Red-state romp backing abortion rights changes 2022 calculations
A push to allow lawmakers to ban abortion backfired spectacularly in Kansas.
Put in the issue Ahead of voters on midsummer primary day, conservatives in Kansas were banking on a low-turnout case that would pave the way for an abortion ban in a reliably red state.
What they got instead was a one-sided loss that maintained the status quo but completely changed the calculations about 2022.
Lawmakers push to allow abortion ban in Kansas Brilliantly reversed. It roused suburban voters and even those in conservative parts of the state who didn’t want to pursue something that was practically invited by the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade.
Joe Scarborough called the Republican position on forced birth a “rapist’s bill of rights” this morning. Even rural counties in KS underperformed in supporting Yes, and turnout was much higher (900K, that’s the general election level). People will come out and vote on this issue.
Concerns about abortion erupted among Democrats, fueling a push for the vote
Concern about abortion access as an election issue has surged among Democratic voters in the past month, a USA Today/Suffolk University poll found, as the results of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade came into play.
Sixty-four percent of Democrats say the court action makes them more likely to vote in November, likely an important factor in midterm elections that traditionally have low turnout. That’s more than double the 29% of Democrats who said A USA TODAY/Suffolk poll taken After the draft of the historic decision was leaked in June.
The issue’s growing power to drive voting among abortion-rights supporters could limit losses in the House and boost Democratic chances to contest control of the Senate in the midterms. GOP hopes of a “wave” election that will sweep Republican candidates into office have been fueled by a campaign driven by economic anxiety.
Check out the election roundup later today from Daily Kos.
And in other news…
House panel: DHS officials intervene in effort to retrieve lost Secret Service texts
After the Office of Inspector General requested Secret Service communications on January 6, the effort was called off.
Top officials in the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Office of Inspector General interfered with efforts to retrieve deleted Secret Service texts. Attack on the US Capitol and tried to cover up their actions, two House committees said in a letter Monday.
Taken together, the new revelations appear to indicate that key oversight for secret service And DHS deliberately took steps to prevent the retrieval of documents it knew were missing, and then tried to hide the fact that it had decided not to pursue that evidence.
Good job, Democrats.
David Rothkopf/Daily Beast:
Biden promised his Zawahiri strike
The president promised to pressure the terrorists while pulling the US out of Afghanistan. Monday’s killing of the al-Qaeda chief shows he was as good as his word.
For years, including as vice president during Obama’s years, Biden argued that a new strategy was needed to end America’s “endless war” in Afghanistan, bring the troops home, and deal with terrorism. He and those close to him acknowledged that the Bush administration’s exorbitant spending on what it described as the “global war on terror” was a misallocation of resources. Instead, as a senior Biden aide told me shortly after taking office, “the focus should be … as it probably always should have been … led by the intelligence community, law enforcement and the military. supported by, on the management of targeted counterterrorism efforts. , and implemented using over-the-horizon technologies and, where necessary, special operations.”
Last year’s troop withdrawal from Afghanistan not only brought America’s longest war to a close but also created a put-up or closure moment for Biden’s preferred approach. Political opponents, members of the military and other critics Omitting the argument will create a blank space Which terrorists will surely fill and which in turn will put Americans in danger.
Biden argued that would not happen. In a speech defending his decision to pull out just 50 weeks ago, on August 14 last year, after explaining his rationale for withdrawal, he added: “We will not take our eyes off the terrorist threat. . We will realign our counter-terrorism capabilities and critical assets in the region to prevent the re-emergence of terrorists—threats to our nation from far away. We will hold the Taliban accountable for their commitment not to allow any terrorist to threaten the United States or its allies from Afghan soil…
The analysis considers Biden’s climate and tax bill fiscally responsible
Despite Republican claims, the new law would be only a modest corporate tax increase, the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation found.
An analysis by the Joint Committee on Taxation, a congressional nonpartisan scorekeeper for tax law, suggests the bill would raise about $70 billion over 10 years. But the increase would be front-loaded: Through 2027, the bill would actually amount to a net tax cut each year, as new credits and other incentives for low-emissions energy sources outweigh a new minimum tax on some large corporations.
This analysis, along with a comprehensive estimate of the bill’s provisions from the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, suggests that the legislation, if passed, would increase federal spending modestly over the next 10 years. By the end of the decade, the bill will be reducing federal spending, which is what will happen if it doesn’t become law.
Ignore the GOP panicking about the Dems’ tax plans. They are doable.
In fact, the tax-side changes are so subtle that relatively few people should notice. Even the largest share of revenue raisers — megacorporations — effectively has only a partial grip on the big GOP corporate tax cuts passed in 2017.
“Unless you’re a tax dodger, hedge fund manager or a corporation making over $1 billion, you’re not affected,” in summary. Steven M. Rosenthal, senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center.
Let’s take the measures one by one.
More than half of American voters say abortion is “very important” to the midterm elections
Big picture: While abortion is a motivational issue for some voter groups, it has been eclipsed by inflation, including rising gas prices, which 74% of respondents say is “very important.”
Yes, but: “Low turnout midterm elections can be a game of inches, and abortion can make a difference, especially if Gas prices continue to fall” said KFF President and CEO Drew Altman.
U.S. Veterans owe A new burn-pit bill would write this into law. So why are Republicans opposing it?
Now, as Stewart pointed out, the bill that came up for a vote last week was no different than the one the Senate passed in June. No new provisions have been added to it. So it’s not clear why something that most Republican senators had no problem with last month has suddenly become unacceptable.
Having said that, it’s not the case that Republicans just brought up this projected budget move after the fact. It’s possible — perhaps even likely — that Republicans like Cruz switched votes last week despite the fact that Joe Mnuchin and Chuck Schumer secretly negotiated to pass the so-called Inflation Reduction Act. were given But Senator Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania has been complaining about the provision at issue for more than a month — and is offering an amendment to change it. Indeed, unlike most of his Republican colleagues, Toomey voted against the PACT Act the first time because of it.
So what is Toomey’s problem with Bill? This is quite a secret point. Essentially, Toomey is unhappy that the bill replaces the roughly $40 billion the government currently spends on health care for these veterans each year. optional spend to mandatory Spending is currently a limit on how much discretionary spending Congress can authorize each year. So if $40 billion of veterans’ health care spending no longer counts against the cap, Toomey argued, Congress will now go ahead and spend another $40 billion on things they’d rather not spend it on. will do It is believed that he is trying to excise from the bill.
I find this Twitter account very droll.
Michigan’s undecided Republican voters look for a fighter, but also a winner
A faction of Michigan Republicans who have struggled for months to make up their minds in the governor’s primary race could change Tuesday’s election as they say their plans to nominate a fighter against their hopes of winning in November. Weigh the desires.
The five-candidate GOP primary field for the state’s top office includes all political newcomers without voting records to vet. Most contenders have not raised enough money to run constant television ads to promote themselves.
And former President Donald Trump issued no endorsement By Friday night, four days before the election. He is now supporting conservative commentator Tudor Dixon of Norton Shores.
According to political observers, the circumstances have left an unusually large number of undecided voters, forcing them to study the personalities and actions of the candidates and make judgments about who to vote for Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. Considered the best to beat.