Politics

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republicans launched the marquee investigation of their new majority Thursday with a brazen assertion that the federal government has been used against conservatives, drawing in current and former lawmakers to make a sprawling — and at times convoluted — case that national security officials, social media companies and the media have been conspiring against them.

The first hearing of the new House panel on what Republicans assert is the “weaponization” of government, led by Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, featured partisan and sometimes misleading or even inaccurate testimony about 2016 election interference, the COVID-19 crisis and the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol attack, including from two top Senate Republicans. Much of it focused on grievances about actions taken by federal officials when former President Donald Trump was in office.

“It’s clear to me that the Justice Department and the FBI are suffering from a political infection that, if it’s not defeated, will cause the American people to no longer trust these storied institutions,” said Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the former chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, in rare testimony to the House committee.

Rather than focusing on new information, the hearing delved into long-standing conservative complaints about the Trump-Russia investigation and misjudgments by FBI officials, including anti-Trump text messages, that have been documented for years. The FBI officials whose names were repeatedly invoked have long since left the bureau.

Sweeping in scope, the new investigation is likely to test public appetite for the kind of partisan, aggressive oversight and investigations that Republicans have made the centerpiece of their newly-minted House majority agenda.

It amounts to a high-profile platform for Jordan, the panel’s chairman, who after years of leveling attacks against Justice Department officials of both parties now has a committee gavel of his own to elevate his criticism and turn it into action.

Jordan said the first panel — comprised of Grassley, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., and Tulsi Gabbard a former congresswoman from Hawaii who left the Democratic Party —- was important in “framing it up.”

The second panel of lawyers and former FBI and Justice Department officials, Jordan said, documented the federal government’s “censorship by surrogate.”

He added, “Our whole objective was to sort of frame up how important this is and how serious it is. And I certainly think that happened.”

The hearing touched on a broad array of topics, some only loosely related, but laid bare the GOP desire to use the committee as a vehicle for attacking what they say are politically-driven decisions not only in law enforcement but also by those in the technology and health care sectors.

It also showed the complexity of issues around free speech and the free flow of information on social media, as the government is forced to keep pace with the new ways Americans communicate their sometimes polarizing politics, views and beliefs.

Republicans attributed their claims of weaponization to private interviews with dozens of whistleblowers over the last two years, when they were in the minority.

Grassley, an Iowa Republican, recounted a long list of oft-cited grievances about the origins of the investigation between Russia and Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and complained about what he said was unfair media coverage and criticism of his inquiry into President Joe Biden’s family.

“They, in a sense, were basically calling us Russian stooges,” he said of attacks from Democratic colleagues.

Johnson of Wisconsin, formerly the top Republican on the Senate Homeland Security Committee, in his own statement to the committee linked the last two presidential elections, the Jan. 6th attack and the government’s response to the COVID pandemic into a wide-ranging allegation of wrongdoing by federal agencies ignored or covered up by the media.

“I have barely scratched the surface in describing the complexity, power and destructive nature of forces that we face,” Johnson testified.

But at times their testimony veered into contested or even debunked claims.

Grassley testified that during the 2016 election the Democratic National Committee, along with Hillary Clinton’s campaign, “colluded with the Russians.” That is not an accurate characterization of what took place, and the assertion Thursday that a special counsel investigation found no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia is much less nuanced than the actual finding.

Johnson raised questions about the origins of the coronavirus during the tenure of Anthony Fauci, the former head of a National Institutes of Health office. And as the Justice Department prosecutes Jan. 6 rioters for the attack on the Capitol, Johnson claimed the investigations did not “adequately explain why the Capitol was still woefully unprepared, or how many federal agents informants were in the crowd.”

In response, Democrats brought in Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., a former constitutional lawyer and member of the Jan. 6 committee that disbanded last year, to make the opposite argument that it is congressional Republicans, not the federal government, who are weaponizing their oversight and investigative power, but against civil servants in the Biden administration.

And all of it, Raskin argued, is being done in an effort to find retribution for Trump as he embarks on a reelection presidential campaign in 2024.

“Now of course, a serious bipartisan committee focused on the weaponization of the government would zero in quickly on the Trump administration itself, which brought weaponization to frightening new levels across the board,” Raskin said.

Raskin, who serves as ranking Democrat of the Oversight committee, voiced concerns that GOP pursuit of federal agencies and their employees could prove to be dangerous. He noted that the FBI and Department of Homeland Security have observed an increase in violent threats against those individuals and facilities over the last year.

source

TAMPA, Florida (AP) — With an eye toward the 2024 campaign, President Joe Biden on Thursday ventured to Florida, a state defined by its growing retiree population and status as the unofficial headquarters of the modern-day Republican Party.

White House aides have been using the votes and words of Republican lawmakers to make their case that Social Security and Medicare benefits are under threat, while GOP leaders say their statements are being mischaracterized.

Even as Biden said his focus is on getting things done, his speech in Tampa and remarks the day before in Wisconsin showed how he’s trying to rally the public to his side now that Republicans control the House. In a politically divided country, the ability to get support from older voters who rely on the programs could decide which party holds the White House as well as Congress in the 2024 elections.

At the lectern Thursday, Biden held up a pamphlet about Florida Sen. Rick Scott in which the Republican said he wants to require that the programs be reauthorized every five years.

“I know that a lot of Republicans — their dream is to cut Social Security and Medicare,” Biden said. “If that’s your dream, I’m your nightmare.”

Leading Republican lawmakers insist that spending cuts to Social Security and Medicare are off the table with regard to reaching a deal to increase the government’s legal borrowing authority. But enough prominent Republicans have broached the subject that Biden told his audience Thursday that, “I’ll believe it when I see it.”

“I will not cut a single Social Security or Medicare benefit,” the president continued. “In fact, I’m going to extend the Medicare trust fund for at least two decades.”

“Let’s stand up for seniors,” Biden said as most of those in the chamber took to their feet to applaud, knowing the dangers of being on the wrong side of an aging electorate that values these programs.

To drive home their argument, White House aides distributed handouts in Tampa before the speech summarizing Scott’s plan, highlighting the phrase where the senator wrote: “All federal legislation sunsets in 5 years. If a law is worth keeping, Congress can pass it again.”

Scott said his policy ideas have been misrepresented by the president and he only wants programs up for congressional renewal every five years, which he believes is different from spending cuts to Social Security or Medicare. “They lie about it,” Scott said in a written statement about how administration officials have described his plan.

“I am not for cutting Social Security and Medicare,” Scott said in a CNN interview hours before Biden’s trip. “We’ve got to preserve those benefits.”

It’s a delicate moment for Social Security and Medicare, programs that economists say will drive the national debt to unprecedented highs over the next few decades. The Social Security trust fund will be unable to pay full benefits starting in 2035, prompting some Republican lawmakers to say changes will have to be made to sustain payments.

But any proposed changes can come across as kryptonite to voters, who want their benefits preserved rather than cut. That’s especially true in Republican-held Florida, where census figures show that nearly a third of adults are older than 62.

Republicans have flocked to the state in recent years as well, describing it as “the free state of Florida” in a nod to DeSantis’ fierce resistance to pandemic-related mandates and “woke” policies on race and gender.

“They are trying to take away your gas stove,” DeSantis said. “It shows they are coming for any little thing in your life.”

Multiple administration officials have said they are not banning gas stoves, with White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre saying last month, “The president does not support banning gas stoves.”

source

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court soon could find itself with easy ways out of two high-profile cases involving immigration and elections, if indeed the justices are looking to avoid potentially messy, divisive decisions.

Off-ramps in those cases could prove attractive in a term with no shortage of big cases that could divide the court’s six conservatives and three liberals. Affirmative action, voting rights, gay rights and student loan forgiveness also are on the agenda for a court that is less than a year removed from overturning nearly 50 years of constitutional protections for abortion and seeing a significant dip in public confidence.

The Biden administration provided one possible way out for the court this week. A legal fight over turning away immigrants at the border because of the coronavirus pandemic, under a provision of federal law known as Title 42, is about to become irrelevant, the administration said in a court filing Tuesday.

That’s because the administration recently announced that the public health emergency that justified the quick expulsion of immigrants will expire on May 11.

“Absent other relevant developments, the end of the public health emergency will (among other consequences) terminate the Title 42 orders and moot this case,” wrote the administration’s top Supreme Court lawyer, Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar.

The use of Title 42 began during Donald Trump’s presidency and continued after Joe Biden took office. It has been used millions of times to quickly turn away migrants at the border.

Title 42 is at the root of a Supreme Court case that the justices in December put on a fast track, with arguments set for March 1. At issue isn’t the use of Title 42 itself but the question of whether a group of Republican states can insert themselves into a lawsuit over the policy. The states support keeping it in place. If it ends, they say illegal immigration will increase and they argue their interests aren’t represented in the case.

The court could still rule before May 11, though that would be faster than usual. It’s also possible the policy’s end date will be pushed back beyond that date. But if the public health emergency ends as planned and the justices do nothing until then, the case could end without a decision.

When the court agreed to take the case in December, the justices were split. Five justices wanted to wade in and four justices — the court’s three liberals and conservative Neil Gorsuch — said they would not have gotten involved in the first place.

The other case the court could dodge involves a closely watched elections issue and comes out of North Carolina. Last week the state’s top court ordered a new look at the case.

Republicans in North Carolina have asked the justices for a ruling that could leave state legislatures virtually unchecked in making rules for congressional and presidential elections. Such an outcome would for the first time validate what is known as the “independent state legislature” theory, which would dramatically enhance the power of state lawmakers over elections for president and Congress at the expense of state courts.

The justices heard arguments in December in an appeal from Republicans who argued that the state Supreme Court, then with a Democratic majority, improperly tossed the state’s Republican-drawn congressional districts as excessively partisan and adopted a new map that produced a 7-7 split in November’s elections.

Now a new Republican majority on the North Carolina high court has set new arguments for March. It’s unclear how long it might to take to reach a decision.

The justices have been at work on a decision in the North Carolina case for more than two months, but the final word in this and other consequential cases often doesn’t come until late June.

So the court could wait to see what the North Carolina court does before reaching its own conclusions.

Vikram Amar, a professor at the University of Illinois College of Law, said the court can always find a way out “if it wants to dodge the case,” including if the justices are finding trouble reaching consensus.

But Amar, who filed a brief opposing the Republicans in the case, said it’s important for the court to weigh in.

“The fact that they took the case in the first place tells us they think it needs resolution. Better to resolve this between election cycles,” Amar said.

source

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House voted unanimously Thursday to condemn China’s balloon surveillance program as a “brazen violation” of U.S. sovereignty, a rare and swift bipartisan rebuke of Beijing as questions mount about the craft the U.S. says was part of a vast aerial spy program.

The 419-0 action came as lawmakers clamoring for information about the balloon that flew across American skies were being briefed by U.S. officials in a classified session. The Senate also held a hearing Thursday about the balloon, which was shot down by the U.S. military last weekend.

“This resolution, I believe, sends a clear bipartisan signal to the CCP and our adversaries around the world that this action will not be tolerated,” said Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, referring to the Chinese Communist Party.

In a Congress riven by partisan splits, the shared anxiety over China’s stealthy balloon surveillance program and the reach of the Beijing’s global military and economic force provided an unusual opening for bipartisan agreement. The four-page resolution came together quickly, overcoming initial partisan divisions.

The top Democrat on the Foreign Affairs panel, Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, said China “needs to come clean” about its surveillance activities. “It is now up to Beijing to demonstrate not just to the United States but to the world that it is serious about respecting international rules and law,” he said.

The balloon flew from Alaska to the Atlantic Coast, but the U.S. didn’t shoot it down until it was over the Atlantic, off South Carolina. That decision sparked bipartisan concerns, questions and outrage, some of it directed at President Joe Biden for not acting sooner. But the GOP-led House set criticism of Biden aside for now and focused instead on the People’s Republic of China.

While it doesn’t carry the force of law, the resolution approved by the House stands as an expression of concern as Congress delves into questions about the balloon and China’s surveillance activity.

Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., who chaired a Senate subcommittee hearing Thursday on the balloon, said earlier this week he wanted to know where “exactly it flew — particularly in Montana because I’m very familiar with where the (missile) silos are — and questions like, Did it have capability to hover?”

Congress has been delving into such questions since the balloon captured America’s attention late last week, refocusing lawmakers on China.

“There are very few bipartisan issues in Washington these days, but our national concern about the PRC is one of them,” said retired U.S. Navy Adm. Harry Harris in testimony this week before the House Armed Services Committee.

“Make no mistake, that balloon was intentionally launched as a calculated show of force,” said Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Ala., chair of the House Armed Services Committee, during Tuesday’s hearing. “We have to stop being naïve about the threat we face from China.”

source

Former Vice President Mike Pence has been subpoenaed by the special counsel overseeing investigations into efforts by former President Donald Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 election, according to a person with direct knowledge of the event.

The subpoena to Pence as part of the investigation by special counsel Jack Smith was served in recent days, according to the person, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity Thursday to discuss a sensitive issue.

The extraordinary scenario of a former vice president potentially testifying against his former boss in a criminal investigation comes as Pence considers launching a 2024 Republican presidential bid against Trump. The two have been estranged since a mob of Trump’s supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021, in an attempt to stop Democrat Joe Biden’s victory.

The subpoena is an aggressive step from a prosecutor who for years led the Justice Department’s public corruption section and who oversaw indictments against major political figures. The move sets the stage for a likely executive privilege fight, given Pence’s close proximity to Trump for four years as major decisions were being contemplated and planned. It is unclear whether efforts to secure voluntary testimony from Pence stalled before the subpoena was issued.

Spokespeople for Pence and Smith declined to comment on the issuance of the subpoena, which was first reported by ABC News.

Pence was a central figure in Trump’s efforts to stay in power after losing the 2020 election. Trump falsely insisted that his vice president, who had a ceremonial role in overseeing the certification of the election, could simply reject the results and send them back to the battleground states he contested.

On Jan. 6, Trump supporters, driven by the lie that the election was stolen, marched to the Capitol building, brutally pushed past the police and smashed through the windows and doors while Pence was presiding over the certification of Biden’s victory. The vice president was steered to safety with his staff and family as some in the mob chanted, “Hang Mike Pence!”

While the mob was in the Capitol, Trump tweeted, “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution.”

Smith, who was named special counsel in November by Attorney General Merrick Garland, has been tasked with overseeing investigations into Trump’s attempts to subvert his defeat, his actions leading up to the Jan. 6 insurrection at the Capitol and his possession of top-secret government documents at his Florida estate, Mar-a-Lago.

Federal prosecutors have been especially focused on a scheme by Trump allies to elevate fake presidential electors in key battleground states won by Biden as a way to subvert the vote, issuing subpoenas to multiple state Republican party chairs.

Federal prosecutors have brought multiple Trump administration officials before the grand jury for questioning, including former Trump White House counsel Pat Cipollone and Pence’s own former chief of staff, Marc Short.

In a sign of the expanding nature of the investigation, election officials in multiple states whose results were disputed by Trump have received subpoenas asking for communications with or involving Trump and his campaign aides.

A House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack recommended that the Justice Department bring criminal charges against Trump and associates who helped him launch a pressure campaign to try to overturn his 2020 election loss.

source

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Republican-led House has launched the first salvo in what could be a long-running feud with the District of Columbia over self-government in the nation’s capital.

In back-to-back votes, the House voted Thursday to overturn a sweeping rewrite of the criminal code passed by the City Council last year and a new law that would grant noncitizens the right to vote in local elections.

Congressional oversight of the district is written into the Constitution. And while it has been more than three decades since Congress outright nullified a D.C. law, Congress has frequently used alternative methods such as budget riders to alter laws on issues ranging from abortion funding to marijuana legalization.

The House voted 250-173 to overturn the rewrite of the criminal code, which among other things, reduced the maximum penalties for burglary, carjacking and robbery. The voting rights bill also was overturned by a 260-173 vote.

The moves may be partially symbolic since both would have to pass the Democratic-held Senate and be signed by President Joe Biden. However, both House votes garnered a notable amount of Democratic support with 31 Democrats voting to overturn the criminal code rewrite and 42 voting to overturn the voting measure. Biden has said publicly that he opposes both measures, but has not explicitly stated he would veto them.

Thursday’s votes signal a new and openly combative phase in the District’s tortured relationship with the federal government.

The debate has put D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser in a curious political position. Bowser vetoed the rewrite of the city’s criminal code in January, saying the maximum penalty reductions send “the wrong message” on crime prevention, Bowser also apposed a measure that would allow for jury trials in most misdemeanor cases, saying the sudden spike in jury trials would overwhelm the local justice system. Her veto was quickly overridden by the D.C. Council in a 12-1 vote.

Republican lawmakers decried the D.C. government as soft on criminals in the midst of a multi-year local spike in violent crime. Several Republican lawmakers have cited Bowser’s opposition to bolster their own arguments.

But Bowser has publicly stated she does not want Congress to get involved in the process, while also citing congressional concern as proof of the validity of her own objections.

“We don’t want any interference on our local laws,” she said last week. “Quite frankly, members of Congress have expressed similar concerns. There’s a lot of people that don’t agree with what the council did.”

New York Rep. Anthony Esposito, a former police officer, accused the D.C. Council of “empowering criminals at the expense of the public,” and said the new criminal code would ”effectively prevent the local justice system from keeping criminals off of our streets, all while D.C. grapples with a crime wave.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the top Democrat on the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, and Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D.C’s nonvoting delegate in the Congress, spent most of the morning House debate playing defense. Norton said the new mandatory minimum penalties would still be higher than those for identical crimes in multiple U.S. states.

Raskin accused House Republicans of ignoring their own public dedication to states’ rights by carrying out a longstanding vendetta against the D.C. government.

“That is the beauty of the federal system which I thought our colleagues supported,” Raskin said. “They’re not really interested in scrutinizing the actual criminal justice policy. They just want to kick the people of Washington, D.C., around. They want to lord it over them.”

After the vote, Norton released a statement saying, “D.C. residents, a majority of whom are Black and Brown, are worthy and capable of governing themselves. It is true Congress has absolute power over D.C., but might does not make right.”

The sweeping rewrite of D.C’s criminal code has been years in the making; it was approved unanimously last year by the 13-member D.C. Council and carries the support of major stakeholders, including D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb.

“Today’s move to overturn our laws is not about making the District safer or more just,” Schwalb said in a post-vote statement. “Today’s actions are political grandstanding and highlight the urgent need for D.C. statehood.”

The measure to grant noncitizens, including immigrants living in the U.S. illegally, the right to vote in local elections is not unique. Similar measures have passed in multiple jurisdictions around the country, including Takoma Park, Maryland — a liberal bastion on the outskirts of Washington that is Raskin’s home district. But multiple Republican critics claimed that the unique nature of D.C. with its hundreds of foreign embassies, made it particularly inappropriate.

Official estimates set the number of noncitizen D.C. residents at around 50,000, out of a total population of just under 700,000 residents.

“For years, Democrats in Washington decried potential foreign influence in our electoral process, but D.C.’s new law potentially allows foreign agents from China, Russia, and other adversaries to participate in local elections held within this nation’s capital city,” said Rep. Nicholas Langworthy, R-N.Y.

Norton, in a Wednesday night debate over the voting law, call the congressional intervention “paternalistic” and said it violated basic democratic ideals of local self-governance.

“There is only one question before this House,” Norton said, “The question is: ‘Do you believe in democracy?’ “

source

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Former Vice President Mike Pence is stepping up his outreach in Iowa ahead of a possible 2024 presidential campaign by rallying conservatives against transgender-affirming policies in schools, like one adopted in an eastern Iowa district last year.

The effort by Advancing American Freedom, a group formed by Pence in 2021 and financed by his supporters, will include digital ads, rallies, canvassing and perhaps radio and television spots. It comes as a federal court in Minnesota is scheduled next week to hear a case brought by a group representing parents of students in Linn-Mar Community School District outside Cedar Rapids.

“The strength of our nation is tied to the strength of our families, and we cannot stand idly by as the radical left attempts to indoctrinate our children behind parents’ backs,” Pence said in a statement provided to The Associated Press. “Advancing American Freedom will not rest until parental rights are restored in Iowa and across the nation.”

The Linn-Mar board last year adopted a policy allowing students to request a gender support plan to begin socially transitioning at school and without the permission of their parents. The group representing the parents is suing to overturn the policy.

The planned budget for the effort is more than $1 million, and the push is expected to last several months, said a Pence aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity ahead of a formal announcement later Thursday.

The moves by the outside group — separate from any potential Pence candidacy — comes as school policy, notably involving gender identification and sexual orientation, has become an early focus of 2024 Republican presidential prospects.

The issue is particularly relevant in Iowa, given both the court case and the Republican-controlled Legislature advancing legislation barring schools from supporting a student’s social change in gender identity.

Pence’s outreach comes before a trip to the early-voting state to headline an event next Wednesday in Cedar Rapids. Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor and United Nations ambassador, is planning to campaign across Iowa after announcing her 2024 campaign, while South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott and former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson are expected to visit Iowa later in the month.

source

WASHINGTON (AP) — Joe Biden stepped to the rostrum for his State of the Union address Tuesday night at what should be a high point of his presidency. He’s repeatedly beaten the odds with a string of legislative accomplishments and a historically strong midterm election where Democrats held the line against Republicans. His steadfast support for Ukraine has won praise. The cloud of the pandemic has lifted.

But on Tuesday night, he found himself facing a problem that has shadowed him for years — doubt.

Polls show a majority of Americans are largely unaware of his successes and don’t approve of his job performance. Even Democrats question whether he should run for reelection amid concerns about his age.

It all added up to a particularly high-stakes moment for Biden, providing him with his last, best opportunity to make his case for why he deserves a second term before a formal campaign announcement.

He left no doubt that he believes he has more work to do as president. Addressing Republicans who recently won control of the House, Biden said “the people sent us a clear message” about the need to find common ground.

“We’ve been sent here to finish the job,” he said.

Although Biden frequently used the language of cooperation, he slipped in a few digs at the other party, such as when he talked about Republicans who voted against his infrastructure law but still celebrate the money being used in their districts.

“Don’t worry,” he said. “I promised to be the president for all Americans. We’ll fund these projects. And I’ll see you at the groundbreaking!”

At another point, Biden accused Republicans of trying to curtail Social Security and Medicare benefits for older Americans, provoking shouts of “liar” from his critics.

Veering from the text of his speech, Biden responded with a grin. “Anybody who doubts it, contact my office, I’ll give you a copy of the proposal.” It was a thrust and parry more likely to be found on a debate stage than in a State of the Union.

Now it’s just a matter of waiting for Biden to reveal his decision on whether he’ll run again. He’s promised an announcement early this year.

“Until the moment when he makes that pronouncement, that’s still that question that hangs over every word that he utters,” said Patrick Gaspard, a former White House political director and top official at the Democratic National Committee.

Gaspard, who is currently president of the liberal Center for American Progress, said the State of the Union “is often considered the opening bid in an argument for reelection. And in this situation, it’s certainly the case.”

American presidents almost never forgo a shot at a second term. The last one was Lyndon Johnson, who did not seek reelection in 1968 after his presidency became unmoored by the Vietnam War.

But there’s also never been a president as old as Biden. He’s 80, and would be 86 at the end of a second term. He first ran for the White House in 1988.

“I’m not new to this place,” Biden acknowledged in his speech. “I stand here tonight having served as long as about any one of you has ever served here.”

Lyndsay Chervinsky, a presidential historian, said Biden’s age is “the X factor” that differentiates him from his predecessors. Even when other presidents faced low approval ratings during their first term, “no one was suggesting that they not run.”

“If he was ten years younger, none of these conversations would be happening,” she said.

Biden gave a glimpse of his campaign pitch on Friday in Philadelphia, when he spoke at a Democratic National Committee meeting. He rattled off legislative accomplishments, some of which were achieved after they were left for dead in Congress, and blasted Republicans as “extremists,” even calling them “nuts” at one point.

“Let me ask you a simple question. Are you with me?” he said to the cheering crowd, which responded by chanting, “Four more years!”

Political appearances rarely draw the same attention as the State of the Union. Last year, 38 million people tuned in, compared to nearly 100 million who watched the Super Bowl.

Presidential historian Michael Beschloss said the challenge is to find the right way to harness that fleeting focus.

“The speech will probably be remembered for two or three lines,” he said. “He has to decide which he wants those to be.“

Judging by the text, Biden wants that line to be “finish the job,” a phrase included no less than a dozen times. Whether it’s increasing taxes on billionaires, preventing police brutality or lowering insulin costs, Biden said he wants to “finish the job.”

It may not have been a campaign announcement, but it’s an implicit request for voters to stick with him.

Biden plans to travel to Wisconsin on Wednesday and Florida on Thursday to continue pushing his agenda, part of an administration-wide plan for top officials to fan out across the country this week.

After a Democratic midterm showing that was strong by historical averages in a president’s first term, Biden has successfully tamped down handwringing within his party over whether he should seek another term. No primary opponent has emerged.

And he has a record to build upon. He’s also secured investments in infrastructure, computer chip manufacturing and financial incentives to encourage Americans to adopt cleaner technologies for fighting climate change.

“At the end of the day, you can’t argue with the extraordinary accomplishments, more than almost any other modern president, that President Biden has achieved, again, under the toughest of circumstances,” Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said in a Sunday interview with CNN’s “State of the Union.”

However, Biden still faces skepticism from the country at large.

Only 37% of Democrats say they want Biden to seek a second term, down from 52% before the midterm elections in November, according to a new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

Victories in Congress to the contrary, many Americans don’t see him making progress either.

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll said 36% of Americans believe Biden has accomplished “a great deal” or “a good amount” since taking office, while 62% said he’s done “not very much” or “little or nothing.”

Cedric Richmond, a former top White House official who is now a senior adviser to the Democratic National Committee, says the numbers don’t concern him.

“When you hit a campaign, and you’re going to spend the kind of money that campaigns cost now, people will get inundated” with reminders of changes that Biden has made during his administration, he said.

Right now, Richmond said, “people are more focused on their lives than political commentary and polls and all of those things.”

Now the question is whether Biden’s big speech shifted voters’ focus to him — and got them to see the country his same way.

___

EDITORS: Chris Megerian covers the White House for The Associated Press.

___

Follow AP’s coverage of the State of the Union address at: https://apnews.com/hub/state-of-the-union-address

source

In his 73-minute speech, Biden sought to portray a nation dramatically improved from the one he took charge of two years ago: from a reeling economy to one prosperous with new jobs; from a crippled, pandemic-weary nation to one that has now reopened, and a democracy that has survived its biggest test since the Civil War.

“The story of America is a story of progress and resilience. Of always moving forward. Of never giving up. A story that is unique among all nations,” Biden said. “We are the only country that has emerged from every crisis stronger than when we entered it. That is what we are doing again.”

“We’re not finished yet by any stretch of the imagination,” he declared.

The backdrop for the annual address was markedly different from the previous two years, with a Republican speaker now sitting expressionless behind Biden and newly empowered GOP lawmakers in the chamber sometimes shouting criticism of him and his administration.

Biden sought to reassure the nation that his stewardship has delivered results both at home and abroad, as he also set out to prove his fitness for a likely reelection bid.

But the challenges for Biden are many: economic uncertainty, a wearying war in Ukraine, growing tensions with China and more. Signs of past trauma at the Capitol, most notably the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection, were unavoidable: A large fence encircled the complex, and lawmakers and those in attendance faced tighter-than-usual security.

From the start, the partisan divisions were clear. Democrats — including Vice President Kamala Harris — jumped to applause as Biden began his speech. New Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, though he had greeted the president warmly when he entered the chamber, stayed in his seat.

Rather than rolling out flashy policy proposals, the president set out to offer a reassuring assessment of the nation’s condition, declaring that two years after the Capitol attack, America’s democracy was “unbowed and unbroken.”

He highlighted record job creation during his tenure as the country has emerged from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Biden also pointed to areas of bipartisan progress in his first two years in office, including on states’ vital infrastructure and high tech manufacturing. And he said, “There is no reason we can’t work together in this new Congress.”

“The people sent us a clear message. Fighting for the sake of fighting, power for the sake of power, conflict for the sake of conflict, gets us nowhere,” Biden said. “And that’s always been my vision for the country: to restore the soul of the nation, to rebuild the backbone of America — the middle class — to unite the country.”

“We’ve been sent here to finish the job!”

The president took to the House rostrum at a time when just a quarter of U.S. adults say things in the country are headed in the right direction, according to a new poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. About three-quarters say things are on the wrong track. And a majority of Democrats don’t want Biden to seek another term.

He sought to confront those sentiments head-on.

“You wonder whether a path even exists anymore for you and your children to get ahead without moving away, I get it,” Biden said. “That’s why we’re building an economy where no one is left behind. Jobs are coming back, pride is coming back because of the choices we made in the last two years.”

Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who gained a national profile as former President Donald Trump’s press secretary, delivered the Republican response to Biden’s speech.

She focused much of her remarks on social issues, including race in business and education and alleged big-tech censorship of conservatives.

“While you reap the consequences of their failures, the Biden administration seems more interested in woke fantasies than the hard reality Americans face every day,” she said. “Most Americans simply want to live their lives in freedom and peace, but we are under attack in a left-wing culture war we didn’t start and never wanted to fight.”

“The choice is between normal and crazy,” she added.

With COVID-19 restrictions now lifted, the White House and legislators from both parties invited guests designed to drive home political messages with their presence in the House chamber. The mother and stepfather of Tyre Nichols, who was severely beaten by police officers in Memphis and later died, were among those seated with first lady Jill Biden. Other Biden guests included the rock star/humanitarian Bono and 26-year-old Brandon Tsay, who disarmed a gunman in last month’s Monterey Park, California, shooting.

“There are no words to describe the heartbreak and grief of losing a child,” Biden said after introducing RowVaughn and Rodney Wells to a standing ovation. Their grief was palpable as they stood and were recognized by the president and the audience. Biden called on Congress to “rise to the moment” after Nichols’ death to make meaningful change.

Biden drew bipartisan applause when he praised most law enforcement officers as “good, decent people” but added that “when police officers or police departments violate the public’s trust, we must hold them accountable.”

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus invited family members of those involved in police incidents, as they sought to press for action on police reform in the wake of Nichols’ death.

Biden was shifting his sights after spending his first two years pushing through major bills such as the bipartisan infrastructure package, legislation to promote high-tech manufacturing and climate measures. With Republicans now in control of the House, he is turning his focus to implementing those massive laws and making sure voters credit him for the improvements.

Biden, not known for his oratory, appeared relaxed and confident as he delivered his address. He casually adlibbed remarks, fed off the responses from Democratic lawmakers who frequently stood up with thunderous ovations and playfully engaged with his Republican critics.

Addressing Republicans who voted against the big bipartisan infrastructure law, Biden said he’d still ensure their pet projects received federal support. “I promised to be the president for all Americans,” he said. “We’ll fund these projects. And I’ll see you at the ground-breaking.”

The switch was largely by necessity. The newly empowered GOP is itching to undo many of his achievements and vowing to pursue a multitude of investigations — including looking into the recent discoveries of classified documents from his time as vice president at his home and former office.

Though he pledged bipartisanship where possible, Biden also underscored the sharp tensions that exist between him and House Republicans: He discussed GOP efforts to repeal Democrats’ 2022 climate change and healthcare law and their reluctance to increase the federal debt limit, the nation’s legal borrowing authority that must be raised later this year or risk default.

“Instead of making the wealthy pay their fair share, some Republicans want Medicare and Social Security to sunset every five years,” Biden said. “Other Republicans say if we don’t cut Social Security and Medicare, they’ll let America default on its debt for the first time in our history.

“I won’t let that happen.”

Biden’s comments on entitlement programs prompted an outcry from Republicans, as Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., and others jumped to their feet, some yelling “Liar!”

The president answered back, “Stand up and show them: We will not cut Social Security! We will not cut Medicare!”

As Republicans continued to protest his accusations, he said, “We’ve got unanimity.”

While hopes for large-scale bipartisanship are slim, Biden reissued his 2022 appeal for Congress to get behind his “unity agenda” of actions to address the opioid epidemic, mental health, veterans’ health and cancer. He announced new executive action and call for lawmakers to act to support new measures to support cancer research, address housing needs and suicide among veterans, boost access to mental health care, and move to further crack down on deadly trafficking in fentanyl.

In fiery refrains, Biden said the phrase “finish the job” 13 times, challenging lawmakers to complete the work of his administration on capping insulin costs for all Americans, confronting climate change, raising taxes on the wealthy and corporations and banning assault-style weapons. But on all of those fronts, the divided government is even less likely to yield than the Congress under sole Democratic control.

The speech came days after Biden ordered the military to shoot down a suspected Chinese spy balloon that flew brazenly across the country, captivating the nation and serving as a reminder of tense relations between the two global powers.

“Make no mistake: As we made clear last week, if China’s threatens our sovereignty, we will act to protect our country,” Biden said. “And we did.”

Last year’s address occurred just days after Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine and as many in the West doubted Kyiv’s ability to withstand the onslaught. Over the past year, the U.S. and other allies have sent tens of billions of dollars in military and economic assistance to bolster Ukraine’s defenses. Now, Biden must make the case — both at home and abroad — for sustaining that coalition as the war drags on.

“Together, we did what America always does at our best,” Biden said. “We led. We united NATO and built a global coalition. We stood against Putin’s aggression. We stood with the Ukrainian people.”

source

ATLANTA (AP) — A process recently implemented by Georgia state lawmakers to examine how county officials handle elections is likely unsustainable without more resources or reforms, according to the panel that did the first review under the law.

The provision in a sweeping 2021 election overhaul allows state lawmakers who represent a given county to request a review of local election officials and their practices. That sets in motion a process that ultimately could lead to the replacement of county election officials by the State Election Board.

The first three-person review panel was appointed by the state board in August 2021 at the request of Republican lawmakers in Fulton County. The state’s most populous county, Fulton, is a Democratic stronghold that includes most of the city of Atlanta and about 11% of the state’s voters.

It has a history of problematic elections and has long been criticized by Republicans. Former President Donald Trump fixated on Fulton County in the wake of his narrow election loss in Georgia in 2020 and continues to push unfounded claims of widespread election fraud there.

The bipartisan review panel last month completed its required report and presented its findings on Tuesday to the State Election Board. The panel recommended against a state takeover of Fulton County’s elections, saying that while the county still has work to do, it had made significant improvements.

The review panel included Stephen Day, a Democratic appointee to the Gwinnett County election board; Ricky Kittle, a Republican appointee to the Catoosa County election board; and Ryan Germany, who was until recently the longtime general counsel for the secretary of state’s office.

The existence of the review “helped incentivize Fulton County to make improvements to their elections, but it took an enormous amount of donated work, and it is difficult to see how it is a sustainable process that can continue to positively influence election administration in Georgia without some reforms,” the panel’s report said.

In addition to observation and work done by the panel, the Atlanta-based Carter Center, which regularly monitors elections around the world, was invited to independently observe the 2022 general election in Fulton County and donated “almost 4000 people hours,” the report said.

Members of the panel told the state board on Tuesday that it would, perhaps, be more useful to implement a more positive, proactive and periodic review process to help counties fix problems before they become systemic.

“It is better to be a partner than an adversary, better to improve systems before dysfunction than trying to fix them after the fact,” Day said.

He suggested several possible approaches: a review process using retired election officials, or volunteers run through the Georgia Association of Voter Registration and Election Officials; hiring outside consultants to do reviews; or having paid staff within the secretary of state’s office that travels to all 159 counties for reviews. But he said that all of those options require funding and called on state lawmakers to adequately fund the secretary of state’s office.

“If you value elections, then let’s fully fund the staff there and give them the person power they need to do the job rather than begging for crumbs, which they seem to have to do every year in their budget,” he said.

State Election Board Chair William Duffey said lawmakers who created the review panel process clearly thought it was necessary to have a mechanism to intervene when a county is in dire straits. But he said he doesn’t want the board to be perceived “as the sheriff that runs into a county because we found a problem there.”

Instead, he said, he’d like the board to work proactively with the secretary of state’s office and the counties to identify issues — and to establish uniform processes that can be implemented in all 159 counties. But he also said that the funding to do that is not currently available.

Senate Ethics Committee Chairman Max Burns, a Sylvania Republican whose committee oversees election matters, said he wasn’t aware of the statements made Tuesday before the State Election Board.

“Resources are always a challenge. I’m not aware of a specific request by the Secretary of State for resources for investigations,” said Burns, who chaired the committee when the sweeping election overhaul known as SB 202 passed.

Burns said he believed lawmakers would be receptive to a request for money needed for specific investigations. He praised Duffey and the current board.

“We’d like for every county to follow Georgia law,” Burns said.

The provision of state law that allows lawmakers to request a review panel says that up to four counties may be under review at any given time. Sara Tindall Ghazal, a Democratic appointee to the State Election Board, asked the panel whether that would be feasible.

“It would be impossible to do four counties at one time,” Kittle said, adding, “It may have been a good idea somebody had, but they really didn’t think this out.”

___

Associated Press writer Jeff Amy in Atlanta contributed reporting.

source