting out and having lots of different committees come up with different pieces of legislation,” Rounds said.
The AI hype has produced high-profile hearings and scattershot policy proposals. Last month, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman testified before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee, wowing lawmakers by asking for regulation and by giving a technical demonstration to enthralled members of the House the evening before.
Sen. Michael Bennet has introduced legislation to create a new federal agency with authority to regulate AI, for example. And on Wednesday, Sen. Josh Hawley unveiled his own framework for AI legislation that called for letting Americans sue companies for harms created by AI models.
Rounds told reporters Schumer has not set a timeframe for coming up with AI legislation, adding that the current goal is to allow ideas to “melt for a while.”
But he predicted that with AI’s expected impact on many agencies and industries, it would be impossible not to foresee a wide-ranging and open legislative process reflecting input from many sources, akin to how the Senate crafts the annual spending package known as the National Defense Authorization Act.
“You bring in all of these ideas, and then you very quietly start to meld this bill together, kind of behind the scenes in a way,” he said. “You go through a committee process in which you deliver a bill that says this could pass, and then you allow other members to come in and offer their amendments to it as well. That has worked well year-in and year-out for the NDAA.”
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
CNN
—
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced a broad, open-ended plan for regulating artificial intelligence on Wednesday, describing AI as an unprecedented challenge for Congress that effectively has policymakers “starting from scratch.”
The plan, Schumer said at a speech in Washington, will begin with at least nine panels to identify and discuss the hardest questions that regulations on AI will have to answer, including how to protect workers, national security and copyright and to defend against “doomsday scenarios.” The panels will be composed of experts from industry, academia and civil society, with the first sessions taking place in September, Schumer said.
The Senate will then turn to committee chairs and other vocal lawmakers on AI legislation to develop bills reflecting the panel discussions, Schumer added, arguing that the resulting US solution could leapfrog existing regulatory proposals from around the world.
“If we can put this together in a very serious way, I think the rest of the world will follow and we can set the direction of how we ought to go in AI, because I don’t think any of the existing proposals have captured that imagination,” Schumer said, reflecting on other recent proposals such as the European Union’s draft AI Act, which last week was approved by the European Parliament.
The speech represents Schumer’s most definitive remarks to date on a problem that has dogged Congress for months amid the wide embrace of tools such as ChatGPT: How to catch up, or get ahead, on policymaking for a technology that is already in the hands of millions of people and evolving rapidly.
In the wake of ChatGPT’s viral success, Silicon Valley has raced to develop and deploy a new crop of generative AI tools that can produce images and writing almost instantly, with the potential to change how people work, shop and interact with each other. But these same tools have also raised concerns for their potential to make factual errors, spread misinformation and perpetuate biases, among other issues.
In contrast to the fast pace of AI advancements, Schumer has stressed the importance of a deliberate approach, focusing on getting lawmakers acquainted with the basic facts of the technology and the issues it raises before seeking to legislate. He and three other colleagues began last week by convening the first in a series of closed-door briefings on AI for senators that is expected to run through the summer.
In his remarks Wednesday, Schumer appeared to acknowledge criticism of his pace.
“I know many of you have spent months calling on us to act,” he said. “I hear you. I hear you loud and clear.”
But he described AI as a novel issue for which Congress lacks a guide.
“It’s not like labor, or healthcare, or defense, where Congress has had a long history we can work off of,” he said. “Experts aren’t even sure which questions policymakers should be asking. In many ways, we’re starting from scratch.”
Schumer described his plan as laying “a foundation for AI policy” that will do “years of work in a matter of months.”
To guide that process, Schumer expanded on a set of principles he first announced in April. Formally unveiling the framework on Wednesday, Schumer said any legislation on AI should be geared toward facilitating innovation before addressing risks to national security or democratic governance.
“Innovation first,” Schumer said, “but with security, accountability, [democratic] foundations and explainability.”
The last two pillars of his framework, Schumer said, may be among the most important, as unrestricted artificial intelligence could undermine electoral processes or make it impossible to critically evaluate an AI’s claims.
Schumer’s remarks were restrained in calling for any specific proposals. At one point, he acknowledged that a consensus may even emerge that recommends against major government intervention on the technology.
But he was clear on one point: “We do — we do — need to require companies to develop a system where in simple and understandable terms users understand why the system produced a particular answer, and where that answer came from.”
The Senate may still be a long way off from unveiling any comprehensive proposal, however. Schumer predicted that the process is likely to take longer than weeks but shorter than years.
“Months would be the proper timeline,” he said.
[ad_2]