Tag: US Republican Party

Trump Breaks the Ice in Iowa Even as American Politics Remains Frozen in the Past

Trump seems set to be the Republican candidate for a third successive presidential election, while Biden will be part of the Democratic ticket for the fourth time in five elections. America’s democracy seems to have lost the ability to renew itself.

Mid-winter in the mid-West. What a way to start the world’s most crucial election! But the overwhelming victory achieved by Donald Trump in the Republican caucus in the state of Iowa really does matter.

It’s not so much his win, but the margin of his success which matters. Trump is now almost certain to be the Republican party’s candidate in November’s presidential election. And the prospect of his return to the White House is no longer a fanciful notion, but a 50:50 possibility – indeed many neutral observers believe he’s the favourite.

Illustration: Pariplab Chakraborty

But let’s just stay in the snowbound mid-West for a moment. Iowa is about as untypical a state as you can come across in the United States. It’s large, rural, overwhelmingly white and distinctly conservative. Pigs outnumber people there by seven-to-one.

Iowa is unusual among American states in having not simply a primary election to help determine who stands in November but a caucus. Only Republican supporters can take part. And they have to turn-up at a local get-together, held at a school or library, and listen to arguments put forward by supporters of the various candidates before casting a vote.

If you turn up late, or don’t stay until the end, your choice might not count.

Iowa accounts for not quite 1% of America’s population; and only one-in-thirty Iowans took part in the Republican caucus. So not quite 100,000 Iowans are making the weather in a contest to decide who governs a nation of more than 330 million.

The people of Iowa are used to harsh winters, but the white-out which descended on the state in the last few days was something different – pushing temperatures down to ten degrees below zero (much lower when wind chill is taken into account). No wonder that turn-out was lower than usual.

But then, American politics is entering a new Ice Age. It’s frozen in the past. Donald Trump seems set to be the Republican candidate for a third successive presidential election; Joe Biden, who says he is determined to stand again in spite of his age (he’s 81), will be part of the Democratic ticket, as presidential or vice-presidential contender, for the fourth time in five elections.

America’s democracy seems to have lost the ability to renew itself.

Trump was tipped to win handsomely in Iowa, but taking more than half the total vote in the caucus is an emphatic triumph. His two main challengers – Ron DeSantis took second place, narrowly ahead of Nikki Haley (born Nimrata Randhawa to Punjabi parents who emigrated to the US in the 1960s) – are not only a long way behind, but destined to continue sniping at each other to secure the mantle of principal challenger.

Vivek Ramaswamy, a biotech entrepreneur whose parents were migrants to the US from Kerala, came a poor fourth in the caucus and has dropped out of the race. He has endorsed his fellow conservative, Donald Trump.

The electoral battleground now shifts to the much more liberal state of New Hampshire, where there’s a Republican primary election next week. Trump won’t do as well here – but he now has the all-important momentum which will very probably allow him to shake off all his challengers within a matter of weeks.

Also read: As the US Enters Election Year, Will There Be a Peaceful Transfer of Power?

The courts could, of course, still disrupt Trump’s plans to run. He faces a slew of legal cases, several arising out of his refusal to accept the outcome of the last presidential election and the storming of the Congress building by his supporters.

But the evidence from Iowa is that the more legal cases against Trump, the more Republicans support him, apparently convinced that the action is politically motivated.

The Democrats, Joe Biden’s party, don’t officially start their primary elections until the contest in South Carolina on February 3. But the process is a formality. No candidate of substance is standing against the incumbent president.

That’s not simply a pity, but close to a tragedy. Biden is an unpopular president, because he’s seen – perhaps unfairly – not to have been a good steward of the economy. And his advanced age is evident in his stiffness when walking and in moments of apparent confusion. Most Americans, opinion polls suggest, think Biden is too old to serve as president for another four years.

President Biden seems to have convinced himself that only he can frustrate Donald Trump’s ambition to return to the White House. Democrats believe that a second Trump presidency could imperil America’s democracy. But it could be Biden’s determination to stand again that eases Trump’s path back to power.

Even the most experienced leaders are bad at making that brave decision to leave the political field of combat.

Andrew Whitehead is an honorary professor at the University of Nottingham in the UK and a former BBC India correspondent.

London Calling: How does India look from afar? Looming world power or dysfunctional democracy? And what’s happening in Britain, and the West, that India needs to know about and perhaps learn from? This fortnightly column helps forge the connections so essential in our globalising world.

‘Questionable’: A Quiz by The Wire, September 3, 2023 Edition

Take this sixth edition of our quiz!

Questionable by The Wire is a mosaic of the fortnight’s developments, featuring coverage from the mainstream press as well as off the beaten path.

Take this sixth edition of our fortnightly quiz and see if you’re as caught up with the news as you think you are!

Abortions, Voting Rights, Guns in Focus as US Midterm Elections Take Off

The high stakes have brought increased money and attention to the state-level races, which typically get overshadowed in midterm elections by the fight for control of Congress.

Phoenix/East Lansing: Competitive governor contests are on the ballot in about a dozen states in Tuesday’s U.S. midterm elections, with outcomes that hold far-reaching consequences on issues such as abortion, voting rights and guns.

The high stakes have brought increased money and attention to the state-level races, which typically get overshadowed in midterm elections by the fight for control of Congress.

Democrats are fighting to keep control of governorships in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan to maintain the power to veto any legislation by the Republican-controlled legislatures that might curb abortion rights and voting access.

Republican victories in presidential battleground states including Arizona could have implications for the 2024 White House election. The party’s nominees in several such states have embraced former President Donald Trump’s false claims that the 2020 election was stolen.

In Arizona, which has one of the country’s closest gubernatorial races, Trump-backed candidate Kari Lake has repeated his assertions about voter fraud and said she would not have certified President Joe Biden’s victory in that state.

Her opponent is Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, a Democrat who rose to national prominence in 2020 when she defended Arizona’s election results.

Lake backed off the stolen election theme at a campaign event near Phoenix on Monday. She told supporters they needed to vote “like your life depends on it.”

In all, 36 of the country’s 50 states will elect governors on Tuesday, with the majority safely in either Democratic or Republican hands. Republicans hold 28 governor seats nationally, compared to 22 Democratic governorships.

Michigan’s Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer has made abortion a focal point of her re-election campaign, as voters also will consider a ballot measure that would safeguard abortion rights in the state’s constitution.

“We need a governor who’s going to fight for our reproductive rights, not give them away,” Whitmer told a rally of mostly students huddled on a campus field at Michigan State University in East Lansing.

Her Republican opponent, Trump-backed conservative commentator Tudor Dixon, supports a near-total ban on abortion but says the topic is not an issue in the governor’s race because of the ballot question.

With Whitmer’s lead in the polls shrinking, she urged her young audience to get their friends to vote, saying, “This election could be decided by a few thousand votes.”

In Florida, polls show Republican incumbent Ron DeSantis poised to defeat Democratic challenger Charlie Crist ahead of DeSantis’ widely expected run for the presidency in 2024.

In Texas, Republican Governor Greg Abbott is expected to win a third term despite a lively campaign by his Democratic opponent, former U.S. congressman Beto O’Rourke. Georgia’s Republican governor, Brian Kemp, also looks likely to prevail against Democratic challenger Stacey Abrams in a rematch of their 2018 race.

Democrats are expected to flip Republican-held governorships in the states of Maryland and Massachusetts, but they face tough battles in a couple of other Democratic states.

Tight Contests

A three-way race in Oregon could result in a Republican winning the state’s governorship for the first time in 40 years.

Democrat Tina Kotek and Republican Christine Drazan are locked in a close battle for the open seat, and independent candidate Betsy Johnson, a former Democrat, could potentially siphon votes from Kotek.

Biden campaigned on Sunday in New York, where Democratic Governor Kathy Hochul’s lead in the polls over Republican challenger Lee Zeldin has shrunk to single digits as Zeldin has campaigned on crime and controversial bail reform laws. No Republican has won statewide office in New York in 20 years.

While Democrats have stressed abortion rights and elections, Republicans have focused largely on fears of rising crime and inflation, which it blames on Democratic policies.

Wisconsin’s Democratic incumbent Tony Evers faces a strong challenge from Republican construction magnate Tim Michels, who has promised to enforce a 19th-century abortion ban that Evers is challenging in court.

Michels has raised concerns about how he would handle future elections, telling supporters at a recent campaign event that “Republicans will never lose another election in Wisconsin after I’m elected governor.”

In Pennsylvania, the governor appoints the secretary of state, who oversees election administration. Biden and former presidents Barack Obama and Trump all spent part of the final weekend before Election Day rallying with their party’s nominees in the pivotal state.

Republican candidate Doug Mastriano has echoed Trump’s false claims of voter fraud and was present at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, to protest the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.

Democratic candidate Josh Shapiro, the state’s attorney general who is leading in opinion polls for the open seat, has cast Mastriano as too extreme.

(Reuters)

Trump Imposes Rule Allowing US to Detain Migrant Families Indefinitely

It was the Republican administration’s third major regulation restricting immigration in little more than a month.

Washington: The Trump administration on Wednesday unveiled a rule that allows officials to detain migrant families indefinitely while judges consider whether to grant them asylum in the United States, abolishing a previous 20-day limit.

The rule, which is certain to draw a legal challenge, would replace a 1997 court settlement that limits the amount of time US immigration authorities can detain migrant children. That agreement is generally interpreted as meaning families must be released within 20 days.

It was the Republican administration’s third major regulation restricting immigration in little more than a month, all during an unsettled period when senior immigration officials hold “acting” titles lacking US Senate confirmation.

Trump has made cracking down on legal and illegal immigration a hallmark of his presidency after campaigning in 2016 on a promise, so far unfulfilled, that Mexico would pay for a border wall to keep migrants from entering the United States.

Also read: How ICE Enforcement Has Changed Under the Trump Administration

In what would be another attempt to dismantle established immigration law, Trump told reporters on Wednesday his administration was seriously looking at ending the right of citizenship for children born to non-citizens within the United States.

Immigration officials are looking for any kind of deterrent to reverse a record surge in families fleeing violence and poverty in Central America. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials say they have caught or rejected 475,000 family members in the past 10 months, more than three times any previous full year.

On July 15 the administration unveiled a rule to bar almost all immigrants from applying for asylum at the southern border, and on Aug. 12 it announced regulation denying visas and permanent residency for those who fail to make enough money.

Multiple lawsuits were filed within days of the two previous immigration rules.

Legal challenges have held up many of Trump‘s initiatives, but immigration advocates say he has managed to build an “invisible wall” through executive actions bypassing Congress.

The administration framed the policy as a humane approach to a crisis.

“To protect these children from abuse, and stop this illegal flow, we must close these loopholes. This is an urgent humanitarian necessity,” Trump said in a statement.

Also read: US Targets Families for Deportation to Discourage Migrants

Critics counter that Trump and Stephen Miller, his aide on immigration, are using a series of heartless policies to animate hard-core political supporters.

“The administration is seeking to codify child abuse, plain and simple,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, said in a statement, adding that she expected a federal judge would strike down the new rule.

Mexico’s Foreign Ministry expressed concern over the plan, saying in a statement that it would consider legal action.

Paediatricians have said children may suffer numerous negative physical and emotional symptoms from detention, even if only brief. The American Psychoanalytic Association on Wednesday branded the Trump policies as “psychological warfare.”

“It has become clear that the current administration uses cruel language, policies and abuse with the objective of deterring immigrants and asylum seekers,” said Lee Jaffe, president of APsaA.

Officials said the families would receive mental health treatment and other services in facilities that are held to high standards of care.

“They’re campus-like settings with educational, medical, dining and separate, private living facilities,” acting Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan told Fox News.

Robyn Barnard, an attorney for the nonprofit organisation Human Rights First, challenged that characterisation, saying that just because a facility is in a pastoral setting does not make it more humane.

“A gilded cage is still a cage,” Barnard said. “There are locks on the doors, there is no freedom of movement. It is for all intents and purposes a prison.”

Flores settlement

The latest action tears apart the Flores Settlement Agreement that had placed limits on how long children of families seeking asylum could be held in detention, enabling the US government to release tens of thousands of families pending the resolution of their cases.

Also read: Trump Wants to Make It Easier to Deport Immigrants Who Use Public Benefits

Trump officials had blamed Flores for the spike in immigration, especially of Central American families, saying it encouraged migrants to bring children with them so they could be released into the United States pending their court cases.

Families typically wait several months for their cases to work their way through immigration court, and the new rule would allow the DHS to keep those families at detention facilities.

The rule will be published in the Federal Register on Friday and will take effect 60 days later. The implementation deadline could slip, however, depending on the success of the court challenges.

Hundreds Rally at US Supreme Court Against Abortion Bans in Eight States

Many of the restrictions are intended to draw legal challenges, which religious conservatives hope will lead the nation’s top court to overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that established a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy.

Washington: Abortion-rights campaigners, including Democrats seeking their party’s 2020 presidential nomination, rallied at the US Supreme Court on Tuesday to protest new restrictions on abortion passed by Republican-dominated legislatures in eight states.

Many of the restrictions are intended to draw legal challenges, which religious conservatives hope will lead the nation’s top court to overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that established a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy.

“We are not going to allow them to move our country backward,” US Senator Amy Klobuchar, one of the two dozen Democrats running for president, told the crowd through a megaphone.

Another candidate, Senator Cory Booker, urged the crowd to “wake up more men to join this fight.”

The rally is one of the scores scheduled for Tuesday around the country by the American Civil Liberties Union, NARAL Pro-Choice America, Planned Parenthood Action Fund and other abortion rights group. The protests are a response to laws passed recently by Republican state legislatures that amount to the tightest restrictions on abortion in the United States in decades.

Alabama passed an outright ban last week, including for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest, unless the woman’s life is in danger. Other states, including Ohio and Georgia, have banned abortions absent a medical emergency after six weeks of pregnancy or after the fetus’s heartbeat can be detected, which can occur before a woman even realizes she is pregnant.

Protesters outside the Supreme Court waved signs saying “We won’t be punished” and “Protect Safe, Legal Abortion” and were joined by Pete Buttigieg, the South Bend, Indiana, mayor who also is vying for the 2020 nomination. “My entire campaign is about freedom,” he said in a brief interview.

U.S. President Donald Trump, a Republican who opposes abortion, has seized on the issue as one likely to fire up his core supporters, although he considers the Alabama ban too restrictive because it does not make exceptions for incest and rape.

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, another Democratic 2020 candidate, blamed what she called “outrageous bans” on Trump.

“This is the beginning of President Trump’s war on women,” she told the rally. “If he wants his war, he will have his war, and he will lose.”

The restrictive new laws are contrary to the Roe v. Wade ruling, which affords a woman the right to an abortion up to the moment the fetus would be viable outside the womb, which is usually placed at about seven months, or 28 weeks, but may occur earlier.

The bans have been championed by conservatives, many of them Christian, who say fetuses should have rights comparable to those of infants and view abortion as tantamount to murder. The Supreme Court now has a 5-4 conservative majority following two judicial appointments by Trump.

“This is probably one of the first times I’ve ever felt like it’s real that things could actually be overturned,” Tracy Leaman, 43, an event planner from the Washington area, said at Tuesday’s rally. “The Supreme Court is stacked against us for the first time in my lifetime. I feel like it’s scarier than ever before.”

A federal judge in Mississippi on Tuesday heard arguments in a lawsuit challenging the state’s new fetal-heartbeart abortion law. District Judge Carlton Reeves asked questions suggesting he thought the new law to be even more unconstitutional than the state’s 15-week abortion ban he struck down last year, USA Today reported.

(Reuters)

Nancy Pelosi Victorious – Why the California Democrat Was Reelected as Speaker

First elected in 1987, Pelosi offers decades of experience at building coalitions and she excels as a Democratic fundraiser.

Despite some brash and not insignificant opposition, California’s Nancy Pelosi is returning to her previous role as speaker of the House.

She will preside over a chamber that is 77% male and a Democratic Caucus that is 62% male.

When the Democratic Caucus held their leadership election on Nov. 28, Pelosi won the nomination on a 203 to 32 vote, falling 15 votes shy of the 218 she would later need to win the speakership with all members voting.

When a vote was taken on the House floor on Jan. 3, she won by a vote of 220 to 192, with 15 Democrats voting for someone else or voting “present.” The close vote illustrated, once again, Pelosi’s skill in coalition-building and counting votes, but also that some Democrats – particularly new members and those in swing districts – are dissatisfied with her as the party’s standard bearer.

As a political scientist who focuses on gender and party discipline in the House of Representatives, I have studied Pelosi’s leadership and how she was able to hold it for so long.

It’s important to realise that Pelosi’s battle to win over wavering Democrats didn’t begin in November 2018. Rather, it stretches back to when she was first elected to leadership in 2001. Her ongoing ability to rally members of her own party illustrates why she has been among the most successful US House speakers. It also suggests her leadership will help Democrats in Congress as they negotiate with President Trump and Senate Republicans, even if Pelosi remains unpopular in some Democratic members’ districts.

Rising to power

Pelosi’s rise to power and leadership are characterised by her intense partisanship, fundraising prowess and coalition-building within her own party.

Elected to the House in 1987, she won her first leadership race as party whip in October of 2001, defeating Steny Hoyer of Maryland by a vote of 118 to 95. As minority leader, Pelosi established a reputation as a pragmatist who enforced party discipline, counted votes, built coalitions – and raised enormous sums of money for her colleagues.

Also Read: Trump Threatens to Declare National Emergency to Get Funds for Border Wall

Fast forward to the 2006 elections – halfway through the second term of Republican President George W. Bush. Democrats gained 30 seats and majority party control. Taking the gavel at the start of the 110th Congress, Pelosi became the first female speaker of the House, presiding over an 84% male chamber.

Centralised power

Serving as speaker from 2007 to 2010, Pelosi benefited from – and expanded – the centralization of party leaders’ power that occurred during the previous 12 years of GOP control of the House.

As she stepped into the leadership role in 2007, Pelosi had more tools and prerogatives than her immediate Democratic predecessors, Tip O’Neill, Jim Wright and Tom Foley. That’s because under Republican speakers Newt Gingrich and Dennis Hastert, the shift of power away from committee chairs to party leaders – a change that had been taking place since the Democratic reforms of the 1970s – picked up speed. For example, Republicans instituted six-year term limits on committee chairs in 1995 and made clear that seniority was only one of many factors that a party leadership-led steering committee considered when selecting committee chairs.

During her first two terms as Speaker, Pelosi maximized her influence, setting the legislative agenda, pursuing partisan policy initiatives and fundraising for her colleagues. As I argue in my book on party discipline, Democratic committee chairs, grateful to return to the majority, were willing to cede power to her and other party leaders.

For the most part, Pelosi worked hard to build consensus within her party and shut Republicans out of the process. She frequently met with freshmen and more moderate and conservative Democrats to find common ground on the party agenda.

Under her leadership, House Democrats voted on average with the majority of their caucus 92% of the time in 2007 and 2008, setting a record for party cohesion. Pelosi routinely challenged President Bush and congressional Republicans, particularly on issues related to the war in Iraq.

A Different Challenge

When Obama was first elected in 2008, the Democrats gained unified party control of the White House and both chambers of Congress. Pelosi had a new challenge: building coalitions to pass the president’s ambitious agenda items – like health care and financial regulatory reform – rather than the easier job of simply attacking a Republican president’s proposals.

Pelosi’s role in the passage of the Affordable Care Act can hardly be overstated.

She brought Democrats together to start the process in the House before Obama became deeply involved. Three House committees marked up the bill which Pelosi then assembled. When key House Democrats threatened to withdraw their support over disagreements related to abortion funding, Pelosi appeased them and attracted enough votes to pass the bill. And when it seemed that the House and Senate would not be able to reconcile their versions after Senate Democrats lost their 60-vote filibuster-proof majority with the special election of Republican Scott Brown of Massachusetts, who filled the seat of the late Democrat Ted Kennedy, Pelosi’s leadership was critical in crafting and executing a complicated legislative strategy that resulted in the bill that Obama ultimately signed into law.

Also Read: US Congress Convenes a Younger, Bluer and More Diverse Body

House Democrats were largely unified on other votes as well. The average member voted with the majority 91% of the time in 2009 and 89% in 2010.

Backlash

But Obama’s legislative successes came at a cost. During the 2010 midterm elections Democrats lost 64 seats. Republicans gained a 242 to 193 majority, their best showing since 1946.

Back in the minority, Pelosi lost the speakership but was re-elected as Democratic leader in 2011, defeating North Carolina centrist Heath Shuler by a caucus vote of 150-43. In a sign of dissatisfaction, 19 Democrats did not support her in the vote on the House floor.

The Trump era

On January 3, 2017, reeling from being completely shut out of power in Washington, all but four Democrats voted to reelect Pelosi as their leader for the eighth time. However, this show of Democratic unity on the House floor masked the uneasiness during the party’s internal contest between Pelosi and relatively unknown seven-term Democrat Tim Ryan of Ohio in late November. Pelosi prevailed, 134 to 63 – hardly a ringing endorsement.

As the 115th Congress got underway, Pelosi pledged to seek common ground with President-elect Trump on job creation, trade and support for working families. She also warned that “If there is an attempt to destroy the guarantee of Medicare, harm Medicaid, Social Security, or the Affordable Care Act, Democrats will stand our ground.”

Not surprisingly, with deep policy divides and intense competition between the parties, along with the difficulty of negotiating with President Trump, finding that common ground has been elusive. Without the votes to advance the Democrats’ agenda in the House, criticizing Republican policies and especially President Trump was the best way for Pelosi to get attention. It also helped Democrats win elections in 2018, as a majority of voters saw the 2018 election as a referendum on the president.

The 116th Congress

And so to Pelosi victorious. She brings three main strengths as the party’s leader: fundraising prowess, experience and skill in legislative bargaining and coalition building, and the ability to effectively challenge Trump with policy and procedural expertise. Pelosi showed her skill when confronting the president about the government shutdown during a highly publicised meeting on Dec. 11. Indeed, it was praise from Democrats for her strong performance that day that likely bolstered her bid for the speakership.

Her skill has also been display as Pelosi has won over skeptical Democrats on both her ideological left and right since the November elections. Pelosi has relied on the immense power and prerogatives of leadership that she herself helped to expand, winning over members one committee assignment and policy promise at a time. However, as part of the bargain, Pelosi ultimately agreed to curb the power of the speaker and limit her remaining time in leadership to four years. She also agreed to a series of proposals by the “problem solvers” caucus that would allow somewhat more opportunities for junior members to be involved in policymaking and large bipartisan coalitions to move legislation that party leaders had not put on the agenda.

Also Read: In Jibe at ‘Friend’, Trump Belittles Indian Assistance to Afghanistan

Democrats’ internal leadership battle made clear that the party needs to develop a deeper bench of potential leaders with skills and experience to replace not only Pelosi but long-time #2 and #3 leaders Steny Hoyer and James Clyburn as well. However, it also shows that women leaders need to take extra steps to prove themselves in a male-dominated institution. After all, neither Hoyer nor Clyburn faced any opposition.

Kathryn L. Pearson is an Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Minnesota

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Indian American Lawmakers Fail to Increase Their Strength in US Mid-Term Elections

None of the more than half-a-dozen new Indian Americans candidates, many of whom caught national attention by putting up a tough fight to their opponents, could make it to the House of Representatives

Washington: The Indian American caucus in the US Congress failed to increase its strength, even as all four its incumbent members were most likely to be re-elected to the House of Representatives in the highly polarised mid-term elections held on Tuesday.

None of the more than half-a-dozen new Indian Americans candidates, many of whom caught national attention by putting up a tough fight to and raising more funds than their opponents, could make it to the House of Representatives, which is equivalent to Lok Sabha in the Indian parliament.

Indian Americans performed better in state assemblies

Mujataba Mohammed.

However, Indian Americans picked up more seats in the state assemblies. Ram Villivalam was elected for the first time to the Illinois senate and Mujtaba Mohammed was elected to the North Carolina state senate.

Chicago-born Villivalam, elected unopposed, also became the first Asian-American state senator and the first South Asian-American member of Illinois general assembly ever.

For the first time, more than 100 Indian Americans had entered the race in this mid-term elections, of which over 50 were on the ballot on Tuesday.

Among them, 12, including four incumbents, were running for the House and one for the Senate: a record in itself.

Also Read: The Most Significant US Mid-Term Elections Can Serve as a Lesson on Voting-Rights

In the Eighth Congressional District of Illinois, Raja Krishnamoorthi defeated his Republican Indian-American rival Jitender Diganvker. Krishnamoorthi would serve a second term in the US House of Representatives.

Pramila Jayapal, the first Indian American to be elected to the House of Representative in 2016, registered her second consecutive win from the Seventh Congressional District of Washington State. In little less than two years, she has emerged nationally as the champion of immigrants, workers and human rights.

Ro Khanna.

Ro Khanna was expected to easily sail through the race for the House of Representatives from the 17th Congressional District of California as he took an impressive lead over his GOP rival Ron Cohen. He was elected for the first time in 2016.

Three-term Congressman Ami Bera, the senior-most among lawmakers in the so-called “Samosa caucus”, had taken a lead of about 2,500 votes over his Republican rival Andrew Grant, with over 96% of the votes being counted in the Seventh Congressional District of California.

Notably, his previous three electoral victories came only after recounting of votes which took several weeks before the results were finally declared.

Indian-American of Tibetan descent Aftab Pureval, 35, lost to GOP incumbent Steve Chabot. He was the first Democrat to get elected as the Hamilton County Clerk of Courts in more than 100 years.

Indian-American Anita Malik lost to her Republican incumbent in the Sixth District of Arizona, while Hiral Tipirneni was trailing behind GOP rival Debbie Lesko in the early tabulations.

Former State Department diplomat Sri Preston Kulkarni lost to his GOP incumbent Pete Olson from the 22nd Congressional District of Texas.

A five-time incumbent, Rep Olson defeated his Indian American Democrat challenger in the most heated 22nd Congressional District that the opposition had hoped to flip due to a large Asian-American population.

Also Read: US Mid-Term Polls: Democrats Take Control of the House of Representatives

The 40-year-old relied heavily on his ability to connect with the district’s diverse population to give Democrats hope that he could pull off an upset in the district.

About 20% of the population here is of Asian heritage, more than any other district in Texas.

Sanjay Patel, who runs a successful consulting business, lost to Republican Congressman Bill Posey, who has been winning the Eighth Congressional District of Florida continuously since 2009.

In the first Congressional District of Arkansas Democrat Chintan Desai lost to Republican incumbent Rick Crawford, while Republican Harry Arora lost to incumbent Jim Himes in the Fourth Congressional District of Connecticut.

Independent candidate comes distant third

Successful entrepreneur Shiva Ayyadurai, who fought the Massachusetts Senate race as an independent, came a distant third. Democrat leader Elizabeth Warren registered a comprehensive win over her Republican rival Geoff Diehl to re-enter the US Senate.

Nima Kulkarni.

Democrat Nima Kulkarni defeated Joshua Neubert from the GOP to make her maiden entry into the Kentucky Assembly from State District 40. A practising and recognised lawyer, she owns Indus Law Firm specialising in immigration, employment and business law.

Mujtaba Mohammed entered the North Carolina state senate from the Senate District 38. A former staff attorney at the Council for Children’s Rights and assistant public defender, Mohammed defeated Richard Rivette.

Incumbent Jay Chaudhuri, an accomplished entrepreneur, was re-elected to North Carolina Senate from the State Senate District 15.

Republican Niraj Atani, 27, registered his third consecutive electoral victory from Ohio House 42nd District. He is the youngest Indian American elected official in the US. He also is the second Indian American state elected official in Ohio history, and the first Indian American Republican.

“Representing the community in which I was born and raised is an incredible honour. I work hard every day to make it achievable for all Ohioans to have the opportunity to make their American Dream a reality,” Atani said in a statement.

In Washington State, Manka Dhingra and Vandana Slatter were re-elected for the state senate. Among others re-elected at the state level are Sabi Kumar in Tennessee and Ash Kalra in California.

(PTI)

Women, Youth, Hispanics Drive Democratic House Wins – Reuters/Ipsos poll

Voters coalesced around three top election issues. The poll found 14% listed the economy as their top issue and another 14% named immigration. In third place, 13% said healthcare was their primary concern.

Washington: Increased support from women, youth and Hispanic voters gave Democrats the boost they needed to take control of the US House of Representatives on Tuesday, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll.

In all, 55% of women said they backed a Democrat for the House this year, compared with 49% who in 2014 said they backed a Democrat in the congressional midterm elections.

Young voters also swung aggressively toward Democrats, with those ages 18 to 34 backing Democrats by 62% to 34% support for Republicans, a 28-percentage point gap.

This was up from 2014, when 54% of young voters backed Democrats and 36% went for Republicans, an 18-point gap.

Hispanic voters also favoured Democratic House candidates by 33% points – higher than the 18-point gap with Republicans that Democrats enjoyed in 2014, the poll found.

Also read: Loss of US House Leaves Republicans More Tied to Trump Than Ever

Democrats took control from Republicans in the House on Tuesday but Republicans outperformed expectations in Senate races and were set to pick up seats in the upper chamber.

All 435 seats in the House, 35 seats in the 100-member Senate and 36 of the 50 state governorships were at stake.

Overall, US voters were deeply divided about Republican President Donald Trump’s job performance and the direction of the country. When asked about Trump’s performance in office, 52% said they disapproved and 44% said they approved, the poll found.

The poll was conducted online on Tuesday and based on responses from 38,196 people who voted in 37 states. The poll is ongoing and will be updated as the vote is tallied.

Women divided

Supporters of Democratic U.S. Senator Heidi Heitkamp react to her acknowledging of defeat at her election night party in West Fargo, North Dakota, U.S. November 6, 2018. Credit: REUTERS/Dan Koeck

Supporters of Democratic U.S. Senator Heidi Heitkamp react to her acknowledging of defeat at her election night party in West Fargo, North Dakota, U.S. November 6, 2018. Credit: REUTERS/Dan Koeck

Election Day polling revealed a split among women voters, who proved a decisive voting bloc for Democrats in the House but sided with Republicans in key Senate races.

Voters coalesced around three top election issues. The poll found 14% listed the economy as their top issue and another 14% named immigration. In third place, 13% said healthcare was their primary concern.

Both Democrats and Republicans cited immigration as a concern – evidence that the issue resonated among the Republican base but also stoked opposition among Democrats.

Among Republicans, immigration was the top issue with 24% citing it. For Democrats, it was healthcare, which registered with 18% of voters.

Also read: US Mid-Term Polls: Democrats Take Control of the House of Representatives

Democrats made healthcare and protecting the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare, the central theme of their House and Senate campaigns, warning that people could lose coverage for pre-existing health conditions and other protections if Republicans kept control of Congress.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll found robust support for changing the nation’s gun laws. Seven in 10 voters said they wanted “moderate” or “strong” regulations and restrictions for firearms, the poll found.

Emboldened by a spate of school shootings and shift in public opinion, Democrats this cycle embraced limits on firearms after decades of avoiding talking about gun control.

About half of midterm voters want abortion to be legal in “most” or “all” cases, the poll found. A slightly smaller number, four in 10, want abortion to be illegal, the poll found.

(Reuters)

With Midterm Elections in Sight, Trump Targets US Birthright Citizenship Amendment

While Trump’s comments have resonated with his political base, legal experts say Trump is running afoul of the US Constitution which added the 14th Amendment in the wake of the Civil War to ensure that “all persons born or naturalized in the US,” were granted citizenship rights.

Washington: With congressional elections a week away, President Donald Trump on Tuesday said he will seek to scrap the right of citizenship for US-born children of non-citizens and undocumented immigrants as he tries again to dramatically reshape immigration policies.

Reviving his support for a legally questionable theory, Trump told the Axios news website he would issue an executive order on so-called birthright citizenship, an issue that has long rankled some conservative Republicans.

Trump’s previous calls to end the practice have resonated with his political base, but moderate Republicans and some legal experts say Trump is running afoul of the US Constitution.

Also Read: Trump Administration Plans Major Changes for H-1B Visas

Under the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, enacted in the wake of the Civil War to ensure that black Americans previously subject to slavery had full citizenship rights, citizenship is granted to “all persons born or naturalized in the US.”

It has been routinely interpreted over the years to confer citizenship to people born in the US whose parents are undocumented immigrants.

Trump, who has made rhetoric against undocumented immigrants a central plank of his presidency, originally spoke out against birthright citizenship when he first started running for president in 2015.

One Republican member of Congress, frequent Trump ally Senator Lindsey Graham, said he would move to introduce legislation “along the same lines” as Trump‘s order.

Neither Graham nor Trump gave any details about the latest plan. The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

Other Republicans were critical. US House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan said Trump could not scrap the right with the stroke of a pen.

“You cannot end birthright citizenship with an executive order,” Ryan, the top Republican in Congress, said in an interview with radio station WVLK, the Washington Post reported.

In the run-up to the November 6 congressional elections, Trump has seized on a caravan of migrants from Central America who are trekking through Mexico toward the US, calling the migrants a threat. On Monday, the US said it would send over 5,200 troops to help secure the border with Mexico.

Also Read: Would-Be Immigrants Left in Legal Limbo After SCOTUS Travel Ban Order

Bill Kristol, editor at large of the conservative Weekly Standard and a Trump critic, said in a Twitter post: “The shrinking caravan of refugees isn’t a threat to the country or the constitutional order. A president who tries to end birthright citizenship by executive order is.”

Legal Argument

Trump, whose hard-line stance against undocumented immigration helped him win the White House, is emphasising his policy to drum up support for fellow Republicans in the elections as Americans are sharply divided and grappling with race and national identity.

A pregnant woman from Honduras is released from detention with other undocumented immigrants at a bus depot in McAllen, Texas, U.S., July 28, 2018.

A pregnant woman from Honduras is released from detention with other undocumented immigrants at a bus depot in McAllen, Texas, U.S., July 28, 2018. Credit: REUTERS/Loren Elliott/File Photo/Files

Opinion polls show Democrats have a chance at achieving the net gain of 23 seats they need to win a majority in the House but they have a longer shot at the Senate, where they need a gain of two seats.

Democratic house leader Nancy Pelosi accused Trump of trying to distract attention from healthcare policy, which Democrats have identified as a top election issue.

“President Trump’s new claim he can unilaterally end the Constitution’s guarantee of citizenship shows Republicans’ spiralling desperation to distract from their assault on Medicare, Medicaid and people with pre-existing conditions,” Pelosi said in a statement.

The legal argument espoused by conservative activists for excluding children of undocumented immigrants would likely be based around the language in the 14th Amendment that says people born in the US are citizens if they are “subject to the jurisdiction” of the US.

Activists seeking to limit immigration, including Michael Anton, who wrote an article on the subject for the Washington Post in July, argue that undocumented immigrants are not under the jurisdiction of the US and therefore their children born on US soil should not be US citizens.

Most legal scholars say the jurisdiction language denies citizenship only to those who are not bound by US law, such as the children of foreign diplomats.

Ilya Shapiro, a lawyer with the libertarian Cato Institute, said that although there is a debate in academic circles among conservatives on whether Congress could legislate on the issue without running afoul of the 14th Amendment, “it’s not something that can be done by executive action alone.”

At least since 2005, Republicans in the US Congress have regularly offered legislation ending birthright citizenship for children born in the US if their parents were in the US without proper documents. But the legislation has never advanced, even when the House of Representatives or Senate was under Republican control.

Also Read: With the Rise of Borders at Home and Abroad, the Writing Is on the Wall

Vice president Mike Pence said the plan may not be unconstitutional, telling Politico in an interview that while “we all cherish” the 14th amendment, the US Supreme Court has not weighed in on the issue entirely.

“But the Supreme Court of the US has never ruled on whether or not the language of the 14th amendment, subject to the jurisdiction thereof, applies specifically to people who are in the country illegally,” Pence said.

The Supreme Court has not ruled specifically on the issue of whether undocumented immigrants can be denied birthright citizenship.

In 1898, however, in the case of a man born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrants who lived permanently in the US, the court ruled that the government could not deny him citizenship.

Saikrishna Prakash, a conservative legal scholar at the University of Virginia, said Trump faces long legal odds to ending citizenship as a birthright.

“We’re a nation of immigrants so if I were to bet I would think the president is going to lose,” he said.

(Reuters)

Most Republicans Believe FBI, Justice Dept Trying to Undermine Donald Trump: Poll

Some 73% of Republicans agreed that “members of the FBI and Department of Justice are working to delegitimise Trump through politically motivated investigations.”

US President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump walk on South Lawn of the White House upon their return to Washington, US, from Cincinnati, February 5, 2018. Credit: Reuters/Yuri Gripas

New York: Nearly three out of four Republicans believe the FBI and Justice Department are trying to undermine US President Donald Trump, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Monday, a sharp turn for a party that has historically been a strong backer of law enforcement agencies.

Overall, most of the public still believes that Trump or someone from his campaign worked with Russia to influence the 2016 US presidential election, allegations that Moscow and Trump have repeatedly denied.

The February 3-5 poll found that Americans were sharply divided along party lines over a federal investigation into potential ties between Trump‘s 2016 campaign and Russia, a controversy that has hung over his year-old presidency.

Trump has called the probe a witch hunt and accused the top leadership of the FBI and Justice Department of being biased against him. The dispute has caused an extraordinary breach between the White House and law enforcement and deepened partisan rancor.

Some 73% of Republicans agreed that “members of the FBI and Department of Justice are working to delegitimise Trump through politically motivated investigations.”

But three in four Democrats said they believed a competing narrative that “members of the Republican Party and the White House are working to delegitimise the FBI and DOJ in the investigation of Russian tampering in the 2016 presidential election.”

The poll findings appear to reflect the influence that Trump wields among Republicans, who have long reserved some of their highest levels of trust for the country’s law enforcement agencies.

Nearly 84% of Republicans said in a January 2015 Reuters/Ipsos poll that they had a “favourable” view of the FBI.

Last month, 91%of Republicans said they had a “great deal” or “some” confidence in the country’s law enforcement agencies, compared with the 75% who expressed a similar level of confidence in the Trump administration and 47% who said the same about Congress.

‘Win-win’

Erroll Southers, a national security expert and former FBI agent, said Trump had shown an uncanny ability to shape his supporters’ views of the world in a way that benefits him. By hammering at federal investigators, Southers said, Trump was inoculating himself from any political fallout that may follow.

“It’s a win-win for him,” Southers said. “If he’s exonerated, he wins. If he’s not, he explains that the FBI is corrupt and it’s all a witch hunt, and he wins.

“And his base will be even more energised.”

Lloyd Billiter Jr., a retired Texas oilfield services worker who participated in the poll, said he thought the FBI had become too political and “their people have gone astray.”

Billiter, 64, said he was shocked to hear reports that investigators said critical things of Trump, and he would not believe anything that comes out of the Russia investigation unless it comes with a trove of evidence.

“Show me the proof,” he said. “I’ve put them on probation. You have to earn my trust back.”

Ron Krebs, a foreign policy expert at the University of Minnesota, said people usually looked to political leaders and the media for guidance on how to view issues and organisations they do not know much about. He said public trust in the FBI could further erode unless there was a bipartisan effort in Congress to support the investigation.

“The real question is how long this will last,” Krebs said. “How long will Republicans in Congress move in lockstep with the president?”

But among Americans overall, the latest poll showed that people did not appear to have changed their minds about the Russia investigation.

Of all adults 52% said they believed Trump or someone from his campaign worked with Russia to influence the election and that it was likely “authorities will find evidence of an illegal relationship between the Trump administration and Russia.”

Those percentages have not changed since the last time the poll asked those questions in 2017.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted online in English across the US. It gathered responses from 2,251 adults, including 941 Democrats and 827 Republicans, and had a credibility interval, a measure of accuracy, of 2% points for the entire sample and 4% points for both the Republicans and Democrats.

(Reuters)