WASHINGTON — As Congress begins debate this week on sweeping voting and ethics legislation, Democrats and Republicans can agree on one thing: If signed into law, it would usher in the biggest overhaul of U.S. elections law in at least a generation. House Resolution 1, Democrats’ 791-page bill, would touch virtually every aspect of the electoral process — striking down hurdles to voting erected in the name of election security, curbing partisan gerrymandering and curtailing the influence of big money in politics. Republicans see those very measures as threats that would both limit the power of states to conduct elections and ultimately benefit Democrats, notably with higher turnout among minority voters. The stakes are prodigious, with control of Congress and the fate of President Joe Biden’s legislative agenda in the balance. But at its core, a more foundational principle of American democracy is at play: access to the ballot. “This goes above partisan interests. The vote is at the heart of our democratic system of government,” said Fred Wertheimer, president of the nonpartisan good government organization Democracy 21. “That’s the battleground. And everyone knows it.” Barriers to voting are as old as the country, but in more recent history they have come in the form of voter ID laws and other restrictions that are up for debate in statehouses across the country. Rep. John Sarbanes, a Maryland Democrat who sponsored the bill, said that outside of Congress “these aren’t controversial reforms.” Much of it, he noted, was derived from recommendations of a bipartisan commission. Yet to many Republicans, it amounts to an unwarranted federal intrusion into a process that states should control. Rep. Rodney Davis, R-Ill., excoriated the measure during a House hearing last week as “800 pages of election mandates and free speech regulations” that poses a “threat to democracy” and would “weaken voter confidence” in elections. Citing Congress’ ...
Gigi hadids underarms sparked major debate
Student debt fears lower the bar for low income students
As the pandemic stretches on, President Biden Joe Biden Biden offers support to union organizing efforts Senate Democrats nix 'Plan B' on minimum wage hike Kavanaugh dismays conservatives by dodging pro-Trump election lawsuits MORE has come under pressure from Democrats to cancel student debt in amounts larger than he has supported. They argue the move would narrow the racial wealth gap and help lead an economic recovery and they have demanded immediate executive action. Biden has promised to address student debt but spoken in terms of only $10,000 in relief. This month, Senators Charles Schumer Chuck Schumer The bizarre back story of the filibuster Hillicon Valley: Biden signs order on chips | Hearing on media misinformation | Facebook's deal with Australia | CIA nominee on SolarWinds House Rules release new text of COVID-19 relief bill MORE , Elizabeth Warren Elizabeth Warren Senate mulls changes to .9 trillion coronavirus bill Exclusive: How Obama went to bat for Warren Minimum wage setback revives progressive calls to nix Senate filibuster MORE and others called for $50,000 of debt to be forgiven for any American, regardless of income level, raising the ante against prior Senate and House resolutions that called for smaller amounts of relief. With the political rhetoric so charged and a major policy decision potentially looming, I decided to look closely into the issue of how college debt affects low-income students in higher education and their families. Over the last year and a half, after talking with many in different parts of the country, I observed first-hand the crumbling of the national promise to provide equal access to higher education and educational opportunity to all. ADVERTISEMENT I came to the realization that the problem is less that low-income students and families are taking on too much debt, than that they frequently take on too little. The ...
Silverii: Colorado’s free and fair election laws are under attack
A Colorado state Senate committee voted down a bill by Sen. Paul Lundeen, R-Monument, on Tuesday that would have ended Colorado’s popular and successful universal vote-by-mail system as we know it. The bill died on a 4-1 vote, with newly elected Sen. Cleave Simpson, R-Alamosa, joining majority Democrats in an act of pro-democracy bipartisanship. Colorado’s election system has become the nation’s “gold-standard” for facilitating record turnout year after year, improving voter access, and ensuring election safety, integrity and security. Our system has been lauded by both Republican and Democratic secretaries of state, county clerks and recorders, and officials in both parties for nearly a decade. Not to mention the fact that voters love the convenience of doing their civic duty from home, with nearly a month to study up on the positions of the candidates, as well as on the increasingly long list of ballot initiatives Coloradans are asked to weigh in on every year. Sen. Lundeen says his intention was to “start a conversation,” hoping to “improve confidence” in our voting system. Dismantling our voting system is a funny way to progress. Why would we make such a radical change to a system that works so well? The only way Lundeen’s bill makes sense is in the context of the campaign of voter suppression taking place right now in statehouses around the country in the wake of former President Donald Trump’s failed attack on the 2020 election, which he — and let me be absolutely clear — lost. The Brennan Center for Justice, reports that as of February 2021, there are 165 bills to restrict voting rights moving through 33 statehouses. In Georgia, ground-zero in Trump’s attempt to overturn the will of the voters and browbeat local election officials into “finding” extra votes to hand him victory, these attempts include eliminating no-excuse absentee ballots to curtail voting by mail, and targeting early voting on Sundays when Black congregations traditionally organize ...
Warren bill would impose wealth tax on $50M households
Sen. Elizabeth Warren Elizabeth Warren Senate mulls changes to .9 trillion coronavirus bill Exclusive: How Obama went to bat for Warren Minimum wage setback revives progressive calls to nix Senate filibuster MORE (D-Mass.) on Monday unveiled legislation to create a wealth tax for high-net-worth households, furthering her efforts on an idea that was a central feature of her 2020 presidential campaign. The bill , called the Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act, would create an annual tax of 2 percent on the net worth of households and trusts between $50 million and $1 billion and a tax of 3 percent on net worth above $1 billion. The rate for net worth above $1 billion would increase to 6 percent if a "Medicare for All" health care plan is enacted. The bill resembles a proposal that Warren released during her unsuccessful presidential campaign and frequently touted on the campaign trail. The rollout of the bill comes after Warren indicated earlier this year that introducing wealth tax legislation would be a top priority of hers as a new member of the Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over tax issues. ADVERTISEMENT Warren said in a news release that her proposal could be a way to help pay for proposals to help the economy recover from the coronavirus-related downturn. "As Congress develops additional plans to help our economy, the wealth tax should be at the top of the list to help pay for these plans because of the huge amounts of revenue it would generate," she said. "This is money that should be invested in child care and early education, K-12, infrastructure, all of which are priorities of President Biden Joe Biden Biden offers support to union organizing efforts Senate Democrats nix 'Plan B' on minimum wage hike Kavanaugh dismays conservatives by dodging pro-Trump election lawsuits MORE and Democrats in Congress. I'm confident lawmakers will catch up to the overwhelming majority of Americans who are ...
Senate to vote on $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief bill this week
The Senate will vote this week on a sweeping $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief bill, as Democrats try to get the legislation signed into law before federal unemployment benefits expire. "The Senate will take up the American Rescue Plan this week. I expect a hardy debate and some late nights, but the American people sent us here with a job to do, to help the country through this moment of extraordinary challenge," Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer Chuck Schumer The bizarre back story of the filibuster Hillicon Valley: Biden signs order on chips | Hearing on media misinformation | Facebook's deal with Australia | CIA nominee on SolarWinds House Rules release new text of COVID-19 relief bill MORE (D-N.Y.) said from the Senate floor. The House passed the bill early Saturday morning, sending it to the Senate. ADVERTISEMENT The Senate is expected to make changes to the bill, including stripping out language increasing the minimum wage to $15 per hour after the Senate parliamentarian advised that it didn't comply with budget rules that govern what can be included in the coronavirus bill. The Senate will also have to go through a marathon voting session known as vote-a-rama, where any senator who wants to force an amendment vote will be able to do so. Senators are mulling potential changes to the bill, including changing the phase-out structure of a third round of stimulus checks. Republicans were able to successfully get amendments added to last month's budget resolution, which teed up the coronavirus bill. But those changes were non-binding, while any successful effort by Senate Republicans will change the House-passed coronavirus bill. Schumer can defeat GOP amendments as long as all 50 members of the Democratic caucus stick together. He'll also need support from every member of the Democratic caucus to pass the coronavirus bill, with no Republican expected to vote for it. Under reconciliation, the process Democrats are ...
