Mediaboss Marketing

It all adds up to a punishing test for congressional Democrats, who are looking for concrete legislative wins but also can't alienate progressive groups if they want to hold on to the House and the Senate in 2022. And they're trying to stay hopeful.

We are close, Rep. Karen Bass (D-Calif.), the lead sponsor of House Democrats policing bill, said this week at a panel hosted by Brave New Films. Yet Bass noted in the next breath that the urgency of last year's massive protests against Floyd's murder has faded somewhat: "There are not hundreds of thousands of people out on the streets right now. So we need the pressure.

House Democrats and activists can find common ground on eliminating the legal doctrine known as qualified immunity, which currently shields officers from civil liability for misdeeds, but Republicans have no interest in outright abolishing it. Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), his party's lead negotiator on the issue, called qualified immunity's axing a poison pill for the GOP.

On other issues, however, the two parties are getting closer to an accord. As of late Friday, staff were nearing compromise on provisions limiting chokeholds, no-knock warrants, and the transfer of military equipment to police. That progress, first reported by the Wall Street Journal, was confirmed by a source familiar with the negotiations.

But even if lawmakers reach a compromise, it's unclear that it would pass muster with activists and progressive Democrats who want outright bans on all three of those elements. The parties are also still far apart on police misconduct prosecutions, an issue as thorny as qualified immunity; both issues are among reform advocates' top priorities in the talks.

Two weeks after the House passed its policing bill in March, the first sign of activist resistance came when leaders with the Movement for Black Lives sent a nine-page letter to the House Appropriations Committee saying the legislation doubles down on failed approaches to police reform.

That group has floated another proposal that redirects funding from police to community services, known as the BREATHE Act. It counts support from a handful of progressives in the House, including Reps. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Cori Bush (D-Mo.), but has never been formally introduced in either chamber.

Nonetheless, activists are frustrated that Democrats haven't even given the measure a hearing.

"We're always open to debate and to talk through the legislation," said Amara Enyia, policy and research coordinator with the Movement for Black Lives. "We're open to feedback. But at a minimum, that should be heard."

Leaders of long-established civil rights groups have taken a different approach. While most have not been directly involved in this round of policy discussions, they won't publicly criticize Democratic lawmakers' efforts as insufficient. Rather than setting firm conditions for the talks, they're putting more subtle pressure on negotiators over portions of the House-passed bill that they see as important particularly qualified immunity.

POLITICO NEWSLETTERS

A newsletter exploring how race and identity are shaping politics, policy and power.

Derrick Johnson, president of the NAACP, said he was anxiously awaiting an outcome from negotiations but emphasized reforming qualified immunity; changing a federal criminal statute prohibiting officers from depriving people of their constitutional rights; instituting a federal registry of police misconduct; and the military equipment transfer prohibition as his goals for a final deal.

However, Johnson echoed by National Urban League President Marc Morial described changing qualified immunity as a top priority.

If officers cause harm, there must be accountability, Johnson said.

Advocates in touch with negotiators say they see progress compared to last year. Holly Harris, president and executive director of the Justice Action Network, implored "both sides to redouble their efforts" to reach a deal.

As a way to bridge the partisan gap on qualified immunity, Scott has suggested allowing individuals to bring civil suits against police departments rather than individual officers and requiring cities to pay the associated costs. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) has proposed a similar change, though neither proposal has been publicly released.

When it comes to police misconduct prosecutions, civil rights leaders of all backgrounds want current law changed to make the process easier. They say the federal prohibition on officers from willfully depriving people of rights sets too high a bar. Scott and other Republicans, however, describe lowering that threshold as a redline.

Even as they face competing pressures from activists outside the Capitol and Republicans inside, Democrats are still optimistic they'll be able to deliver. But they haven't yet committed to the quick timetable Biden set in his first address to Congress last month.

The president urged Congress to find a consensus by May 25 to coincide with the anniversary of Floyds killing. Congressional Democrats, however, viewed Biden's words as an opportunity to speed the pace of negotiations rather than a firm deadline.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyers recent announcement of the chamber's May agenda did not mention police reform. The House-passed bill remains stalled in the 50-50 Senate, where it lacks the votes to clear a filibuster.

And even if they can translate this week's success into a comprehensive bipartisan agreement, Democrats may ultimately find long-established civil rights leaders as hard to win over as younger Movement for Black Lives activists.

Our hope is that we get something concrete done. A real law with teeth in it, said Sharpton, president of the National Action Network. He added that he expects to be briefed alongside other activist groups and Floyd's family on any deal once discussions conclude. If it is not a bill with teeth, then they're going to have big problems with me, and everybody else.

Excerpt from:
Dems have a problem on police reform and it's not the GOP - POLITICO

President Bidens American Families Act makes one political reality officially clear: The Democratic Party has given up on the American dream.

The Biden proposalscoming as they do with the Democratic progressives rise to powerpresent the American people with a once-in-a-lifetime decision about what kind of country they want to live in for the next half-century.

This isnt about the culture wars or standard Keynesian stimulus spending. The Biden plan is about public policies that will redesign American society.

The American Families Plan and other recent Democratic legislation implicitly pose several important questions. Is the traditional American idea of upward mobility still important? If so, how should upward mobility happenthrough Washington or individual effort? Indeed, should the habit of individual striving give way to a presumably more important goal of nationalized paternalism?

It is no surprise that a liberalism that embraced the 1619 Projects rewriting of the U.S.s founding history would not stop there and try now, despite its almost invisible congressional majority, to displace the countrys originating idea of individual opportunity with a broad birth-to-death entitlement state.

Continue reading here:
Democrats Are Killing the American Dream - The Wall Street Journal

Over the last decade, Americans continued to move South and West and out of the Northeast and Midwest. For the most part, thats bad news for Democrats.

Let the Congressional redistricting battles begin.

Over the last decade, Americans continued to move South and West and out of the Northeast and Midwest. For the most part, thats bad news for Democrats.

The 435 seats in the House of Representatives are apportioned to the states by population. According to the Census Bureau, the countrys population stood at 331,449,281 on April 1st, 2020. Doing the math, after the 2022 election each House member will represent about 762,000 citizens.

Democrats dilemma comes from which states gained population and which states lost. Texas will receive two more congressional seats next year, and five states Florida, North Carolina, Colorado, Montana, and Oregon will gain one congressional seat each. New York, California, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia will each lose one seat.

Per the Constitution, states draw their own election districts. They must conform to the Supreme Courts one person, one vote ruling requiring substantially equal legislative representation for all citizens. Districts must also be drawn so as not to discriminate by race.

However, there is no prohibition against districts being drawn for political benefit.

While Republicans lost the presidency in 2020, Democrats were surprised when Republicans increased their already substantial majorities at the state level. Republicans have 23 state trifectas where they control the governorship and both legislative houses, up two from before the election. Democrats have 15.

As a result, Republicans will be in charge of drawing new maps in 187 congressional districts this year, compared with 75 for Democrats according to the Cook Political Report. The other seats are (1) in states where power is split, (2) a commission is in charge of the maps, or (3) the states have only a single House seat.

Looked at another way, the states gaining House seats currently have a total of 52 Republican and 37 Democratic seats today (counting open seats by the party that held them in Novembers election). The states losing House seats currently have a total of 55 Republican and 94 Democratic seats.

States controlled by Democrats that are losing seats will draw new maps so as to create likely losses for currently-serving House Republicans. Nonetheless, states getting more seats already have a lot of House Republicans today while states with big Democratic caucuses are getting fewer seats.

New independent redistricting commissions could improve Democratic odds in Michigan and Colorado. But Democrats remain completely on the sidelines in Georgia, Texas, Florida and North Carolina.

The Cook Political Reports David Wasserman said that The reapportionment itself offers a very slight advantage to Republicans, but not nearly as large as their power to draw the maps.

CNNs Zachary Wolf explained the importance of state legislature control: The political drawing of congressional districts is a key reason [Republicans] retained control of the House in 2012. Its a large reason they retained control of many state legislatures in 2020.

The three states with the largest House representations California, Texas, and Florida deserve special attention. California lost a House seat for the first time ever. Its skyrocketing cost of living, rampant social problems, and one-party politics are driving people from the state in increasing numbers.

Texas is likely to become the most important state politically in the coming decade. It voted for Trump twice and its Republican Senators Cruz and Cornyn were reelected with healthy margins. But a significant fraction of new move-ins in its largest cities is, unfortunately, bringing their liberal politics with them.

Florida, once a swing state, has moved well to the right with Republicans holding most statewide offices.

Reapportionment has ramifications for presidential contests in 2024 and 2028. States won by Trump gained five electoral votes and lost two for a net gain of three. Biden states Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Ohio lost Electoral College votes to Texas and Florida: more good news for Republicans.

Texas will now have 40 Electoral College votes and Florida 30, making them second and third behind California. Expect Democrats to focus on Texas while downplaying Florida.

Its far too early to call the 2022 elections but so far, my money is on Republican gains in the 2022 House of Representatives, hopefully sending Nancy Pelosi back to her old job as Minority Leader.

Read the original post:
The 2020 Census Is Bad News for Democrats - The Independent | News Events Opinion More - The Independent | SUindependent.com

A Birmingham police officer has been reassigned following a social media post in which he called President Joe Biden and the Democratic Party the enemy of the United States of America.

The officer has not been publicly identified, and department spokesman Sgt. Rod Mauldin said he is on administrative duty pending the outcome of an internal investigation.

According to CBS 42, the officer wrote: Our nation is under siege by these socialist enemies and if we cannot soon vote them out, it will be time to fight. If we are forced to fight, much blood will be spilled on both sides. I pray we can remove them peacefully before it is too late.

The Birmingham Police Department released the following statement:

The Birmingham police department was recently made aware of an inflammatory social media post made by an officer on his personal Facebook page. The Birmingham Police Departments command staff took immediate action according to Bpd protocol to initiate an internal investigation. The officer has been assigned to administrative duties pending the outcome of an internal investigation. This opinionated post made by this officer is not reflective of the views of the Birmingham Police Department. BPD takes these instances seriously and our goal is to assure open accountability of each officer that serves the City of Birmingham.

See the original post:
Birmingham police officer under investigation for calling Democrats the enemy of the United States - AL.com

Can Joe Biden "reimagine and rebuild" the American economy in just 550 days? Because that's how long it is until the 2022 midterm elections. And history suggests a good chance Democrats will lose their narrow control of Congress, most likely by losing the House. Then gridlock resumes. It's doubtful that Republicans will have much interest in helping Biden further become a "transformational president" by passing more wish-list items from the progressive agenda.

Democrats surely understand the clock is ticking. But they also have to be hoping that the extraordinary power of the emerging economic boom might make the 2022 midterms an exception to the political pattern. Moody's Analytics, for example, recently revised its 2021 real GDP growth outlook to nearly 7 percent and to over 5 percent next year. "If we are right," chief economist Mark Zandi told clients in a report, "and there's good reason to believe we will be, this will be the strongest two years of growth since 1950-1951 at the height of the post-World War II economic boom." And Moody's is hardly alone in predicting warp-speed GDP and job growth this year and next.

So we're really off the map here. Who knows, not only might the Biden Boom keep the House and Senate in Democratic hands, it might also make a second Biden term (or a first Harris term, perhaps) a pretty good bet. And when you think about it, two presidential terms might be what Democrats need to pass key legislation and then make sure those programs survive during an era of extreme partisanship. Democrats are already trying to undo the Trump presidency wherever possible, such as attempting to partially reverse the Trump tax cuts, restore environmental rules, and rebuild America's trade relationship with Europe.

But the political impact of an unprecedented economic surge isn't the only unknown here. Putting aside the possibility of a dangerous new COVID-19 variant, perhaps the greatest risk to the recovery and thus the Biden legacy is how Washington is helping generate that recovery. The stimulus continues to flow even as consumers boost spending and businesses fully reopen. And some Democrats still don't think there's enough federal dough being spent, such as those who want recurring stimulus checks to be sent out and the $2.3 trillion Biden infrastructure plan to be a $10 trillion plan. As is, the tsunami of spending might yet boost inflation, resulting in surprise action from the Federal Reserve and an unexpected slowdown. Imagining pre-election recessions during the first terms of Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama creates a pretty interesting game of "what if" alternate history with Presidents Mondale, Kerry, and Romney.

An inflation surprise is hardly the only risk. While the recovery is currently generating gobs of jobs, the expansion will eventually slow. And it might slow faster than necessary thanks to generous jobless benefits that could potentially discourage work and create shortages. The $1.9 trillion COVID relief package last March extended supplemental benefits of $300 a month through early September. Its an argument sure to gain momentum after Friday's wildly disappointing April jobs report that showed 266,000 net new jobs were created last month vs. a Wall Street forecast of a million or so. Now fat unemployment checks might not be the main reason for that undershoot. Home schooling, a lack of child care, virus fears, and data issues all might have played a role. But the report does suggest why some economists are worried about the labor-supply impact of impact of jobless benefits as the economy continues to gain strength in the coming months. A worker shortage would also add to the inflation threat. Again, many Democrats don't seem at all worried, at least so far. Late last month, nearly 40 Democrats on Capitol Hill sent the Biden White House a letter proposing "more generous and long-lasting jobless benefits on a permanent basis," according to the Wall Street Journal.

Then there's the proposed tax increases, more than $3 trillion worth including a record increase in capital gains tax rates. A nation's tax burden matters. How an economy is taxed matters. What is taxed matters. Tax rates matter. And although the economy didn't soar after the Trump tax cuts, the impact of the business tax cuts might have been offset by the Trump trade war.

It is generally accepted, however, that tax rates affect how much and where a company invests. More investment makes workers more productive and will, over time, boost their wages. There's an economic risk that these proposed Biden tax increases will hurt investment. While many Wall Street banks have some pretty rosy economics forecasts, they are generally not incorporating any downside impact of the tax hikes. Those same firms are also, for the most part, assuming the economy returns to its modest pre-pandemic pace in 2023. So there could be less room for economic policy mistakes than it seems right now.

And Democrats pushing for more, more, more should be worried a transformational presidency might just end up transitioning back to a Republican one.

Read the original here:
The economic threats that could derail the Democrats' election dreams - The Week