Mediaboss Marketing

Progressives and activists are ratcheting up their pressure campaigns against President-elect Biden as the incoming commander-in-chief builds out his administration.

Immigrant advocacy groups, while happy that President Trump was defeated, do not plan to give his successor an easy time.

Hell yeah, Im optimistic. I dont know what the hell we were going to do if Trump won again. But then the other side of me is like, I know how this works,' Marisa Franco, executive director of grassroots advocacy group Mijente told Politico.

Nothing is going to be enough that [Biden] does and thats the same issue that folks in the crime-and-justice movement have and folks in policing [reform] have. I think its very possible for things to get lost and thats what our job is: To make sure it doesnt, she added.

Biden is also facing ramped-up pressure from lawmakers within his own party, with Squad members like Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) signing on to a petition against him nominating former chief of staff Bruce Reed to run the Office of Management and Budget.

The petition was launched by Justice Democrats, a group dedicated to electing progressives, which referred to Reed as a deficit hawk and slammed his past work on the 1994 crime bill and the Bowles-Simpson Commission, which urged massive deficit reductions.

We are extremely concerned by the reports that Reed is a frontrunner to head the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Biden administration, given his history of antipathy towards economic security programs that working people rely on. We demand that OMB be staffed with people who will prioritize working people, not Wall Street deficit scaremongers, the petition language reads.

It also warns that, Biden must not repeat Obamas mistake by working with Reed.

Following Bidens first rollout of cabinet and administration picks, which included no progressives, some in that wing of the party privately told Axios that they felt concerned about a couple of the names being floated.

Specifically, some argued that the order of Bidens announcements was important in terms of messaging, and the lack of a progressive presence thus far had created worry.

With two months to go before taking office, the incoming commander-in-chief has set a high bar on the issue of immigration, as activists are expecting him to present and pass an adequate reform package early in his presidency.

Speaking to Politico, multiple Hispanic Caucus members said that a large number of Democrats would be severely disappointed if immigration reform was not addressed early.

Thats not going to sit well with a lot of folks, one lawmaker in the caucus told the outlet.

While Bidens ability to push through legislation will come down to who wins the two Georgia Senate run-off races come January, he and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) have publicly pledged that immigration would be addressed first.

After the Supreme Court blocked the White House from ending the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program in June, Biden committed to sending a bill to Congress on day one of his administration making the program permanent.

The Supreme Courts ruling today is a victory made possible by the courage and resilience of hundreds of thousands of DACA recipients who bravely stood up and refused to be ignored. As President, I will immediately work to make it permanent by sending a bill to Congress on day one of my Administration, the former vice president said in a statement at the time.

DACA is a program that covers individuals who have been in the United States since they were children because they were brought into the country illegally by their parents.

Asked by The Hill in July if immigration would be top-of-mind for Democrats if they won in November, Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) referred to Biden and Schumers promises.

Theyve all said its first up, the Illinois Democrat said.

Its definitely on the agenda, Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) told the outlet, adding that immigration reform would have economic benefits.

See the original post here:
Progressives, activists plan to hound Biden on staffing - New York Post

When President-elect Joe Biden announced Ron Klain to be the White House chief of staff in his forthcoming administration, a rush of leading voices in the Democratic Partys left wing publicly applauded the move.

Then came the official nomination of Tony Blinken as secretary of state. And John Kerry as climate czar. And news reports about Janet Yellen leading the Treasury Department.

Those too were met with nods of approval from some of the most vociferous forces on the left.

As the the Biden transition picks up steam, what started as early sighs of relief with Klains appointment has ballooned into a pronounced endorsement of Bidens initial selections to lead some of the highest-profile positions in government, with progressives giving the president-elect a hat tip on the delicate balancing act of appealing to both wings early on.

The Biden team made a really genuine effort to reach out to the left on a whole range of issues, including on foreign policy, Matt Duss, who serves as foreign policy adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), told The Daily Beast in an interview. They understood this helped them to win and now I think they understand that it can help them govern.

Top progressives close to Sanders and others in the partys left flank, as they tell it, are not praising Bidens first personnel installments because they expect them to enact grassroots-oriented changes in the way Sanders would hope to. By nature of being closely aligned with Biden, they are largely institutionalists, too.

But the fact that the future president has curated a slate of names that, so far, have not incited or alienated the left is considered a positive development among those who often eagerly convey grievances about Democratic officials policy positions and personal biographies alike.

Tactically, Klain is one of Bidens closest advisers who had a central role in molding his successful campaign against President Donald Trump. On policy, Blinken has been Bidens right-hand on foreign affairs for over a decade, helping him craft responses to pressing geopolitical issues. And Yellen is perceived among Democrats as a capable and respected former chair of the Federal Reserve appointed by Bidens old boss, President Barack Obama.

Sanders advisers and aides agree that Blinken has a history of meeting minds with progressives. Duss, who fashioned the senators foreign policy platform for his second presidential campaign, said that Blinken and others regularly engaged with left-leaning foreign policy groups during the general election, a strategic decision that he said has now helped create a natural bridge between the two sides. Entering a new administration with that type of dialogue within the community is essentially unprecedented, he said.

Having those relationships going in and having those avenues of communication with a secretary of state is new for a secretary and for the progressive left, Duss said.

Ari Rabin-Havt, who was recently Sanders deputy campaign manager, agreed that top fixtures on the left are ready to engage in a productive manner with nominees announced by Bidens transition.

What this shows is progressive leaders on individual issues are very willing to hear out the Biden administration and give honest assessments, said Rabin-Havt. I think if you saw a different set of people rolled out, you would see different assessments.

Among the more notable names unveiled this week, Bidens choice of Kerry as climate envoy, who will also sit on the National Security Council, was met with a positive reception among top activists.

Kerry was one of Bidens main endorsers who also doubled as a surrogate during the campaign. During some of the more trying junctures of his bidincluding in the first two primariesKerry loyally stumped for him, often to little fanfare, in anticipation of more fortuitous days to come.

Despite Bidens decision not to adopt the signature Green New Deal proposal favored adamantly by those within the movement, some pointed to Kerrys willingness to work with progressive activists recently as one bullet point indicating momentum.

Varshini Prakash, the Sunrise Movements executive director, said she linked up with Kerry on the Biden-Sanders taskforce, one of several areas where Biden and Sanders allies collaborated in anticipation of a post-Trump era. He really does care about stopping climate change. Thats something we can work with, Prakash wrote on Twitter.

Biden is expected to name additional posts in the coming weeks. And some possibilities have already been met with objections. Those conversations are largely focused around Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of Staff under Obama and former Chicago mayor, and longtime Biden hand Bruce Reed. Incoming freshman Rep. Mondaire Jones (D-NY) wrote a lengthy thread detailing his strong disapproval of Emanuel, which was subsequently echoed by like-minded members, including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).

Other names floated such as former Obama-era Deputy Central Intelligence Agency Director Mike Morell, who is under consideration to head up the agency, have been met with some Democratic skepticism about getting a leading defender of torture tactics confirmed in the Senate.

But for now, the outrage is the exception. Some Democrats view that as a reflection of Bidens ability to walk a line among professionals who are, essentially, getting moved up a career notch, as well as his desire to avoid snubbing a substantial portion of the party who proactively helped him defeat Trump.

Whats very interesting about the picks that have been made so far is you can basically describe them as job promotions for people who have been in the job just underneath that for a number of years, said Joel Rubin, who was Sanders Jewish outreach director during his 2020 campaign and a senior State Department official under Obama (and periodic Daily Beast contributor).

Theres no jaggedness or newness in the spheres that they will be responsible for in the sense of a new human who comes in and is just totally distinct from anything that was there beforehand. In many ways, theres a familiarity that enables more confidence from the get go.

That sense of preparedness is clear with Yellen. While not considered a steadfast Biden loyalist like Klain and Blinken, her steering of the federal reserve has long excited some Hill progressives, including in particular Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). Warren publicly applauded Yellen on Monday, along with the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, a group that supports her policies.

Progressives lost the primary so are not going to pick the cabinet obviously, said Sean McElwee, who founded Data for Progress, which also boosts Warrens agenda. But theres a difference between entirely shutting out what progressives want and taking it into consideration.

In terms of the band of possible options that became possible after Super Tuesday, these are on the most optimistic end of that for progressives.

See more here:
Progressives Can't Find Anyone in Biden's Cabinet to Be Mad AboutYet - The Daily Beast

Progressives are raising objections to the Biden teams pick for overseeing the transition at a key regulatory agency in the White House, arguing the official has been too sympathetic toward President TrumpDonald John TrumpUSAID administrator tests positive for COVID-19 Kamala Harris, Stacey Abrams among nominees for Time magazine's 2020 Person of the Year DOJ appeals ruling preventing it from replacing Trump in E. Jean Carroll defamation lawsuit MOREs deregulatory efforts.

Bridget C.E. Dooling, a research professor at George Washington University, has been tapped to help with the agency review team at the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), which reviews all executive branch regulations before they can be enacted.

Critics say theyre concerned with Doolings prominent role given that the center where she works, George Washingtons Regulatory Studies Center, has received funding from both the Charles Koch Foundation and ExxonMobil and has long been viewed as conservative-leaning.

The center is run by Susan Dudley, who led the OIRA during part of the George W. Bush administration, and its scholars have offered sympathetic analysis for some of Trumps regulatory rollbacks.

Its just kind of surprising to see a Democrat reach out to someone in charge of reviewing OIRA whose work in this space is funded by the Koch network, which is so opposed to the regulation of corporate America, said Jeff Hauser, director of the Revolving Door Project, a progressive group.

You would expect a Koch-funded person to be conducting an OIRA agency view in the Trump administration that wouldn't be surprising but this is supposed to be a transition, a change, he added.

When reached for comment, Dooling referred questions to the Biden transition team.

The transition team defended Dooling's role among the many individuals assisting the incoming administration.

"Over 500 policy experts serve on the Biden-Harris Transition agency review teams to ensure the policy goals of President-elect Biden and Vice President-elect Harris are met. Bridget Dooling has decades of experience, is well-respected in her field and like all members of the transition, has values that align with President-elect Biden's," the transition team said in a statement.

Dooling comes to the transition team with more than a decades worth of experience at the OIRA, starting with the George W. Bush administration and ending in the early days of the Trump administration.

In the past few years at the Regulatory Studies Center, shes reviewed a number of Trumps regulatory directives, at times suggesting how they could be improved for implementation purposes.

When Trump issued his order to strike down two regulations for every new one implemented, Dooling co-authored a report that included 10 recommendations for making the order stronger.

That did not sit well with progressives who expected members of the regulatory community to unequivocally condemn Trumps order.

The order, one of Trumps first actions upon taking office, was embraced by the right kicking off four years of deregulation. But for critics, it was seen as an arbitrary target imposed by a president with little regard for what rules and regulations might get eliminated in the process.

She's basically an apologist for it. Shes written about how it could be improved but she never said it's been a bad idea. She said it could be improved, but never said categorically its a bad idea and should be gotten rid of, said James Goodwin, a senior policy analyst with the Center for Progressive Reform.

I would expect from Biden there should be a litmus test on that executive order, and if youre not categorically opposed to that executive order you shouldnt be allowed in the parking lot of OIRA, Goodwin added.

Doolings colleagues say the criticism from the left is unwarranted.

I do not see Bridgets affiliation with the Regulatory Studies Center as evidence of a conservative bias, said Stuart Shapiro, a regulatory studies professor at Rutgers University and an affiliated scholar with the GW center.

Shapiro, who worked at the OIRA before Dooling and considers himself a progressive, said she is smart and qualified.

He added that the Regulatory Studies Center is always willing to consider views across the political spectrum, and they always invite Democrats to their panels.

Progressives are eager to see the Biden administration reform the OIRA, an agency they view as a frequent roadblock to implementing ambitious regulations.

But Bidens eventual pick to lead the agency will need to be confirmed by the Senate, and Republicans are in a strong position to retain control of the chamber next year. That would make it harder for Biden to pick someone favored by progressives.

One of the main concerns among progressives is that the OIRA, even under Biden, could hamstring regulatory efforts with its reviews of policies crafted by technical experts at other agencies, potentially delaying implementation of some regulations.

Not everyone who has interest in an agency rule should be able to delay or weaken or undo that rule, said Lisa Heinzerling, an environmental and administrative law professor at Georgetown University.

Dooling has long backed the use of cost-benefit analyses to ground regulations and assess their worth, an approach that gained favor under the Reagan administration.

It's also been a useful tool for the Trump administration, which has reduced how it weighs the costs of carbon pollution and the benefits of fighting climate change on a global scale, with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) now seeking to codify some of those changes.

But cost-benefit analyses havent always helped the Trump administration. In some cases, theyve shown that regulatory efforts like rolling back vehicle mileage rules will cost more than they save a finding likely to be brought up in court challenges.

If EPA's cost-benefit rules are finalized, it could create a significant hurdle for future administrations by making it tougher to implement regulations that limit pollution. That would be problematic for Biden, who wants to put the U.S. on track to reach net-zero emissions by 2050 as part of his climate plan.

Cost-benefit analysis as performed by the government disfavors actions on problems that extend into the future, so climate change would be the premier example, said Heinzerling.

For progressives, Doolings pick signals that many of the OIRA practices from previous administrations are likely to continue under Biden.

If you were interested in making a dramatic change at OIRA, you probably wouldn't choose someone who has had a quite traditional role at OIRA, Heinzerling said.

For Goodwin, that represents a significant roadblock.

Ive always had reservations about how the Biden administration would address regulation, and Im left reading the tea leaves as they come out, and every tea leaf I see, like Bridget Doolings name coming out, is indicative that things are not going to be great, and that is going to be a huge missed opportunity, Goodwin said.

Shapiro countered that the OIRA will continue to carry out its duties under Biden, much like it has during previous administrations.

OIRA has had a regulatory review function under six presidents now of both parties. It is unrealistic to expect that that regulatory review function will disappear under a Biden administration, he said.

Therefore we should expect a transition team member to figure out how to make OIRA work as effectively as possible rather than eliminate that regulatory review function.

See more here:
Progressives see red flags in regulatory official on Biden transition team | TheHill - The Hill

Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, the Senates oldest member, said on Monday that she would relinquish the top Democratic spot on the Judiciary Committee next year, bowing to intense pressure by progressives who said she was not up to the task of leading a crucial panel at the forefront of the partisan war over the courts in a new Biden administration.

After serving as the lead Democrat on the Judiciary Committee for four years, I will not seek the chairmanship or ranking member position in the next Congress, Ms. Feinstein, 87, said in a statement. Ms. Feinstein, the former chairwoman of the Intelligence Committee, said she did not intend to pursue committee leadership at all, but would focus more intently instead on the dual threats of wildfire and drought threatening her state.

Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, who is next in seniority, intends to pursue the position, according to his spokeswoman. Mr. Durbin is also the Democratic whip, but caucus rules do not preclude him from doing both jobs.

Progressives had been pushing Democratic leaders hard in recent weeks to bar Ms. Feinstein from returning to her post next year, when Democrats hope they will control the committee. They believed that despite her towering status in the Senate, Ms. Feinsteins record as a genteel deal-maker made her the wrong fit for an increasingly bruising partisan arena on the Judiciary Committee. Those stylistic differences have been exacerbated by Ms. Feinsteins advancing age.

Progressives were livid, for instance, when Ms. Feinstein praised Republicans for their handling of Justice Amy Coney Barretts Supreme Court nomination hearings last month, even though G.O.P. leaders had broken with precedent and their own professed opposition to election-year confirmations to fast-track the approval of President Trumps choice before he faced voters. A photograph of the California Democrat hugging the committees Republican chairman, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, after Justice Barretts nomination was approved ricocheted across the internet, drawing condemnation from liberal groups.

They feared that under President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.s leadership, Ms. Feinstein would be too gentle with Republicans who would seek to block his appointments to the federal courts.

Brian Fallon, the director of the progressive organization Demand Justice, which called for Ms. Feinsteins removal after the hearings, warned that her replacement cannot wishfully cling to a bygone era of civility and decorum.

It will take someone committed to undoing the damage Trump and McConnell have done to our courts, no matter what it takes, he said, referring to Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, who led a concerted strategy to pack the federal courts with conservatives during Mr. Trumps tenure.

Ms. Feinstein said she would use her perch as a senior Democrat on four influential committees Judiciary, Intelligence, Appropriations and Rules to work with the Biden administration on priorities like gun safety, immigration reform and addressing inequities in criminal justice.

I will continue to do my utmost to bring about positive change in the coming years, she said.

Follow this link:
Feinstein, under fire by progressives, says she will step down as top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. - The New York Times

By Ari Natter on 11/25/2020

(Bloomberg) --Progressive environmentalists are mounting a long-shot bid to get President-elect Joe Biden to go beyond naming a climate czar and declare an environmental national emergency, borrowing a tactic employed by President Donald Trump to fund part of his border wall.

Invoking a climate emergency could give Biden the authority to circumvent Congress and fund clean energy projects, shut down crude oil exports, suspend offshore drilling and curtail the movement of fossil fuels on pipelines, trains, and ships, according to a research note by consulting firm ClearView Energy Partners.

The presidents powers to address climate change through an emergency are very, very large, said Kassie Siegel, an attorney with the environmental group Center for Biological Diversity, which is lobbying Bidens team to act. This is No. 1 on the list of things the Biden administration should do.

In a statement, Bidens transition team didnt explicitly address the question of a climate emergency, saying only that he plans to follow through on his policy platform to fight the climate crisis while creating millions of jobs. Bidens climate platform includes no mention of declaring a climate emergency.

The national emergency question could be an early potential source of tension between climate groups and Biden. It signals the tough fights ahead for the new president, as he walks a line between satisfying activists who backed his campaign and not promoting measures that would draw opposition from more moderate Democrats.

Many environmentalists were pleased to see Biden this week name former Secretary of State John Kerry as special presidential envoy for climate, fulfilling the campaign promise to elevate the issue of global warming to the highest levels of the White House.

In addressing the climate crisis, President-elect Joe Biden is determined to seize the future now and leave a healing planet to future generations, Kerry said Tuesday after being introduced as part of Bidens national security team.

Yet progressives want his administration to go further. They see the emergency declaration as a way to achieve his ambitious climate agenda, even if legislation is blocked by a Senate potentially controlled by Republicans. But such a move may fall victim to the political realities left by the election.

Declaring a climate emergency will radicalize climate protection, alienating the very moderate Senators needed to pass infrastructure and other bills with carbon-reducing provisions, said Paul Bledsoe, a former climate official in the Clinton White House, now with the Progressive Policy Institute. Why would Biden borrow from Trumps polarizing playbook, when Bidens trying to actually unite the country to act on climate?

While Biden has vowed to decarbonize the electricity sector by 2035 as part of a goal to reach zero net emissions by 2050, many elements of his plan would require Congress to act. And other policy shifts he promised, such as halting fracking on federal land, would have to go through a cumbersome, slow-moving regulatory process that complicated some of Trumps own ambitions.

That may not be good enough for progressive environmentalists who say they are counting on Biden to follow through on campaign rhetoric that appealed to climate-minded voters, such as calling global warming an existential threat to humanity.

Greenpeace, along with the Center for Biological Diversity and groups like Friends of the Earth, were among 500 organizations that called for the next president to declare a national climate emergency last December. Two candidates who sought the Democratic presidential nomination, Bernie Sanders and Tom Steyer, vowed on the campaign trail to declare climate change a national emergency.

Some are skeptical that Biden will declare a climate emergency given the election results and deepening crises with coronavirus and the economy -- at least not until the end of his presidency. Possible actions Biden could take under an emergency declaration -- such as suspending offshore drilling or trying to shutdown pipelines -- would almost certainly be held up in lengthy court battles brought by opponents. While the Trump administration was similarly challenged over its diversion of funds for the border wall, it ultimately prevailed at the Supreme Court.

It would be a pretty egregious sign of weakness right out of the gate; an acknowledgment that legislative and regulatory regular order were destined to fail, said Mike McKenna, who previously served in Trumps White House as deputy assistant to the president. That strikes me as something that might happen in year three or year four, as part of an effort to goose the re-elect, or the election, of whoever is running.

Trump declared a national emergency in February 2019, a move that allowed him to divert some $3.5 billion to start construction on the wall along the southern border after Congress refused to appropriate the funding. The move drew criticism from members of his own party, such as Alaska Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski, who said he was overstepping into the legislative prerogative.

Supporters of the move note that presidents have used emergency declarations in the past, which are designed to give the executive branch special, temporary powers to deal with a crisis, and dozens of active national emergencies remain.

The border wall declaration completely re-conceptualizes what constitutes an emergency -- and that genie never goes back in the bottle, said Benjamin Salisbury, a senior policy analyst at Height LLC.

Original post:
Progressives want Biden to sidestep Congress with green 'national emergency' - WorldOil