ReportWire

Tag: Voting

  • Rare GOP votes in Texas for gun bill after mass shootings

    Rare GOP votes in Texas for gun bill after mass shootings

    [ad_1]

    AUSTIN, Texas — As a Republican in the Texas Capitol, Sam Harless turned heads: He voted in favor of a stricter gun law.

    In doing so, the Houston state representative helped advance a bill in the Texas House that would raise the purchase age for AR-style rifles like the kind used by an 18-year-old gunman in Uvalde last year. The vote came just days after eight people at an outdoor mall in Dallas were killed by a 33-year-old gunman, who President Biden said used an AR-15-style weapon.

    The bill has little chance of becoming law, but that did not stop powerful gun rights groups Tuesday from springing into action to stamp out the rare glimpse of momentum for supporters of tougher restrictions as mass killings continue to spread anguish in Texas.

    It underlined how almost any attempt to tighten gun laws in Texas is off the table in the state’s GOP-controlled Legislature, which in recent years has made gun access easier following other mass shootings and shows no appetite for reversing course. That includes Republican Gov. Greg Abbott, who — since Saturday shooting in Allen — has called mental health the root of the problem.

    That made Harless’ vote Monday all the more notable.

    “Every kid has a right to go to school and feel safe, and every parent has a right for the kid to feel safe at school,” Harless said in an interview.

    Another Republican, state Rep. Justin Holland, also joined Democrats on the House Select Committee on Community Safety in voting 8-5 to advance the measure that would raise the purchase age of certain semiautomatic weapons from 18 to 21. The bill has been the priority all year of several Uvalde families whose children were among the 19 students and two teachers killed by a gunman nearly a year ago at Robb Elementary School.

    The vote Monday came unexpectedly. For weeks the bill had stalled in the committee, but as protesters filled the Capitol and shouted “Do Something!” two days after the shooting in Allen, the committee gathered to vote the bill out.

    In a statement defending his vote, Holland said, “I do not believe in gun control,” and he noted that he previously voted in support of Texas removing training and background checks to carry a handgun. He also said he has earned three consecutive “A” ratings from the National Rifle Association — but acknowledged he has “no idea” if they will rate him so highly going forward.

    He said testimony given to the committee convinced him that a law raising the purchase age might serve as a “significant roadblock” to a young person acquiring certain semiautomatic weapons and causing harm.

    Gun rights groups, which are rarely forced to aggressively play defense in the Texas Capitol, responded to the bill advancing by urging its members to call lawmakers. Texas Gun Rights, one of the most outspoken groups, said Tuesday that Kyle Rittenhouse, who shot three people during a Wisconsin protest in 2020 and was later acquitted of murder, had joined them in opposition to the bill.

    Harless, who represents a solidly GOP-leaning district in the Houston suburbs, said he has received no pushback from other House Republicans.

    “I just voted my heart and my constituents are likely not the gun groups,” Harless said.

    For a decade, Nicole Golden has been a mainstay in the Texas Capitol in pushing for stricter gun laws, only to see Republicans instead gradually keep removing the ones that are in place. She called Monday’s vote “unprecedented” given the attention that had surrounded the bill.

    Golden, the executive director of the group Texas Gun Sense, said the Legislature has let wither far less contentious bills over guns this year, including one to promote education about gun storage safety. She could not recall a previous time that Republicans took a vote like the one Monday.

    “We’ve gone to their offices to thank them,” she said. “And I think that thanks are due.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Texas panel says lawmaker should be expelled for misconduct

    Texas panel says lawmaker should be expelled for misconduct

    [ad_1]

    AUSTIN, Texas — A Texas legislative committee recommended Saturday that GOP Rep. Bryan Slaton be expelled for inappropriate sexual conduct with a 19-year-old intern. Slaton, from Royse City, could face an expulsion vote by the full House as early as Tuesday.

    Slaton, 45, has declined to comment on the allegations, and did not immediately respond to a phone message left by The Associated Press Saturday afternoon, but his attorney last month called the claims “outrageous” and “false.” The House General Investigative Committee’s recommendation was first reported by The Texas Tribune.

    In the written investigation report, the committee said Slaton gave the 19-year-old intern and another young staffer alcohol at his home, that he had sex with the intern after she was intoxicated, and that he later showed the intern a threatening email but said everything would be fine if the incident was kept quiet. Slaton also asked a fellow lawmaker to keep his behavior secret, the committee said.

    “Slaton’s misconduct is grave and serious,” the committee members wrote in a report, and that he furnished alcohol to a minor, violated employment laws, abused his position of power and engaged in harassment.

    “The fact that Slaton has not expressed regret or remorse for his conduct is also egregious and unwarranted,” the committee wrote. “It is the Committee’s unanimous recommendation that, considering the factors stated above, the only appropriate discipline in this matter is expulsion.”

    Slaton’s legislative biography describes him as, “a proud East Texan with values and principles that represent the great people of East Texas” that were formed by his participation in church and family gatherings. It also sites his degrees from a Baptist seminary school and his work serving as a youth minister.

    Slaton has repeatedly pushed to ban drag shows for kids and has tweeted his support for laws prohibiting gender-affirming healthcare.

    “Children don’t need to be focused on sex and sexualization, and we need to let them just grow up to be children and let them do that as they’re getting closer to being an adult,” Slaton said in an interview last year.

    The misconduct investigation began after two 19-year-old legislative aides and a 21-year-old legislative intern filed complaints in April. The committee hired a former state judge to conduct the investigation, which confirmed the complaints, Committee Chairman Andrew Murr, a Republican, told the 150-member House on Saturday.

    Murr said he expects a resolution calling for Slaton’s expulsion on Tuesday. Expelling Slaton would require a two-thirds vote from House members.

    In the complaints, two of the women said they tried to dissuade the intern from spending time with Slaton and suggested that his behavior was inappropriate. But the intern, who one complainant described as “naive,” was not convinced and so agreed to Slaton’s request to visit his apartment on the night of March 31. The other women went with her, according to the report, and the lawmaker served them rum and cokes.

    One of the young women drank enough to vomit; the intern was was “really dizzy” and had “split vision” according to the report. The other women eventually left the home but the intern reportedly stayed. She told her friends that Slaton drove her home the next morning, stopping at a drugstore so she could obtain emergency contraception on the way, according to the report.

    The Associated Press found that between 2017 and 2021, at least 120 state lawmakers in 41 states have faced public allegations of sexual misconduct or harassment. Among those cases was an Idaho lawmaker who was eventually convicted in 2022 of raping a legislative intern.

    Often, lawmakers accused of sexual misconduct run again for office and are re-elected. Efforts to remove them are rarer.

    But this year, a handful of lawmakers nationwide have been expelled or barred from Statehouses for simply taking part in protests or violating “decorum” rules. Montana Rep. Zooey Zephyr, who is transgender, was barred by Republicans from the House floor after she rebuked colleagues supporting a ban on gender-affirming care for children and opposed their efforts to silence her. Two Democratic lawmakers from Tennessee were expelled by Republicans in April for their role in a protest calling for more gun control after a deadly school shooting in Nashville.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Kari Lake’s lawyers fined in failed Arizona election lawsuit

    Kari Lake’s lawyers fined in failed Arizona election lawsuit

    [ad_1]

    PHOENIX — Republican Kari Lake’s lawyers were sanctioned $2,000 Thursday by the Arizona Supreme Court in their unsuccessful challenge of her defeat in the governor’s race last year to Democrat Katie Hobbs.

    In an order, the state’s highest court said Lake’s attorney made “false factual statements” that more than 35,000 ballots had been improperly added to the total ballot count. They have 10 days to submit the payment to the court clerk.

    The court, however, refused to order Lake to pay attorney fees to cover the costs of defending Hobbs and Secretary of State Adrian Fontes in Lake’s appeal.

    Chief Justice Robert Brutinel cited Lake’s challenge over signature verification remains unresolved.

    Hobbs and Fontes said Lake and her attorneys should face sanctions for baselessly claiming that over 35,000 ballots were inserted into the race at a facility where a contractor scanned mail-in ballots to prepare them for county election workers to process and count.

    When the high court first confronted Lake’s challenge in late March, justices said the evidence doesn’t show that over 35,000 ballots were added to the vote count in Maricopa County, home to more than 60% of the state’s voters.

    Lawyers for Hobbs and Fontes told the court that Lake and her lawyers misrepresented evidence and are hurting the elections process by continuing to push baseless claims of election fraud. Attorneys for Fontes asked for the court to order Lake’s lawyers to forfeit any money they might have earned in making the appeal, arguing that they shouldn’t be allowed to benefit from their own misconduct.

    Lake’s lawyers said sanctions weren’t appropriate because no one can doubt that Lake honestly believes her race was determined by electoral misconduct.

    Lake, who lost to Hobbs by just over 17,000 votes, was among the most vocal 2022 Republican candidates promoting former President Donald Trump’s election lies, which she made the centerpiece of her campaign. While most other election deniers around the country conceded after losing their races in November, Lake did not.

    In her challenge, Lake focused on problems with ballot printers at some polling places in Maricopa County.

    The defective printers produced ballots that were too light to be read by the on-site tabulators at polling places. Lines backed up in some areas amid the confusion. Lake alleged ballot printer problems were the result of intentional misconduct.

    County officials say everyone had a chance to vote and all ballots were counted because those affected by the printers were taken to more sophisticated counters at election headquarters.

    The state Supreme Court declined on March 22 to hear nearly all of Lake’s appeal, saying there was no evidence that 35,000 ballots were added to vote totals.

    Still, the high court revived Lake’s claim that challenged the application of signature verification procedures on early ballots in Maricopa County. The court sent the claim back to a lower-court judge to consider. This latest order will allow a trial court to resume litigating the matter.

    In mid-February, the Arizona Court of Appeals rejected Lake’s assertions, concluding she presented no evidence that voters whose ballots were unreadable by tabulators at polling places were not able to vote.

    Lake’s attorneys said the chain of custody for ballots was broken at an off-site facility where a contractor scans mail-in ballots to prepare them for processing. The lawyers asserted that workers put their own mail-in ballots into the pile rather than returning them through normal channels, and that paperwork documenting ballot transfers was missing. The county disputes the claims.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • French constitutional body rules on pension referendum call

    French constitutional body rules on pension referendum call

    [ad_1]

    France’s top constitutional body is to rule on a last-ditch effort by opposition lawmakers to thwart President Emmanuel Macron’s move to raise the retirement age to 64, through a possible referendum or new bill restoring the pension age to 62

    PARIS — France’s top constitutional body is to rule Wednesday on a last-ditch effort by opposition lawmakers to thwart President Emmanuel Macron’s move to raise the retirement age to 64, through a possible referendum or new bill restoring the age to 62.

    The move has been prompted by opposition legislators who are seeking to launch a complex, lengthy process in hopes of rejecting Macron’s unpopular pension law that was enacted last month.

    The Constitutional Council’s role is to assess whether the opposition’s request meets the legal conditions for a potential referendum. If so, supporters would have nine months to collect signatures from at least 4.8 million, or 10%, of French voters.

    Macron’s government would then be able to choose between sending the opposition’s text to parliament for debate and eventually a vote, or waiting for six months to put the measure before voters in a referendum. The proposal would only go to a national referendum if it were not debated by lawmakers.

    However, the Constitutional Council rejected a similar proposal in April. The authors have revised the measure to add language stating that a change in the financing of France’s pension system is needed.

    The process, established in 2015, has never yet led to a referendum.

    Regardless of what the council decides, its ruling would not suspend the law that Macron’s government pushed through by using a special constitutional power to raise the retirement age without a final parliamentary vote.

    Macron has defended the reform, saying it is needed to keep the pension system afloat as the population ages.

    The measure has prompted months of street protests from opponents who argue there are other ways to finance the pension system, including via a tax on the wealthy or employers instead.

    The country’s main labor unions on Tuesday called for another round of nationwide demonstrations and strikes on June 6.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Former Ohio attorneys general fight supermajority amendment aimed at thwarting abortion rights question

    Former Ohio attorneys general fight supermajority amendment aimed at thwarting abortion rights question

    [ad_1]

    Ohio Republican state lawmakers pressed forward Tuesday with a plan to raise the threshold for passing future constitutional amendments in August, with an eye toward thwarting a November abortion rights question. Five former Ohio attorneys general of both parties joined a growing chorus in opposing their plan.

    Two Ohio House committees had separate possible votes scheduled — one on a bill establishing a $20 million special election this summer, and another on a joint resolution that would place an issue on that ballot asking to raise the threshold for passing constitutional amendments from 50%-plus-one to 60%.

    Five former attorneys general wrote a letter to every state senator and representative Monday opposing the plan, a move that follows opposition from former Republican Govs. Bob Taft and John Kasich and former Democratic Govs. Ted Strickland and Richard Celeste.

    Republicans Betty Montgomery and Jim Petro and Democrats Richard Cordray, Lee Fisher and Nancy Rogers all told lawmakers they are uniquely positioned to comment on the proposal, given the state attorney general’s key roles in reviewing citizen-led initiatives and litigating on the state’s behalf.

    “Constitutions are designed to endure, and major changes in fundamental constitutional arrangements should not be made unless the changes are supported by a careful understanding of the policies being changed and the consequences of the proposed changes,” they wrote. “Such changes should not be made without the opportunity for participation of those most intimately affected by the constitution — the people. Clearly, that has not happened in this rush to revise our constitution.”

    The former top lawyers said Ohio’s existing initiative process has “worked well” as a vehicle over more than a century for a host of policy changes impacting Ohioans — including creation of county home rule, legislative term limits and setting a minimum wage.

    State Rep. Brian Stewart, the House resolution’s Republican sponsor, defended the resolution at a meeting of the House Constitutional Amendments Committee. He and GOP Secretary of State Frank LaRose introduced the 60% proposal during last year’s lame duck session, with LaRose arguing it would be “a win for good government” that would protect the state’s founding document from deep-pocketed special interests.

    Republican Gov. Mike DeWine, who is also a former state attorney general, has said he would sign the August special election bill, should the politically fractured Ohio House get it through a floor vote. Asked last week how that squares with his signing of a bill in January that eliminated August special elections, which were held up as expensive, low-turnout assaults on democracy, DeWine said “it’s inconsistent.”

    He noted that the legislation also contained a long list of other election law changes that he supported, including a strict new photo ID requirement.

    The Senate passed its versions of both measures last month.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Opponents make last-ditch effort to stop French pension law

    Opponents make last-ditch effort to stop French pension law

    [ad_1]

    PARIS — Opponents of a law that would raise the retirement age in France from 62 to 64 are making last-ditch plans to prevent the change that is set to take effect in September.

    The country’s main labor unions on Tuesday called for another round of nationwide demonstrations and strikes on June 6. May Day protests across France on Monday drew either 800,000 people — that’s according to French authorities — or 2.3 million people, which was the estimate given by organizers.

    France’s top constitutional body is expected to rule Wednesday on a request from opposition lawmakers to start a lengthy process that could ultimately lead to a bill or a referendum to restore the minimum retirement age of 62.

    With President Emmanuel Macron having demonstrated his determination to press on with the unpopular pension reform, here’s a look at the next steps for his government and the plan’s opponents.

    A LONG SHOT AT A REFERENDUM

    The Constitutional Council’s role is to assess whether the opposition’s request over bringing the retirement age back to 62 meets the legal conditions for a potential referendum. If so, supporters would have nine months to collect signatures from at least 4.8 million, or 10%, of voters.

    Macron’s government would then be able to choose between sending the opposition’s text to parliament for debate and eventually a vote, or waiting for six months to put the measure before voters in a referendum in six months. The proposal would only go to a national referendum if it were not debated by lawmakers.

    However, the Constitutional Council rejected a similar proposal in April. The authors have revised the measure to add language stating that a change in the financing of France’s pension system is needed.

    Regardless of what the council decides Wednesday, its ruling would not suspend the law that Macron’s government pushed through by using a special constitutional authority to raise the retirement age without a final parliamentary vote.

    MACRON WANTS TO MOVE ON

    In a televised speech last month, the French leader made clear his intention to move on to other topics now that his pension law was enacted.

    Macron said he heard people’s anger but insisted that the law was needed to keep the pension system afloat as the population ages.

    He announced negotiations to start this month on “key issues” such as improving employee wages, career progressions and working conditions, including for older workers, in the hope these would persuade some unions to get back to the negotiating table.

    Last week, Macron’s government presented its road map for the coming months, with the aim of getting greater support for future bills. Parliament is set to debate a major military bill by the end of the month.

    Legislators will then examine a government proposal on profit-sharing by companies with more than 11 employees. The proposal is intended to turn into law an agreement that unions and employers’ organizations signed in February.

    This paragraph might work better if we reverse order of sentences?

    If you think that works better that’s fine with me. the chronological order is that the government has six months to send the text to parliament – if it doesn’t, it must organize a referendum)).

    OPPONENTS’ NEXT STEPS

    Unions argue the higher retirement age erodes hard-won rights for workers. The date they chose for the next nationwide protests is two days before the lower house of France’s Parliament plans to debate a legislative proposal to bring back the retirement age back to 62.

    A group of opposition lawmakers has championed the proposal, which is separate from the one before the Constitutional Council, in the hope that most members from the left and the right would vote in favor. Macron’s centrist alliance lost its majority in the National Assembly last year.

    Yet there’s no guarantee such move will succeed, because some opposition lawmakers from the conservative party are in favor of the change.

    In a statement Tuesday, unions said they would work together to issue common proposals to address employee concerns over “wages, working conditions, health at work, social democracy, gender equality and the environment.”

    “There’s deep mistrust, and dialogue can only be restored if the government proves its intention to finally take into account unions’ proposals,” they wrote.

    Opponents are also expected to stage more “casserolades,” or scattered protest actions in which they bang pots and pans to make noise near sites Macron and his government members are visiting.

    “We will not turn over a new leaf as long as the pension reform is not withdrawn,” the head of the hard-left CGT union, Sophie Binet, warned Monday.

    ___

    Follow AP’s coverage of the French government at https://apnews.com/hub/france-government

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Paraguay’s long-ruling Colorado Party has easy election win

    Paraguay’s long-ruling Colorado Party has easy election win

    [ad_1]

    ASUNCIÓN, Paraguay — Paraguayans voted overwhelmingly to keep the long-ruling Colorado Party in power for five more years, backing its presidential candidate and giving it majorities in both houses of Congress.

    Santiago Peña, a 44-year-old economist, had 43% of the votes in a preliminary count from Sunday’s election, with nearly all voting places reporting. That was far ahead of the 27% held by his closest challenger, Efraín Alegre of the Pact for a New Paraguay, a broad-based opposition coalition that had united in an effort to bring to an end Colorado’s seven-decade stranglehold on power.

    The conservative Colorado Party also had a strong showing in other races, winning 15 of the 17 governorships up for election and getting majorities in both the Senate and the lower house.

    Led by Alegre, the opposition coalition had been optimistic it was going to be able to win votes due to widespread unhappiness over high levels of corruption and failures in the health and education systems, which took center stage during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Yet a significant number of non-Colorado voters instead supported Paraguayo Cubas, a right-wing populist outsider who received 23% of the vote with a strong anti-establishment message, a larger share than had been expected.

    There were 13 candidates in all, but Paraguay doesn’t require a presidential candidate to get more than 50% of the votes, giving the victory to whomever gets the most votes.

    Peña celebrated a showing that on Aug. 15 will make him Paraguay’s youngest president since the return of democracy in 1989.

    “Today we’re not celebrating a personal triumph, we’re celebrating the victory of a people who with their vote chose the path of social peace, dialogue, fraternity, and national reconciliation,” Peña told a crowd of supporters Sunday night. “Long live Paraguay! Long live the Colorado Party!”

    Alegre acknowledged defeat soon thereafter.

    “Today, the results indicate that perhaps the effort we have made was not enough,” Alegre told reporters, adding that divisions among the opposition “prevented us from reaching the goal of being able to bring about the change that the majority of Paraguayans are asking of us.”

    The first to congratulate the president-elect was the outgoing president, Mario Abdo Benítez. “Congratulations to the Paraguayan people for their great participation in this electoral process, and to the president-elect Santiago Peña,” he said on social media. “We will work to initiate an orderly and transparent transition that strengthens our institutions and the country’s democracy.”

    Before the vote, analysts had predicted a close contest for president, saying Alegre could have a chance of unseating South America’s longest-governing party, which has essentially ruled Paraguay uninterrupted since 1947.

    But many voters preferred to stay with the familiar, an unusual turn in a region where incumbents have not done well in recent elections.

    “An unexpected result, very unexpected. I think even the Colorado Party members are shocked by such a wide margin,” political consultant Sebastián Acha said. “It gives him enormous legitimacy due to the size of the difference and that makes Peña’s victory indisputable.”

    The results also appeared to mark a victory for former President Horacio Cartes, who governed in 2013-2018, and who the U.S. State Department recently accused of being involved in “significant corruption” as well as having ties to terrorism. He has denied the allegations, while Peña called them “groundless.”

    Cartes, a local magnate who is also the president of the Colorado Party, is a powerful figure in Paraguayan politics and members of the opposition had characterized Peña as a frontman for Cartes to hold power.

    Cartes stood next to Peña as he gave his celebratory speech Sunday night.

    “I want to be a tool for you,” Cartes told Peña. “I want you to be sure that the Colorado Party is going to be your best tool.”

    Peña was finance minister in the Cartes government and, until recently, a member of the board of Banco Basa, a local bank owned by the former president.

    The U.S. Embassy posted a statement on social media congatulating Peña. “We will continue to work together in strengthening our excellent bilateral relations and promoting transparency and inclusive democracy,” it added.

    The election in the country of almost 7 million people also had geopolitical implications as Paraguay is the only remaining country in South America to have diplomatic relations with Taiwan, and those ties became an issue in the campaign.

    Alegre had called for the landlocked country’s relationship with Taiwan to be reviewed, saying they are too costly. Peña defended Paraguay’s relationship with Taipei, though he said he would seek more trade with China, without explaining how that would come about.

    “We have a diplomatic and historic relationship with Taiwan of more than 60 years, based on principles and democratic values that we believe are fundamental for a society like Paraguay,” Peña said.

    The Taiwanese Embassy posted a message on social media congratulating “president-elect” Peña.

    “Congratulations to the Paraguayan people, who showed the world the democratic power of citizens through their votes,” the embassy said.

    Brazil’s left-of-center president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, also congratulated Peña.

    “Good luck in your mandate,” the Brazilian wrote on social media. “We will work together for even better and stronger relations between our countries, and for a South America with more unity, development and prosperity.”

    Alegre, a lawyer who heads the Liberal party, the second-largest political force in Congress, was making his third bid for the presidency, though this time he represented a mix of political parties.

    Peña’s presidential campaign was hampered by U.S. sanctions on Cartes for alleged bribery and ties to Hezbollah, which Washington designates as a terrorist group. The sanctions blocked Cartes from the U.S. financial system and cut off funding and loans for the party’s campaign.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Uzbekistan votes on changes that extend president’s tenure

    Uzbekistan votes on changes that extend president’s tenure

    [ad_1]

    Voters in Uzebekistan are casting ballots in a referendum on a revised constitution that promises human rights reforms

    TASHKENT, Uzbekistan — Voters in Uzebekistan, the most populous former Soviet Central Asian republic, cast ballots Sunday in a referendum on a revised constitution that promises human rights reforms but that also would allow the country’s president to stay in office until 2040.

    Approval appears certain. Backers have conducted an array of promotional events featuring local celebrities, and elections in Uzbekistan are widely regarded as noncompetitive.

    With four hours until the polls closed, the central elections commission reported turnout at more than 62%, well above the 50% threshold for the referendum to be valid.

    The proposed changes include lengthening the presidential term from five to seven years, while retaining the existing two-term limit. Although President Shavkat Mirziyoyev is in his second term, the change in term length would allow him to run twice more after his current tenure ends in 2026.

    Other changes include abolishing capital punishment and boosting legal protections for citizens, including those accused of crimes.

    Under Mirziyoyev’s predecessor, Islam Karimov, Uzbekistan was one of the region’s most repressive countries. Mirziyoyev, who took over after Karimov died in 2016, touts the constitutional changes as showing that Uzbekistan will make freedoms and human rights paramount.

    The referendum originally was planned for last year, but was put off in the wake of deadly unrest in the Karakalpakstan region when it was announced that the changes would include rescinding Karakalpakstan’s right to vote on whether to secede.

    Although the likelihood of secession is very small, that proposal angered residents of the poor and environmentally beleaguered republic that makes up a third of Uzbekistan’s territory but has only about 5% of the country’s 36 million people. Mass unrest broke out in the Karakalpak capital, Nukus; at least 18 people died in clashes with police.

    The new package being voted on Sunday retains the Karakalpakstan secession right.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Opposition bloc seeks to oust Paraguay’s long-ruling party

    Opposition bloc seeks to oust Paraguay’s long-ruling party

    [ad_1]

    ASUNCIÓN, Paraguay — A broad-based opposition coalition in Paraguay is seeking to unseat South America’s longest-governing party Sunday in elections focused on corruption, the economy, health care and even ties with Taiwan.

    The Colorado Party has governed Paraguay almost uninterrupted since 1947 and the landlocked nation has been practically immune to the political change and social movements that have swept the region.

    All this could change with Sunday’s vote, which is focused on Santiago Peña of the Colorado Party and Efraín Alegre, the candidate of the Pact for a New Paraguay coalition who is also head of the Liberal party, the second-largest political force in Congress.

    Paraguay doesn’t have a runoff, so whoever of the 13 candidates receives the most votes will be the next president. Voters are also casting ballots for Congress members.

    Analysts expect a tight contest, with the opposition fueled by anger over high levels of corruption and the deficiencies in the health and education systems that worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic. Paraguay has a relatively stable economy though with high levels of poverty.

    “There is a rather strange sense of uncertainty for this stage of the (governing) party, because in other elections the Colorados were already assured of victory, which is not the case this time,” said political consultant Sebastián Acha, leader of PRO Desarrollo Paraguay, a group that promotes public policies.

    Alegre, a 60-year-old lawyer, is making his third bid for the presidency, though this time he is representing a mix of political parties. Paraguay is the only remaining country in South America to have diplomatic relations with Taiwan, and Alegre has called for those ties to be reviewed, saying they are too costly.

    Peña has defended the country’s relationship with Taiwan, but says he would seek more trade with China, without explaining how that would come about.

    Peña was finance minister in the 2013-2018 government of powerful former President Horacio, who has been accused of corruption and links to terrorism by the United States. and, until recently.

    Peña’s presidential campaign was hit by U.S. sanctions on Cartes for alleged bribery and ties to Hezbollah, which Washington designates as a terrorist group. The sanctions blocked Cartes, who is president of the Colorado Party, from the U.S. financial system and cut off funding and loans for the party’s campaign.

    “The sanctions have been lethal,” said Diego Abete Brun, a political science professor who heads the Latin American and Hemispheric Studies program at George Washington University. “Cartes was the financing chief of the Colorado Party. The cash box was left empty.”

    Peña said the accusations against Cartes “are groundless.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • McCarthy struggles for debt bill votes, makes late changes

    McCarthy struggles for debt bill votes, makes late changes

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — House Speaker Kevin McCarthy pushed ahead Wednesday toward a swift vote on his sweeping debt ceiling package despite a veto threat from the White House, struggling to shore up support even after making post-midnight concessions to Republican holdouts in the slim GOP majority.

    Passage of the sprawling 320-page package in the House would be a turnaround for the embattled McCarthy as the chamber’s Republican majority confronts President Joe Biden with demands for spending restrictions and cuts in exchange for approving $1.5 more debt to pay the nation’s bills.

    While the president has threatened to veto the Republican bill — which would almost surely die in the Senate anyway — McCarthy is challenging Biden with a GOP plan to kickstart negotiations and prevent a potentially catastrophic federal debt default this summer. The two could hardly be further apart on how to resolve the issue.

    “We can vote as early as today on this,” said Majority Leader Steve Scalise after a morning meeting of House Republicans, though no vote was scheduled. “We want to get this done as soon as possible.”

    The House launched a noontime debate with lawmakers saying they were expecting a vote later Wednesday, though some Republicans cautioned that a final roll call could still push into Thursday.

    From the White House, Communications Director Ben LaBolt said that McCarthy “has cut a deal with the most extreme MAGA elements of his party,” a reference to the Trump-era “Make America Great Again” slogan that has come to represent far-right Republicans.

    House Republicans “are selling out hard-working Americans in order to defend their top priority: restoring the Trump tax cuts for the wealthiest and corporations,” LaBolt said in a statement. “Budgets are a statement of values — and House Republicans have made clear who they are fighting for.”

    In the rush to bring the package forward, changes were approved at a 2 a.m. session of the House Rules Committee despite earlier repeated insistence by McCarthy and his leadership team that there would be no changes.

    Facing a revolt from Midwestern Republicans over doing away with biofuel tax credits that were just signed into law last year by Democrat Biden, GOP House members relented and allowed the tax credits to stay on the books in their bill.

    Republicans also agreed to more quickly launch the bolstered work requirements for recipients of government aid, starting in 2024 as proposed by another holdout, Freedom Caucus’ Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., who has led previous challenges to McCarthy.

    Republicans hold a five-seat majority and face several absences this week, leaving McCarthy with almost no votes to spare.

    As McCarthy worked to shore up support, some of the most conservative rank-and-file Republican members who have never voted for a debt ceiling increase in their quest to slash spending said they were preparing to do just that, rallying behind the speaker’s strategy to push Biden to the negotiating table.

    Leaders were working hard, still short of the final tally needed from their majority.

    “This week, we will pass the bill on this floor,” McCarthy told reporters late Tuesday.

    Democrats have criticized the package over what Biden calls “wacko” Republican ideas and the “same old trickle-down” economics favored by the GOP, now “only worse.” In the Senate, where Democrats have the majority, they say the Republican plan it is dead on arrival.

    The top Democrat on the House Rules panel, Rep. Jim McGovern, derided the “midnight seance” that produced the final package, particularly “cruelly” imposing stricter work requirements on recipients of food stamps and other government aid.

    “Taking food away from people is a rotten thing to do,” said McGovern of Massachusetts in the early hours of Wednesday morning.

    Still, McCarthy is using the exercise as a political strategy to shake up the debate. Biden has so far refused to engage with House Republicans on what the White House calls “hostage taking” over the debt ceiling. McCarthy hopes House passage will kickstart talks with Democrats — if he can round up enough votes.

    It’s a first big test for the president and the Republican speaker, coming at a time of increased political anxiety about the need to raise the federal debt limit, now at $31 trillion, to keep paying the country’s already accrued debts.

    The Treasury Department is taking “extraordinary measures” to pay the bills, but funding is expected to run out this summer. Economists and experts warn that even the threat of a federal debt default would send shockwaves through the economy.

    In exchange for raising the debt limit by $1.5 trillion into 2024, the bill would rollback federal spending to fiscal 2022 levels and cap future spending increases at 1% a year for the next decade.

    The package would also impose tougher work requirements on recipients of food stamps and government aid, halt Biden’s plans to forgive up to $20,000 in student loans and end the landmark renewable energy tax breaks Biden signed into law last year. It would tack on a sweeping Republican bill to boost oil, gas and coal production.

    A nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office analysis released Tuesday showed the Republican plan would reduce federal deficits by $4.8 trillion over the decade if the proposed changes were enacted into law.

    Several Republicans from the party’s right wing, eager for even stricter spending cuts, said this bill was at least a starting point as they prepared to vote for McCarthy’s strategy and bolster his hand in talks with Biden.

    Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., a member of the Freedom Caucus, said he “wanted double” the deficit savings contained in the bill, but would vote for it.

    “I agreed to vote for it because it starts the ball, it gets us in the arena to solve the debt problem,” Norman said. He said, “We’ll pass it today.”

    Freshman Rep. Derrick Van Orden, R-Wis., said: “It’s our obligation to get Speaker McCarthy to the table.”

    Others though, remained noncommittal or flat out no’s.

    Rep, Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., said Republican leaders were a no-show for a planned meeting and don’t have his support. The nearly $32 trillion in debt, “that’s my major concern,” he said.

    In the Senate, leaders were watching and waiting for the House action.

    Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said House passage of the legislation would be a “wasted effort” and that McCarthy should come to the table with Democrats to pass a straightforward bill without GOP priorities and avoid default.

    __

    Associated Press writer Farnoush Amiri contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • North Dakota limits bathroom use for transgender people

    North Dakota limits bathroom use for transgender people

    [ad_1]

    North Dakota’s Republican Gov. Doug Burgum has signed a bill that limits access to bathrooms, locker rooms and shower rooms for transgender and gender-nonconforming people in several state facilities

    ByTRISHA AHMED Associated Press/Report for America

    Transgender kids and adults in North Dakota won’t be able to access bathrooms, locker rooms or shower rooms that match the gender they identify with, under a new law covering some state-run facilities signed by Republican Gov. Doug Burgum.

    Dorms and other housing controlled by the state board of higher education would be affected, as well as penitentiaries and correctional facilities for youths and adults. Restrooms and shower rooms will be designated for use exclusively by males or exclusively by females. Transgender or gender-nonconforming people would need to get approval from a staff member to use the restroom or shower room of their choice.

    Burgum’s office announced Wednesday that he signed the bill the previous day. It had passed the state House and Senate with veto-proof majorities.

    The American Civil Liberties Union has said that so far this year, more than 450 bills attacking the rights of transgender people have been introduced in state legislatures.

    The governor’s office declined to comment on the bill Wednesday.

    Rep. Eric Murphy was one of three Republicans who defied their party and voted against the bill when it was in the House.

    “I don’t try to be polarizing. I just don’t think there was a need for the legislation,” Murphy said in an interview with The Associated Press after the governor’s decision. The lawmaker from Grand Forks is a professor at the University of North Dakota.

    Last week, the governor signed a bill that restricts transgender health care in the state, immediately making it a crime to give gender-affirming care to people younger than 18.

    That measure also received veto-proof support from GOP lawmakers — although some Republicans did vote against it, alongside all Democrats.

    Earlier this month, Burgum also signed a transgender athlete ban into law after it similarly passed the House and Senate with veto-proof majorities. In 2021, Burgum vetoed a bill that would have imposed a transgender athlete ban at that time, but House and Senate lawmakers did not have enough votes back then to override his veto.

    ___

    Trisha Ahmed is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. Follow Trisha Ahmed on Twitter: @TrishaAhmed15

    ___

    This story has been updated to correct that the bill was signed Tuesday and announced Wednesday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • McCarthy edges Republicans closer to House debt vote

    McCarthy edges Republicans closer to House debt vote

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — House Republicans pushed their debt ceiling package toward a vote as soon as Wednesday as Speaker Kevin McCarthy and his leadership team huddled with key holdouts late into Tuesday evening, working to ensure they would have majority support for passage.

    Prospects for the sweeping package were buoyed by a nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office analysis showing the Republican plan would reduce federal deficits by $4.8 trillion over the decade if the proposed changes were enacted into law. The House Republican plan would lift the debt ceiling by $1.5 trillion into 2024 in exchange for steep budget cuts Democrats and even some Republicans oppose. President Joe Biden has threatened to veto the bill.

    McCarthy declined to say late Tuesday whether he had the 218 votes needed from his slim majority in the face of Democratic opposition. No roll call was yet scheduled, and voting could drag into the coming days.

    “This week, we will pass the bill on this floor,” McCarthy told reporters.

    The Republican speaker’s office at the U.S. Capitol became a revolving door of lawmakers coming and going, including a contingent of Iowa lawmakers believed to have concerns over gutting clean energy tax breaks for biofuels. With 222 Republicans in the majority, and absences expected this week, McCarthy has almost no votes to spare.

    While the 320-page package has almost no chance of becoming law, McCarthy is using it as a strategy to shake up the debate. Biden has so far refused to engage with the House Republicans on what the White House calls “hostage taking” over the debt ceiling. McCarthy hopes passage will kickstart talks with Democrats.

    McCarthy acknowledged after the rounds of closed-door meetings that not all House Republicans were fully on board with the proposal. He dismissed questions about certain provisions that drew concerns. Instead, he insisted that passing this bill would be merely a starting point for negotiations with Biden and Democrats, and not the final product.

    “There’s a number of members that will vote for it going forward and say there are some concerns they have,” he said. But he said they will also say they are ready to vote anyway: “They want to make sure the negotiation goes forward.”

    From the White House, the administration said the president would veto the bill.

    Biden dismissed the Republican ideas as the “same old trickle down” economics down “dressed up in MAGA clothing,” a reference to the Trump-era ”Make America Great Again” slogan that has come to represent the more extreme elements in the Republican Party.

    ”To default would be totally irresponsible,” Biden said at an event Tuesday after announcing his reelection campaign.

    It’s a first big test for the president and the Republican speaker, coming at a time of increased political anxiety about the need to raise the federal debt limit, now at $31 trillion, to keep paying the country’s already accrued debts.

    The Treasury Department is taking “extraordinary measures” to pay the bills, but funding is expected to run out this summer. Economists and experts warn that even the threat of a federal debt default would send shockwaves through the economy.

    “This economic catastrophe is preventable,” Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said in a speech Tuesday. “The solution is simple: Congress must vote to raise or suspend the debt limit. It should do so without conditions. And it should not wait until the last minute.”

    To push the bill to passage Wednesday or later this week, McCarthy was working to unite the “five families” — the often warring factions of the House Freedom Caucus and others that make up the House Republican majority.

    In exchange for raising the debt limit by $1.5 trillion into 2024, the bill would rollback federal spending to fiscal 2022 levels and cap future spending at 1% a year for the next decade.

    The package would also impose tougher work requirements on recipients of food stamps and government aid, halt Biden’s plans to forgive up to $20,000 in student loans and end the landmark renewable energy tax breaks Biden signed into law last year. It would tack on a sweeping Republican bill to boost oil, gas and coal production.

    “There’s been a lot of fruitful conversations and we’re confident we’re going to get it passed,” said Rep. Mike Johnson, R-La., the vice chairman of the House Republican conference, exiting McCarthy’s office.

    Lawmakers were negotiating late into the evening Tuesday on last-minute changes. Lawmakers for Iowa and other Midwestern states had concerns about rescinding new tax breaks on biofuels, while a member of the Freedom Caucus wanted more changes to bolster work requirements.

    Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., the chairman of the Freedom Caucus, said he was waiting to see the final product.

    Another Freedom Caucus member, Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., said he’s leaning no on voting for the bill. He’s aiming for bigger spending cuts than those being considered.

    “There’s a lot of questions,” said Rep. Kevin Hern of Oklahoma, the chairman of the powerful Republican Study Committee.

    But Hern said McCarthy let the caucus leaders know, “He’s not changing the bill.”

    Senators have been bystanders in the debate, but are awaiting next steps.

    Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer called the Republican bill “a wish-list straight out of the Freedom Caucus playbook. It might as well be called the Default On America Act because that’s exactly what it is: DOA.”

    But Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said, “It’s time for President Biden to stop the partisan stubbornness, join Speaker McCarthy at the grown-ups’ table, and get talking.”

    On Tuesday, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said if the changes proposed in the bill were carried out it would shave $4.8 trillion off the deficit over the next decade, with large chunks coming from ending the student loan forgiveness and green energy tax breaks.

    ___

    Associated Press writers Kevin Freking, Colleen Long and Fatima Hussein contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Scholz party paves way for new center-right mayor in Berlin

    Scholz party paves way for new center-right mayor in Berlin

    [ad_1]

    Members of Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s party have narrowly approved a local coalition deal in Berlin with Germany’s main center-right opposition party

    ByGEIR MOULSON Associated Press

    BERLIN — Members of Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s party have narrowly approved a local coalition deal in Berlin with Germany’s main center-right opposition party, a decision which should pave the way for the capital’s first conservative mayor in more than two decades.

    The Social Democrats’ Berlin branch said Sunday that 54.3% of members who voted in a ballot backed the agreement. A convention of the center-right Christian Democratic Union is expected to approve it on Monday, the last step before Christian Democrat Kai Wegner can seek election as mayor by the state legislature.

    The expected change of government follows a state election in February, a rerun made necessary by serious glitches in the previous vote in 2021. The CDU emerged as the biggest party, making big gains as the three parties in Berlin’s left-wing government all lost supporters.

    Outgoing Mayor Franziska Giffey’s center-left Social Democrats have led Berlin since 2001. They took much of the blame for the 2021 election chaos. Many Berliners also are angry over rising housing costs and that the city in recent years has had a dysfunctional bureaucracy, by German standards, in which getting basic paperwork done often entails lengthy waits.

    February’s election did leave the outgoing government with a majority in the legislature — albeit one that raised the possibility of increasing rancor and gridlock, with the Social Democrats just 53 votes ahead of their biggest partner, the environmentalist Greens, in second place.

    But Giffey, a former federal minister who became mayor in December 2021, said that the new beginning voters wanted wasn’t possible with a rerun of the outgoing coalition and her party risked doing even worse at the next election if it carried on.

    The decision to become the CDU’s junior partner drew significant criticism in the party’s ranks. Giffey said she was “very relieved” by the outcome of the ballot and promised to take dissenters’ concerns seriously.

    Giffey is expected to take a ministerial job under Wegner, whose government will face pressure to produce results quickly. It will only serve out the term that started with Berlin’s September 2021 election. The next state vote is due in late 2026.

    At national level, Scholz leads a three-party coalition of the Social Democrats, Greens and pro-business Free Democrats. The CDU leads the opposition. Germany’s 16 states, which have significant powers in many policy areas, have governments of many different political complexions.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • New wave of GOP candidates to challenge Trump, DeSantis

    New wave of GOP candidates to challenge Trump, DeSantis

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — The opening phase of the Republican presidential primary has largely centered on former President Donald Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis ‘ escalating collision.

    But a new wave of GOP White House hopefuls will begin entering the race as soon as next week following a months’-long lull. They include former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, who will formally launch his campaign Wednesday.

    Former Vice President Mike Pence has said he will finalize his plans in “weeks, not months.” He has kept a busy schedule of early state visits and policy speeches as aides have discussed details of an announcement including dates as early as May, but more likely in June. South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, who has formed a presidential exploratory committee, is expected to join the race in a similar time frame.

    Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, meanwhile, has been meeting with former aides and returned to New Hampshire this week, where he told the first-in-the-nation primary state that, “Tonight is the beginning of the case against Donald Trump.” He has said he will make a decision “in the next couple of weeks.”

    The contenders will enter the race at a critical moment as DeSantis, who hasn’t officially announced a campaign, has struggled to live up to sky-high expectations among some early backers. He has been losing support among elected Republicans in his own state to Trump and is prompting concern among some in the party that his positions on abortion and LGBTQ rights, among other issues, could render him unelectable in a general election. Trump in recent weeks has solidified his status as the race’s early frontrunner, even after he was indicted in New York, but remains the subject of intensifying investigations in Atlanta and Washington and persistent concerns about his electability after losing to President Joe Biden in 2020.

    Would-be rivals hope that dynamic leaves an opening for one of the fresh entrants to emerge as an alternative to the current polling leaders. Some strategists hope Trump and DeSantis will attack one another so viciously that they will turn off voters, leaving them searching for an alternative.

    “It’s not uncommon for a third candidate who’s not involved in the kerfuffle to rise,” said Bryan Lanza, a former Trump adviser, who has been informally advising Larry Elder, the conservative talk radio host who launch a his long-shot campaign Thursday.

    Lanza said he expects a robust race to be the “leader of the second tier” of candidates currently polling at under 10%.

    Beyond Trump and Elder, the current field of official GOP presidential candidates includes former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley and tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, both of whom announced their bids in February.

    President Joe Biden, meanwhile, is expected to announce his reelection effort as soon as next week. He faces minimal primary competition.

    Among Republicans, the early debates that are slated to begin this summer could be crucial in determining who builds momentum, particularly given DeSantis’ expectations.

    That means candidates may need to cement their planning soon, even if they’d prefer to wait longer. The Republican National Committee has scheduled the first debate for August and is expected to set strict benchmarks that candidates must satisfy to participate, including amassing tens of thousands of individual donors.

    “That takes a little time to do and so if you’re gong to be serious about this — and I think you have to be on the stage to be serious about it — then you probably have to make the decision by May,” Christie said this week during an interview with the media outlet Semafor.

    In the meantime, candidates-in-waiting have seen little reason to jump in sooner, particularly given Trump’s propensity to attack. Instead, they have been biding their time, visiting early voting states, delivering speeches and wooing donors as they assess the field. Pence, for instance, was in California this week meeting with potential backers and will host another donor retreat for his nonprofit group in late May.

    “If I was in their shoes, I would wait as long as possible,” said former Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who was considered an early favorite for the Republican nomination when he ran against Trump in 2016. He remembers realizing, in those early weeks, how dramatically Trump had upended the race, dominating everything.

    “There was no way around it then,” he said. “And right now, anybody who thinks they’re somehow going to go in and change that is missing the reality.”

    The rivalry between Trump and DeSantis has been turning uglier by the day, with political groups supporting both men already spending millions on attack ads.

    While DeSantis has largely ignored Trump’s jabs questioning his commitment to Social Security, his relationship with young girls as a teacher decades ago and even his sexuality, a pro-DeSantis super PAC, Never Back Down, began to respond in its first round of paid ads last weekend.

    “Trump should fight Democrats, not lie about Gov. DeSantis,” the narrator says in an ad that ran on Fox News. “What happened to Donald Trump?”

    The spot ran in conjunction with an online attack ad that described Trump as “a coward” and a “gun grabber” geotargeted to attendees at an RNC donor retreat in Indiana.

    Trump’s super PAC, MAGA Inc., meanwhile, has been airing its own trio of spots on cable news channels highlighting DeSantis’ votes to cut Social Security and Medicare and raise the retirement age.

    “The more you learn about DeSantis, the more you see he doesn’t share our values. He’s just not ready to be president,” said the narrator in one. Another seized on a report that DeSantis once ate pudding with his fingers, urging DeSantis “to keep his pudding fingers off our money.”

    Trump and his campaign have long seen DeSantis as his only serious challenger and believed the more crowded the field, the better for Trump, as candidates split the anti-Trump vote. But a repeat of 2016’s massive field hasn’t materialized, with potential candidates like former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and former Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan passing on campaigns.

    There are still plenty of unknown dynamics, including whether governors such as Kristi Noem of South Dakota or Chris Sununu of New Hampshire will launch campaigns. Both Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Virginia Gov. Glen Youngkin have said they are focused on other races, but neither has explicitly ruled out a run, leaving open the possibility they could mount late-entry bids.

    Mike DuHaime, a Republican strategist and longtime Christie adviser, believes that Trump is the favorite but nonetheless beatable. He cautioned that races are complicated, with unexpected outcomes.

    “I do think that DeSantis is right now firmly the alternative to Trump, but I don’t know if it stays that way. There’s still way too long to go,” he said, arguing that a debate moment or news story could change the trajectory.

    “Somebody’s just got to get momentum,” he said. “It’s just so wide open even with Trump being the prohibitive favorite.”

    ___

    Associated Press writers Steve Peoples in New York and Meg Kinnard in Columbia, S.C., contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • TV and film writers authorize strike over pay, other issues

    TV and film writers authorize strike over pay, other issues

    [ad_1]

    Writers of film and television have voted overwhelmingly to give their union leadership the authority to call a strike if a new contract agreement is not reached with producers

    LOS ANGELES — Unionized film and television writers have voted overwhelmingly to give their leaders the authority to call a strike if a new contract agreement is not reached with producers.

    In an email to members Monday, the negotiating committee of the Writers Guild of America said nearly 98% of the 9,218 votes were cast to authorize the strike, with nearly 79% of guild members voting.

    “Our membership has spoken,” the email said. “You have expressed your collective strength, solidarity, and the demand for meaningful change in overwhelming numbers.”

    The writers’ three-year contract expires May 1, and leaders could call for a walkout the following day, but could extend the deadline if the two sides are close to a deal.

    Issues in negotiations include pay, writers’ ability to work for different shows during downtime from other projects, and, according to Variety, the use of artificial intelligence in the script process.

    The Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, which negotiates for studios, streaming services and production companies, said in a statement Monday that a “strike authorization vote has always been part of the WGA’s plan, announced before the parties even exchanged proposals. Its inevitable ratification should come as no surprise to anyone.”

    “Our goal is, and continues to be, to reach a fair and reasonable agreement,” the statement said.

    The writers’ voted for a similar strike authorization in nearly the same numbers in 2017, but a deal was reached before a strike was called. The guild last went on strike in 2007.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • TV and film writers authorize strike over pay, other issues

    TV and film writers authorize strike over pay, other issues

    [ad_1]

    Writers of film and television have voted overwhelmingly to give their union leadership the authority to call a strike if a new contract agreement is not reached with producers

    LOS ANGELES — Unionized film and television writers have voted overwhelmingly to give their leaders the authority to call a strike if a new contract agreement is not reached with producers.

    In an email to members Monday, the negotiating committee of the Writers Guild of America said nearly 98% of the 9,218 votes were cast to authorize the strike, with nearly 79% of guild members voting.

    “Our membership has spoken,” the email said. “You have expressed your collective strength, solidarity, and the demand for meaningful change in overwhelming numbers.”

    The writers’ three-year contract expires May 1, and leaders could call for a walkout the following day, but could extend the deadline if the two sides are close to a deal.

    Issues in negotiations include pay, writers’ ability to work for different shows during downtime from other projects, and, according to Variety, the use of artificial intelligence in the script process.

    The Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, which negotiates for studios, streaming services and production companies, said in a statement Monday that a “strike authorization vote has always been part of the WGA’s plan, announced before the parties even exchanged proposals. Its inevitable ratification should come as no surprise to anyone.”

    “Our goal is, and continues to be, to reach a fair and reasonable agreement,” the statement said.

    The writers’ voted for a similar strike authorization in nearly the same numbers in 2017, but a deal was reached before a strike was called. The guild last went on strike in 2007.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Can France’s constitutional body halt disputed pension bill?

    Can France’s constitutional body halt disputed pension bill?

    [ad_1]

    PARIS — French protesters are bracing for an expected ruling Friday by a top constitutional body that they hope will derail President Emmanuel Macron’s unpopular pension reform plan.

    If the Constitutional Council greenlights the reform, the bill raising the retirement age from 62 to 64 can enter into force. Yet the body has the power to reject the text, fully or partially. Protesters marched around France on Thursday and plan scattered demonstrations Friday in hopes of pressuring the body to strike it down.

    Here’s a look at what’s at stake.

    WHAT’S THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL?

    The body’s role is to make sure a law is in line with France’s Constitution prior to enactment.

    In this case, it comes after Macron’s centrist government forced the pension bill through parliament without a vote, using a special constitutional power.

    The council is currently composed of three women and six men aged between 64 and 77, and is headed by former Socialist Prime Minister Laurent Fabius. Most members are centrists and conservatives, including two named by Macron. The council’s discussions and votes are not made public.

    Anne Levade, professor of public law at Paris university, said the ruling will be on strictly legal grounds. “The Constitutional Council won’t say if the pension reform is right or wrong, if it is politically in favor or against it,” she said. “The argument that will be made will be a legal reasoning.”

    POTENTIAL SCENARIOS

    Opponents challenged the government’s choice to include the pension plan in a budget bill, which significantly accelerated the legislative process, arguing it should have been a regular bill instead. They hope it will provide grounds for the Constitutional Council to reject the text as a whole.

    Most likely, the council will approve the biggest part of the bill while rejecting some of its articles — the body often rejects measures which have an insufficient link with the main purpose of the text.

    The age measure in that perspective appears in line with a budget bill, experts said.

    Rejecting a bill as a whole is “a very rare option,” Levade said, noting that only five such decisions have been made since 1959.

    Political scientist Benjamin Morel said such a scenario would mean that “the bill disappears … because the procedure that has been used (to pass it) would be considered as wrong.”

    “We don’t really know whether a pension reform can go through a social security budget bill,” Morel added. “It doesn’t seem the natural way (of doing it). But there’s nothing ruling it out in the Constitution.”

    A LONG SHOT AT A REFERENDUM

    Legislators opposing the pension reforms have also filed a request to start a lengthy process that could ultimately lead to a referendum on a proposal for the legal retirement age not to exceed 62.

    The Constitutional Council on Friday is also expected to rule on whether that proposal meets the conditions provided by law. If so, opponents to Macron’s pension plan will have a nine-month period to register at least 4.8 million signatures — or 10% of voters.

    Still, it doesn’t mean the proposal would automatically be put to referendum, Levade stressed. Macron’s government would instead be able to send it for debate at parliament. A nationwide vote would be organized only if it’s not examined by legislators.

    In any case, Friday’s ruling on the referendum issue would not suspend the pension bill.

    WHAT’S NEXT ?

    If the Constitutional Council gives its green light, Macron will be able to enact the bill within 15 days — except for any measures that are rejected.

    Macron said last month he wants pension reform to be implemented by the end of the year. Some political observers suggest he could try to appease critics with a government reshuffle in the coming weeks or months.

    Meanwhile, unions have vowed to continue their strikes and protests until the withdrawal of the pension plan.

    They have in mind the big protests of 2006 against the creation of special contracts to more easily hire and fire people under 26. That law was withdrawn just after being enacted, under pressure of strong public opposition.

    On the other hand, previous pension reforms that prompted massive protests in 2010 were still implemented.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Drama plagues bid to restrict changes to Ohio Constitution

    Drama plagues bid to restrict changes to Ohio Constitution

    [ad_1]

    COLUMBUS, Ohio — Ohio’s constitution is caught in a high-stakes tug-of-war.

    With an effort to enshrine abortion rights looming this fall, an influential mix of Republican politicians, lobbying organizations and business interests is positioning to try to make another change to the state’s founding document first. They’re pushing an amendment that would raise the threshold for passing future constitutional changes, including the abortion question, from the current 50%-plus-one to 60% of Ohio voters.

    “This issue isn’t just about abortion,” said Ohio Right to Life President Mike Gonidakis, who represented a cross-section of conservative causes at recent strategy talks on the subject. “This is about family farming. This is about small businesses. This is around Second Amendment rights, setting the minimum wage.”

    Despite that powerful line-up of conservative support, getting the 60% question to the ballot this August has been fraught with complications.

    First, there’s the fact that Statehouse Republicans voted to eliminate most August special elections last year. GOP Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose, the state’s elections chief and a likely 2024 U.S. Senate candidate, was among the measure’s highest profile supporters, testifying: “These unnecessary ‘off-cycle’ elections aren’t good for taxpayers, election officials or the civic health of our state. It’s time for them to go!”

    LaRose and powerful Ohio Senate President Matt Huffman, a fellow Republican, have now changed course, realizing the political stakes. Both favor reinstating August elections — at least, just this once — after lawmakers missed the deadline for a May vote. LaRose says a well-publicized statewide issue “is a very different thing” than the low turnout local ballot questions he opined against in December.

    The swiftly timed reversal didn’t initially go over well with Republican Ohio House Speaker Jason Stephens, who has struggled to conduct business with a fractured supermajority caucus.

    “Let me be abundantly clear. I am and have always been 100% Pro-Life,” Stephens tweeted on March 24. “I will stand for life at every turn; however, I am not for changing the rules willy nilly at a whim when it comes to changing our constitution.” Among Stephens’ concerns were the burden and expense an August election would impose on already stressed local election officials.

    Stephens ultimately relented, calling August “a possibility,” after fellow Republicans launched an effort to thwart his authority and push the 60% threshold resolution directly to the House floor. The effort would prevent Stephens from delaying a vote past May 10, the deadline for an August election the resolution will reinstate.

    In Ohio, 59% of voters in last year’s midterm elections said abortion should be legal in most or all cases, according to AP VoteCast, an expansive survey of over 90,000 U.S. voters. Only 7% of Ohio voters said abortion should be illegal in all cases.

    “Republicans aren’t going to put it on the same ballot as the abortion issue,” said ex-House Constitutional Resolutions Committee Chair Scott Wiggam, whom Stephens ousted as chair after he worked at cross purposes to his own committee by signing the petition. “That’s because if they both pass with 50%-plus-one, then abortion would be protected by a 60% threshold into the future.”

    Not that it would pass if it reaches the floor.

    A lack of the necessary three-fifths majority tanked a similar resolution during last year’s lame duck session — and not just because minority Democrats and a large coalition of advocacy groups who organized against it oppose it.

    Among Republicans, some constitutional purists worry about the unforeseen consequences of changing a simple majority requirement in place since 1912. Others are concerned about opposition to the idea among GOP voters, particularly in rural areas that look unkindly on government overreach.

    About a dozen sitting GOP lawmakers, for instance, supported a pending medical freedom amendment aimed at preventing COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

    Diana Smith, the conservative from Bradford in western Ohio who is gathering signatures for that effort, said it’s unfair to require its backers to win an additional 10% of the Ohio electorate.

    “Whether you’re Republican or Democrat, we’re all citizens, we’re all one,” she said. “It’s been in our Constitution that one greater than 50% should be the majority, and I feel that it should stay that way, that we the people are the ones that should be in charge of our government.”

    Rob Sexton, legislative affairs director for the Buckeye Firearms Association, is among the coalition of groups in the GOP-controlled state pushing for the 60% requirement. They are watching gun control or “right to food” amendments pass in other states with trepidation.

    “Ballot issues, in general, have increasingly become almost completely influenced by whoever has the most money,” he said. “So when you’re talking about our state’s foundational document, then we believe it needs protection from large national organizations that may not have Ohio values but are able to bankroll multi-million ballot campaigns in our state.”

    However, the way its Republican backers have overtly tied the Ohio proposal to sinking abortion rights appears to have weakened would-be support elsewhere.

    Two of the state’s most powerful pro-business groups — the Ohio Chamber of Commerce and the Ohio Business Roundtable — have so far remained neutral on both amendments.

    The Chamber hosted and the Roundtable attended the March strategy meeting with Gonidakis; state Rep. Brian Stewart, the resolution’s sponsor; Wiggam and others whose support for the higher threshold is unrelated to abortion. But the two heavy hitters — run by former Republican U.S. Reps. Steve Stivers and Pat Tiberi, respectively — generally don’t wade into social issues on which their corporate members, and the state, might be divided.

    While the proposal’s immediate targets are abortion rights, recreational marijuana legalization, a minimum wage increase and redistricting reform, some conservatives recognize a 60% threshold could hurt their own future constitutional efforts.

    Across the U.S., states are declaring constitutional rights to own guns, to hunt and fish, and to farm. Meanwhile, in Wyoming just last month, the constitutional right to make one’s own healthcare decisions — added to constitutions in Ohio and elsewhere in a push by opponents of the federal Affordable Care Act — was used to protect abortion access. That could prompt conservatives to try to repeal it down the line.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Can France’s constitutional body halt disputed pension bill?

    Can France’s constitutional body halt disputed pension bill?

    [ad_1]

    PARIS — French unions are staging new nationwide protests Thursday, on the eve of an expected ruling by a top constitutional body that they hope will derail President Emmanuel Macron’s unpopular pension reform plan.

    If the Constitutional Council greenlights the reform, the bill raising the retirement age from 62 to 64 can enter into force. Yet the body has the power to reject the text, fully or partially. Here’s a look at what’s at stake ahead of Friday’s decision.

    WHAT’S THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL?

    The body’s role is to make sure a law is in line with France’s Constitution prior to enactment.

    In this case, it comes after Macron’s centrist government forced the pension bill through parliament without a vote, using a special constitutional power.

    The council is currently composed of three women and six men aged between 64 and 77, and is headed by former Socialist Prime Minister Laurent Fabius. Most members are centrists and conservatives, including two named by Macron. The council’s discussions and votes are not made public.

    Anne Levade, professor of public law at Paris university, said the ruling will be on strictly legal grounds. “The Constitutional Council won’t say if the pension reform is right or wrong, if it is politically in favor or against it,” she said. “The argument that will be made will be a legal reasoning.”

    POTENTIAL SCENARIOS

    Opponents challenged the government’s choice to include the pension plan in a budget bill, which significantly accelerated the legislative process, arguing it should have been a regular bill instead. They hope it will provide grounds for the Constitutional Council to reject the text as a whole.

    Most likely, the council will approve the biggest part of the bill while rejecting some of its articles — the body often rejects measures which have an insufficient link with the main purpose of the text, in this case social security financing.

    The age measure in that perspective appears in line with a budget bill, experts said.

    Rejecting a bill as a whole is “a very rare option,” Levade said, noting that only five such decisions have been made since 1959.

    Political scientist Benjamin Morel said such a scenario would mean that “the bill disappears … because the procedure that has been used (to pass it) would be considered as wrong.”

    “We don’t really know whether a pension reform can go through a social security budget bill,” Morel added. “It doesn’t seem the natural way (of doing it). But there’s nothing ruling it out in the Constitution.”

    A LONG SHOT AT A REFERENDUM

    Legislators opposing the pension reforms have also filed a request to start a lengthy process that could ultimately lead to a referendum on a proposal for the legal retirement age not to exceed 62.

    The Constitutional Council on Friday is also expected to rule on whether that proposal meets the conditions provided by law. If so, opponents to Macron’s pension plan will have a nine-month period to register at least 4.8 million signatures — or 10% of voters.

    Still, it doesn’t mean the proposal would automatically be put to referendum, Levade stressed. Macron’s government would instead be able to send it for debate at parliament. A nationwide vote would be organized only if it’s not examined by legislators.

    In any case, Friday’s ruling on the referendum issue would not suspend the pension bill.

    WHAT’S NEXT ?

    If the Constitutional Council gives its green light, Macron will be able to enact the bill within 15 days — except for any measures that are rejected.

    Macron said last month he wants pension reform to be implemented by the end of the year. Some political observers suggest he could try to appease critics with a government reshuffle in the coming weeks or months.

    Meanwhile, unions have vowed to continue their strikes and protests until the withdrawal of the pension plan.

    They have in mind the big protests of 2006 against the creation of special contracts to more easily hire and fire people under 26. That law was withdrawn just after being enacted, under pressure of strong public opposition.

    On the other hand, previous pension reforms that prompted massive protests in 2010 were still implemented.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Expelled Justin Pearson could be returned to Tennessee House

    Expelled Justin Pearson could be returned to Tennessee House

    [ad_1]

    MEMPHIS, Tenn. — One of two Black Democrats expelled from the Republican-led Tennessee House could return to the Legislature after a Memphis commission vote Wednesday, nearly a week after their banishment for supporting gun control protesters propelled them into the national spotlight.

    A Shelby County Board of Commissioners committee approved a resolution Wednesday morning that clears the way for an afternoon vote by the full commission on whether Justin Pearson will get his seat back.

    “I will continue to fight with and for our people, whether in or out of office. We and the young protesters are the future of a new Tennessee. Those who seek to silence us will not have the final say,” Pearson wrote in an op-ed published in The New York Times.

    Republicans banished Pearson and Rep. Justin Jones last week over their role in a gun control protest on the House floor after a Nashville school shooting that left three children and three adults dead.

    The Nashville Metropolitan Council took only a few minutes Monday to unanimously restore Jones to office. He was quickly reinstated to his House seat.

    The appointments are interim and special elections for the seats will take place in the coming months. Jones and Pearson have said they plan to run in the special elections.

    The House’s vote to remove Pearson and Jones but keep white Rep. Gloria Johnson drew accusations of racism. Johnson survived by one vote. Republican leadership denied that race was a factor, however.

    The expulsions last Thursday made Tennessee a new front in the battle for the future of American democracy. In the span of a few days, the two had raised thousands of campaign dollars, and the Tennessee Democratic Party had received a new jolt of support from across the U.S.

    Political tensions rose when Pearson, Johnson and Jones on the House floor joined with hundreds of demonstrators who packed the Capitol last month to call for passage of gun control measures.

    As protesters filled galleries, the lawmakers approached the front of the House chamber with a bullhorn and participated in a chant. The scene unfolded days after the shooting at the Covenant School, a private Christian school. Their participation from the front of the chamber broke House rules because the three did not have permission from the House speaker.

    Support for Pearson has come from across the country, including Memphis. During a Monday rally in support of Tyre Nichols, who died in January after he was beaten by police during an arrest, backers of Pearson said the commission was “on the clock.”

    “You’ve got one job — to reinstate Justin Pearson,” activist LJ Abraham said.

    Ahead of the Wednesday vote, Pearson was set to lead a march from the National Civil Rights Museum to the county commission’s office in downtown Memphis.

    Pearson grew up in the same House district he was chosen to represent after longtime state Rep. Barbara Cooper, a Black Democrat, died in office. It winds along the neighborhoods, forests and wetlands of south Memphis, through the city’s downtown area and into north Shelby County.

    Before he was elected, Pearson helped lead a successful campaign against a planned oil pipeline that would have run through neighborhoods and wetlands, and near wells that pump water from the Memphis Sand Aquifer, which provides drinking water to 1 million people.

    He gained a quick reputation as a skilled community activist and gifted public speaker.

    Should Pearson join Jones in returning to the Tennessee Capitol, they’ll do so when political divisions between the state’s few Democratic strongholds and the Republican supermajority were already reaching boiling point before the expulsions.

    GOP members this year introduced a wave of punishing proposals to strip away Nashville’s autonomy. Others have pushed to abolish the state’s few community oversight boards that investigate police misconduct and instead replace them with advisory panels that would be blocked from investigating complaints.

    Lawmakers are also nearing passage of a bill that would move control of the board that oversees Nashville’s airport from local appointments to selections by Republican state government leaders

    Particularly on addressing gun violence, Republicans have so far refused to consider placing any new restrictions on firearms in the wake of the Nashville school shooting. Instead, lawmakers have advanced legislation designed to add more armed guards in public and private schools and are considering a proposal that would allow teachers to carry guns.

    [ad_2]

    Source link