Mediaboss Marketing

Rep. Cori Bush, the first-term Democrat from Missouri who has quickly become a progressive standout, describes her life as one of constant learning.

Its an education that has taken the 45-year-old from the streets of Ferguson, Mo., to the steps of the Capitol, where she slept outside for days demanding that Congress pass legislation to extend an eviction moratorium.

One of her first educational courses was from her father, Errol Bush, who has served as both a local alderman and mayor.

I grew up in a home where my dad was always teaching us about civil rights, Bush told The Hill in a pair of phone interviews. He always helped me to see your skin color does not make you less than anyone ... you are a leader, he instilled that in me from as early as I can remember, but I didn't understand it yet. I didn't understand what he meant until I was out there on those streets.

Those streets were in Ferguson, the St. Louis suburb where Black teenager Michael Brown was shot and killed by a white police officer in August 2014.

Browns death sparked nationwide anger and was a flashpoint in the burgeoning Black Lives Matter movement; Ferguson itself was dominated by unrest and protests, and its police department eventually was forced to enter a consent decree with the Justice Department.

Formore than400 days, Bush and other protesters marched and held demonstrations. On day one, Bush was a registered nurse, pastor and mother of two; by the end, she was a leader of the movement.

I feel like I learned everything, Bush continued. What I didn't learn in school in a school book, I learned out there on those streets, because [they] helped me understand the experiences that I had walked through prior.

I learned how to use my voice.

Bush was persuaded to jump into Missouris Senate race in 2016, but she didnt make it beyond the primary.

Two years later, the St. Louis native fell short again, this time in a House race, losing in the Democratic primary to then-Rep. Wm. Lacy ClayWilliam (Lacy) Lacy ClayLobbying world Ex-Rep. Clay joins law and lobbying firm Pillsbury Liberal advocacy group stirs debate, discomfort with primary challenges MORE.

But she never stopped organizing, and her tenacious, grassroots approach finally paid off last year, when she was propelled to an upset victory against Clay.

In November, she easily won the general election, becoming Missouris first Black congresswoman.

She credits lessons learned from trauma and hardships, both shared and unshared, as contributing factors to who she is today.

Bush is a survivor of sexual assault, a former low-wage worker and has been evicted multiple times. More recently, she was sidelined for the better part of two months last year with a bout of suspected COVID-19induced pneumonia that landed her in the hospital twice.

I always say that St. Louis built me ... because of all the hard knocks that I've gone through, Bush said.

So many of them happened on the street, or they happened because of what our communities look like. I've watched so many of my friends and neighbors go through so many of the same things that I did.

Her lived experiences and deep roots in activism are far from commonplace in Congress, but those close to her say thats where she draws her strength from.

The special thing about Cori is her passion, passion for people and the genuineness that she has for people, Ohun Ashe, a St. Louis organizer and activist who has worked with Bush, told The Hill.

If you listen to Coris story, you know that shes had some bad experiences with being a Black woman in America. And I think that that has given her a special light to seeing other people, and a special fight and passion not everyone has.

Bushs experience with evictions and homelessness served as the basis for her protest on the Capitol steps at the beginning of August. It also underscored some of the tensions between progressives and Democratic leaders who have not always been in lockstep on legislative priorities.

When it came to extending the eviction moratorium, Democrats didnt have the votes to pass the legislation, but Bushs demonstration on the Capitol steps garnered the media attention needed to pressure the White House. President BidenJoe BidenTrump to offer commentary at heavyweight fight on 9/11 Manchin would support spending plan of at most .5T: report South Dakota governor issues executive order restricting access to abortion medicine MORE later extended the moratorium until Oct. 3.

Bushs protest drew praise across the Democratic caucus.

Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiManchin would support spending plan of at most .5T: report Overnight Health Care US hits new vaccine milestone White House pitches House Democrats on messaging for .5T spending plan MORE (D-Calif.) lauded her powerful action to keep people in their homes.

Rep. Pramila JayapalPramila JayapalMore than 100 Democrats back legislation lowering Medicare eligibility age to 60 On The Money Manchin slams brakes on Biden spending push Progressives hit Manchin after he calls for 'pause' on Biden's .5T plan MORE (D-Wash.), chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, credited Bushs clear-eyed, committed activist mentality.

I think that it would not have been possible to get to this result without Rep. Bush's action, Jayapal said at the time.

The Supreme Court, however, struck down the new moratorium, after saying two months earlier that only Congress could extend the temporary ban.

Bush told The Hill that her heart broke when she heard the news.

Even though I'm not on the steps anymore, this isn't over for me and for my office and so many of my colleagues, Bush said.

She said shes working with Rep. Maxine WatersMaxine Moore WatersCawthorn to introduce resolution condemning political violence after warning of 'bloodshed' if elections are 'rigged' On The Money Eviction ruling puts new pressure on Congress Pelosi backs bill to expedite rental aid after eviction ruling MORE (D-Calif.), the chairwoman of the House Financial Services Committee, to get legislation introduced that would improve disbursement of the $46 billion that Congress approved for emergency rental assistance, the majority of which has failed to reach struggling tenants and their landlords.

Bush also said her office is working on drafting legislation that would give the Department of Health and Human Services the authority to implement eviction moratoriums.

But the national spotlight also brought with it criticism of other policies that Bush is a proponent of, namely defunding the police by redirecting money from police budgets to improve social services such as violence prevention.

In an interview with CBS on Aug. 6 shortly after Biden announced the new eviction moratorium Bush's expenditures on private security were juxtaposed with her support for defunding the police.

You would rather me die? Is that what you want to see? You want to see me die? You know, because that could be the alternative, she responded.

According to The Hills analysis of Federal Election Commission filings, Bush spent almost $70,000 on private security after the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection the most of any House lawmaker.

Bush told The Hill that death threats against her have been commonplace ever since her activism in Ferguson and that the events of Jan. 6 made the transition to Congress more challenging.

"I was told you're more safe here [at the Capitol] than you were before," Bush said. "But the insurrection, just a couple of days in, showed me that that was not the case. And so that was what was difficult."

Going forward, Bush and fellow Democrats are likely to start criticizing each other as new legislative challenges emerge.

Democrats will soon face a true test of unity when they craft what could amount to a $3.5 trillion spending bill and vote on a $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill. Some progressives have threatened to oppose the infrastructure bill which has already passed the Senate if its voted on ahead of before the $3.5 trillion measure thats packed with progressive policy proposals.

I think that the possibilities are wide open right now. It seems like every day there's something different, Bush said.

I'm not going to back down from making sure that both the budget and the infrastructure plan, that they go together, they have to go together. ... I said that coming to Congress that I will do the absolute most for St. Louis and that is this, so I will not back down from this fight.

Cristina Marcos contributed.

Read the original:
Cori Bush hits her stride by drawing on activist past | TheHill - The Hill

Unless youve spent a significant amount of time in a trial courtroom, your understanding of judges power likely remains little more than a vague set of impressions drawn from episodes of "Judge Judy" and "Law & Order." But for those who have spent time in a courtroom especially as a criminal defendant that power is all too real.

The thing with judges power it's like oxygen, right? Youre not really conscious of oxygen until youre deprived of it, Holbrook said. And with judges, youre not conscious of their power until youre in their courtroom or you see them obstructing your interest through the judicial system.

When it comes to many criminal proceedings, it is not an exaggeration to say that judges decisions can be a matter of life and death. In some jurisdictions, state legislatures have adopted mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines and other provisions to constrain judges discretion. But in many cases, judges are afforded fairly broad discretion to apply a states rules of criminal procedure, rules of evidence, and sentencing guidelines. In practice, that means that judges frequently have the power to decide whether a defendant is held on pre-trial bail, what sort of plea bargain prosecutors can negotiate between defendants and victims, what the ultimate terms of a sentencing agreement look like, and how long a person must remain on parole or probation after serving his sentence. In family and housing courts, judges can steer cases toward less punitive outcomes by opting against lengthy probation periods for minors convicted of nonviolent offenses, for example, or by granting more lenient stays in eviction disputes between tenants and landlords.

In part because of the wide array of judges responsibilities, Americans have never agreed on the best way to select judges to the bench, and our collective indecision is reflected in the complex patchwork of state laws that govern judicial selection. Although public debates surrounding the optimal method of judicial selection tend to divide the approaches into two distinct categories those that rely on popular election versus those that rely on some sort of appointment the reality of judicial selection defies simple categorization.

When it comes to many criminal proceedings, it is not an exaggeration to say that judges decisions can be a matter of life and death.

In practice, most states deploy hybrid models that mix and match different selection methodologies, often depending on the type of court in question. In Kansas, for example, some judicial districts empower a commission to appoint judges to the district court a system known as merit selection while others use partisan elections, where candidates are required to list their party affiliation. Meanwhile, judges on the Kansas Court of Appeal are appointed by the governor, confirmed by the state senate, and then subject to face a yes-no retention election after one year at which point they are allowed to serve a four-year term before facing another retention election. In the case of the state Supreme Court, Kansas uses a commission-based appointment without legislative confirmation, followed by retention elections. By contrast, Alabama selects all state judges across all levels of the judiciary through partisan elections. Multiply this complexity across all fifty states and the truly byzantine nature of judicial selection in America begins to come into focus.

Notwithstanding this complexity, nearly all state judges face some sort of electoral scrutiny. According to a 2015 study by the Brennan Center, roughly 87 percent of judges will face at least one election during their careers on the bench. The nature of this scrutiny varies from race to race some judges run in hotly-contested partisan elections, while others merely face up-down retention votes but historically, one dynamic has united most judicial elections: They favor hard-line, tough-on-crime candidates.

Tough on crime messaging has been overwhelmingly the dominant message in judicial elections across the country, said Alicia Bannon, the managing director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. Thats true both in terms of professional backgrounds, where it is very unusual, for example, to see judges come from public defender backgrounds or civil rights backgrounds, as well as in the kind of messaging you see in campaigns, where its so much more common for judicial candidates to be targeted [for being] soft on crime and praised as tough on crime.

Read the original post:
How Progressives Are Knocking Out Local Judges Across the Country - POLITICO

Critics of the proposed Line 3 pipeline - including the Squad" - gathered in Minnesota to protest its construction over environmental and tribal concerns.

Representatives Ilhan Omar, Cori Bush, Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will spend the weekend meeting with indigenous leaders at the pipeline's construction sites before holding a press conference in Minneapolis. On Saturday the group participated in a roundtable discussion to examine "treaty violations and the lack of tribal consent" for the project.

The Line 3 pipeline has generated significant controversy as its proposed construction cuts through tribal lands protected by treaties between the US government and the Ojibwe nations. Its course will also run through hundreds of lakes, rivers, aqueducts and wetlands, raising pollutant concerns among environmental groups.

The progressive politicians have called on Joe Biden to stop the construction of the pipeline.

"President Biden has the opportunity and the responsibility in making good on his word to be the climate president, and must direct the Army Corps of Engineers to revoke the permit for Line 3, Ms Pressley said, calling the decision a "no brainer."

The pipeline is meant to replace the existing Line 3 pipeline, which is operated by a Canadian energy firm called Enbridge.

The proposed pipeline will replace the existing Line 3, which is 52 years old. The new line will not follow the original's course, however. Instead, the new line will run through indigenous land and natural area especially susceptible to damage from oil spills.

The existing pipeline is no stranger to spills; in 1991, a leak near Grand Rapids, Michigan resulted in the largest inland oil spill in US history. The new pipeline will carry tar sands from Alberta, Canada to Superior Wisconsin.

The pipeline is currently 90 per cent complete and will run for 350 miles, with the projected ability to transport 760,000 barrels of oil per day.

Enbridge claims that concerns over spills is overblown, suggesting the new pipeline's improved construction - which includes thicker steel than its predecessor and corrosion-resistant coating - will offer greater leak prevention.

Critics of the pipeline aren't sold on the promises from the oil company.

"We have been encouraged by Joe Biden's boldness so far," Ms Omar said. "Now we have another chance to reject a moving pipeline. We hope you will act."

A group of 63 elected officials sent Mr Biden a letter opposing the pipeline. The state's Democratic governor, Tim Waltz, responded to the letter with a point-by-point counter statement, calling the critics' information "false or misleading."

The United Nations has also gotten involved in the fight. Earlier this week, the UN's Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination sent the US State Department a letter asking for an inquiry into claims that the pipeline will encroach on sacred tribal lands and threaten wild rice plants.

The White Earth Band of Ojibwe have sued the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, naming Manoomin - the Ojibwe word for the wild rice plant - as the plaintiff. The indigenous group invoked the Rights of Manoomin, a law enacted in 2018 as part of the 1855 Treaty Authority, which grants the plant legal personhood. The lawsuit claims that Enbridge's pipeline project will use 10 times more water than it originally estimated.

The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources moved to have the lawsuit dismissed, but a federal judge rejected the motion. The case will proceed to tribal court, though it may not reach a verdict in time to stop the remaining construction on the pipeline.

See original here:
Progressives call on Joe Biden to halt construction of controversial Minnesota pipeline - The Independent

Many of Powells harshest critics have stopped short of calling for his outright removal from the job the countrys most powerful economic position even as President Joe Biden is expected to decide on the appointment as early as September.

The divisions among progressives the one group that could make the most trouble for his reappointment provide an opening for Powell to win nomination to a second term and confirmation by the Senate, where he'd likely get support from most Republicans and moderate Democrats.

There is a lot of fear about being on the wrong side of the nomination fight if he is reappointed, said Jeff Hauser, director of Revolving Door Project, a leading voice against Powell, explaining why progressives haven't been more vocal in opposition. He argued that some groups arent joining the fight because theyre afraid they might lose influence with the Fed if Powell stays, an outcome that some see as inevitable because no firm challenger has emerged.

Hauser is part of a coalition of financial regulation advocates and climate activists who warn of the dangers of giving Powell a second term. But organizations more focused on the Feds interest rate policy and its full employment mandate are pretty sympathetic, said Skanda Amarnath, executive director of the group Employ America.

Its kinda like, Wow, this guy seems pretty aligned with what we want to do, Amarnath said.

Powell, who was first appointed to the Fed board by former President Barack Obama, won overwhelming bipartisan support for his confirmation in the Senate in 2018 after former President Donald Trump tapped him to become chair. Biden still might not opt to reappoint him, given the potential for angering key Democratic constituencies, including climate groups. But the pull could also be strong to keep an incumbent who has helped shepherd the economy through a pandemic and has the confidence of financial markets.

For now, many progressive lawmakers who will be key to Powells reappointment prospects, including Senate Banking Chair Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), have been critical of the Fed chief but have not explicitly called for him to be replaced.

Its an approach that stands in stark contrast to previous nomination fights, such as in 2013, when former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers was the favorite to be nominated as Fed chair under Obama. Brown and Warren led a successful effort to push for Janet Yellen instead, a campaign that started as early as July of that year.

Brown holds a powerful hand since his committee will vet any Fed nominees. Hes using that influence, in part, to try to guide the full slate of open positions on the central bank, which include vice chair of supervision, which oversees regulations; and vice chair, a key voice on monetary policy.

Senator Brown will work with the Biden Administration to ensure our financial regulators not only reflect our nations diversity but are also ready to stand up to Wall Street, address income inequality and systemic racism, and make our economy more just for workers, his office said in a statement.

Brown would back Lisa Cook, an African-American professor of economics at Michigan State University, for one of the open Fed seats, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Some on the left have explicitly targeted Powell. Ocasio-Cortez along with others like Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) issued a strong statement on Monday calling for him to be replaced.

We urge President Biden to re-imagine a Federal Reserve focused on eliminating climate risk and advancing racial and economic justice, the lawmakers said in a joint statement to POLITICO.

They acknowledged that the Fed under Powell has made positive changes by steering the central bank toward a greater emphasis on reaching full employment. But they said they want to see someone in charge who is more aggressive on financial regulation and climate change.

Yet the statement comes late in the process. It also underscores that few other lawmakers have publicly taken the same step. Warren in a recent interview with Bloomberg TV declined to formally call on Biden to dump Powell, though she said she wanted someone who was effective on both monetary policy and financial regulation.

My concern is that, over and over, he has weakened regulation, she said of Powell. We need someone who understands and uses both the monetary policy tools and the regulatory tools to keep our economy safe.

She also praised Fed board member Lael Brainards strong and powerful dissents against some of the Feds recent deregulation, though she didnt explicitly endorse her candidacy for chair.

Powell, pressed by Brown at a July hearing about some of the Feds deregulation, said banks still have a healthy amount of capital, pointing to the central banks moves during the pandemic to limit shareholder payouts by the biggest lenders. So, the financial system is strong, and the banks are strong, he said.

Allies of Brown and Warren say they have ways they can sway regulatory policy within and beyond the Fed, having helped install candidates such as Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Gary Gensler, who is seen as a strong check on Wall Street.

Warren has worked behind the scenes to place a small army of her former aides in key government roles, including Bharat Ramamurti as deputy director of the White House National Economic Council and Julie Siegel as Treasury deputy chief of staff. There are signs of Browns fingerprints as well in nominees like Graham Steele, a former aide to the senator who has been tapped for a key Treasury job.

Pressure from the left has largely focused on policies that progressives would like to see the Fed carry out, rather than campaigns for or against any particular candidate, though much of it is implicitly anti-Powell.

For us, the issue is less who is appointed than what their agenda is, said Benjamin Dulchin, director of the Fed Up Campaign, an influential coalition of labor and community groups.

Dulchin suggested the message was meant just as much for the president: push for a greater commitment from the Fed to help disadvantaged Americans and hold Wall Street accountable.

Whoever Biden appoints, whether its Powell or somebody else, its important that they come into that position with a clear understanding from Biden of what additional steps he as president would like to see the Fed take, he said.

Still, some of the progressive opposition to Powell has been public and vehement. Groups like Revolving Door Project and Action Center for Race and the Economy have joined with climate activists to push against a second term for the Fed chief.

Climate groups argue that the Fed should use its regulatory powers to slow the flow of money to the fossil fuel industry, while groups that support strong financial regulation like Americans for Financial Reform and Better Markets have put out extensive reports outlining where they think Powell has fallen short.

Deregulation under Powell needlessly and dangerously made the financial system significantly less safe, according to a report from Better Markets, which has been highly critical of Powell but has not formally come out against him.

Some others who have been quieter would also prefer someone other than Powell. The clearest option is Brainard; progressive groups across the spectrum of policy issues say they could accept the prospect of her being elevated to chair. But the campaign on her behalf has been muted.

There is a bunch of quiet support behind the scenes for Brainard that would become very vocal if she were chosen as chair, said Justin Guay, director of global climate strategy at the Sunrise Project.

But opposition is mounting against the prospect of Brainard being named as the Feds regulatory chief alongside Powell as chair, underscoring that their trust of her only goes so far. Thats not what were looking for, Fed Ups Dulchin said.

As for Powell, even within organizations, views of him might differ. Dean Baker, senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, penned an enthusiastic defense of the Fed chair earlier this year. Revolving Door Project one of Powells most prominent detractors is part of the center.

And a sizable faction on the left argues that a push toward full employment, including for Black people who have historically seen unemployment at twice the rate of white people, is by far the most important job of the central bank.

"President Bidens litmus test for the next Fed Chair must be whether the nominee will commit to creating a high-pressure enough labor market to narrow racial gaps in wages and employment, said Lindsay Owens, executive director of progressive think tank Groundwork Collaborative and a former senior adviser to Warren.

Read this article:
Clash among progressives is boosting the Fed chiefs path to keeping his job - POLITICO

A San Francisco social justice warrior has very little in common with a New York City cop. Yet they are both voting Democrat. They both wrap themselves in the flag of 'liberalism' but the social authoritarians who dominate the fringe arm of liberalism - progressives - are actually ruining it, argues The Economist.

Whereas classic liberals want to give people a chance to compete - by eliminating monopolies or creating unions - progressives want to force everyone into economic misery, and the more you make the more you must suffer. 'Justice' must be imposed against whoever becomes the target of the moment. Liberals believe in separation of powers, a tenet of America, whereas progressives want power centralized with them. Anyone who is declared a cultural apostate must achieve their vision of ideological purity or be no-platformed and canceled, which includes allies who they have decided have transgressed. If that reads like The Inquisition, well, yeah.

The article rightly quotes Milton Friedman, who said society that puts equality before freedom will end up with neither and rightly so. By crippling some in order to favor others, progressives are creating discrimination. Social justice just becomes bigotry and coercion under a fake name.

You should also read this because this critical thinking is a welcome switch from a few weeks ago when they tried to write about science and looked ridiculous declaring chewing gum is plastic - the kind of provocative claim progressives make in every area. Here is hoping the publication learns to see it in science as clearly as they do politics.

Go here to read the rest:
Economist: Progressives Are Ruining Liberalism - Science 2.0