Rep. Mike Turner says there is a “chaos caucus” who want to block any Congressional action


Turner: “Chaos caucus” wants to block any Congressional action


Rep. Mike Turner says there is a “chaos caucus” who want to block any Congressional action

07:23

Washington — Rep. Mike Turner, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee on Sunday derided a group of lawmakers that he says have continued to “stop everything” in Congress amid opposition toward additional aid to Ukraine and a possible effort to oust House Speaker Mike Johnson.

“Unfortunately, the chaos caucus has continued to want to stop everything that occurs in Congress,” the Ohio Republican said on “Face the Nation” on Sunday. “It’s not as if they have an alternative plan, they’re just against those things that are necessary that we’re doing.”

Turner said an aid package to Ukraine in its war against Russia is “necessary for national security,” noting that it has widespread support in Congress despite some opposition on the fringes. After a commitment by Johnson to bring forward supplemental funding for U.S. allies when lawmakers return from recess next week, Turner expressed confidence that an aid package can pass through both chambers and receive the president’s signature.

On the effort to oust Johnson, which has been pushed by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene due to frustrations with his handling of government funding, Turner said that House Democratic leadership has been clear that they will not join House conservatives looking to remove him from his post, likely saving his speakership should it reach that point. 

1711900200708.png
Rep. Mike Turner on “Face the Nation,” March 31, 2024.

CBS News


Greene, a Georgia Republican, filed a motion to vacate earlier this month, teasing a possible vote to oust Johnson. That effort could gain steam should Johnson bring up a vote on funding for Ukraine. But it remains unclear whether there’s enough political will among the House GOP conference more broadly to oust and replace another speaker. 

The House Republican conference has had a turbulent year, with five departures in recent months that have shrunk the already-narrow GOP majority. Turner said that the pattern shows how “radical” fringes and individuals can cause disruptions in the conference. 

“That’s what we have seen. That certainly makes it difficult for people who just want to get the job done,” Turner said. “In the area of national security, I think Speaker Johnson made it very clear that we have his support to get national security agenda items done and I think we will.”



Source link

Rep. Mike Turner says there is a “chaos caucus” who want to block any Congressional action


Rep. Mike Turner says there is a “chaos caucus” who want to block any Congressional action – CBS News

Watch CBS News


House Intelligence Committee chairman Rep. Mike Turner tells “Face the Nation” that there is a “chaos caucus that wants to stop everything that a person in Congress does” as Speaker Mike Johnson faces a possible motion to vacate.

Be the first to know

Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.




Source link

President Biden calls for Congressional support after bridge collapse


President Biden calls for Congressional support after bridge collapse – CBS News

Watch CBS News


President Joe Biden has made it clear that he wants the full support of Congress to help Baltimore recover from the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge. The state has already received $60 million in emergency relief funding.

Be the first to know

Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.




Source link

Federal court reinstates lines for South Carolina congressional district despite racial gerrymander ruling


Washington — A panel of federal district court judges in South Carolina said Thursday that the 2024 elections for a congressional district in the state can be conducted using a map it determined was racially gerrymandered.

The three judges overseeing the redistricting dispute granted a request from South Carolina Republican legislative leaders, who asked the court to reinstate the lines for Congressional District 1 that GOP state lawmakers drew following the 2020 Census. 

The Republicans had asked the court to pause its own January 2023 decision invalidating the lines of the district, represented by GOP Rep. Nancy Mace, while it awaits a ruling from the Supreme Court on whether to uphold the map. They argued that the 2024 election cycle in South Carolina is now underway — the candidate-filing period opened March 16 and closes April 1 — and last-minute changes to congressional district lines and the state’s election calendar would confuse voters and lead to disorder.

At least five candidates have filed to run in the primaries and have begun campaigning in Mace’s coastal district, as well as the neighboring district represented by Democratic Rep. Jim Clyburn.

The judges said in a short five-page decision that the “present circumstances make it plainly impractical for the court to adopt a remedial plan for” Congressional District 1 before an April 27 deadline for military and overseas ballots to be mailed. South Carolina’s statewide primary elections are set for June 11. 

The district court panel noted that it had concluded that the district is unlawful under the 14th Amendment, but “with the primary election procedures rapidly approaching, the appeal before the Supreme Court still pending, and no remedial plan in place, the ideal must bend to the practical.”

Republican leaders had made their request to the district court on March 7, but then sought emergency relief from the Supreme Court on March 18 because the panel hadn’t yet ruled. The Supreme Court has yet to act on the GOP lawmakers’ bid for it to intervene.

The South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP and a voter challenged the GOP-crafted congressional voting map in federal district court in the 2021 redistricting cycle. South Carolina Republicans had said they constructed the district to produce a stronger Republican tilt. Mace narrowly won the seat in 2020, but cruised to reelection in the 2022 midterm elections, after the new lines were enacted.

In January 2023, the three-judge panel concluded that state lawmakers racially gerrymandered Congressional District 1 and designed it with racially discriminatory intent.

The district court blocked the state from holding elections for Mace’s district until lawmakers approved a constitutionally valid plan, and later gave the GOP-led legislature until 30 days after the Supreme Court rules to submit new boundaries. It amended that earlier order to bar elections from being conducted under the GOP-drawn lines for Congressional District 1 after the 2024 election cycle.

The high court considered in October whether Republican lawmakers impermissibly used race as the predominant factor when drawing the lines for Congressional District 1, and had been asked by GOP legislative leaders and the NAACP to issue its ruling by Jan. 1. But that deadline has long passed without any decision from the justices.

It’s unclear when the Supreme Court will rule in the case, but during arguments in the fall, a majority of the court appeared skeptical of the lower court’s decision.



Source link

Lawmakers trying to be nicer to each other with Congressional Civility Caucus


Lawmakers trying to be nicer to each other with Congressional Civility Caucus – CBS News

Watch CBS News


A bipartisan effort from two Ohio members of Congress is underway to make Congress work better together. Republican Rep. Mike Carey and Democratic Rep. Joyce Beatty have formed a Congressional Civility Caucus, hoping to inspire a more civil discourse between the two parties. CBS News congressional correspondent Scott MacFarlane has more.

Be the first to know

Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.




Source link

Voting rights groups urge court to reject Alabama’s new congressional map


Civil rights groups are fighting Alabama’s redrawn congressional districts, arguing that state Republicans did not follow federal court orders to create a district fair to Black voters.

The plaintiffs in the high-profile redistricting case filed a written objection Friday to oppose Alabama’s new redistricting plan. They accused state Republicans of flouting a judicial mandate to create a second majority-Black district or “something quite close to it” and enacting a map that continues to discriminate against Black voters in the state.

A special three-judge panel in 2022 blocked use of the the state’s existing districts and said any new congressional map should include two districts where “Black voters either comprise a voting-age majority” or something close. That panel’s decision was appealed by the state but upheld in June in a surprise ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, which concurred that having only one Black-majority district out of seven — in a state where more than one in four residents is Black — likely violated federal law.

The plaintiffs in the case, represented by the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund and other groups, asked the three-judge panel to step in and draw new lines for the state.

“Alabama’s new congressional map ignores this court’s preliminary injunction order and instead perpetuates the Voting Rights Act violation that was the very reason that the Legislature redrew the map,” lawyers representing the plaintiffs in the case wrote.

The new map enacted by the Republican-controlled Alabama Legislature maintained one-majority Black district but boosted the percentage of Black voters in the majority-white 2nd Congressional District, now represented by Republican Rep. Barry Moore, from about 30% to 39.9%

Lawyers representing plaintiffs in the case wrote Friday that the revamped district “does not provide Black voters a realistic opportunity to elect their preferred candidates in any but the most extreme situations.” They accused state Republicans of ignoring the courts’ directive to prioritize a district that would stay under GOP control “pleasing national leaders whose objective is to maintain the Republican Party’s slim majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.”

Alabama has maintained the new plan complies with the Voting Rights Act, and state leaders are wagering that the panel will accept their proposal or that the state will prevail in a second round of appeals to the Supreme Court. Republicans argued that the map meets the court’s directive and draws compact districts that comply with redistricting guidelines.

The state must file its defense of the map by Aug. 4. The three judges have scheduled an Aug. 14 hearing in the case as the fight over the map shifts back to federal court.

The outcome could have consequences across the country as the case again weighs the requirements of the Voting Rights Act in redistricting. It could also impact the partisan leanings of one Alabama congressional district in the 2024 elections with control of the U.S House of Representatives at stake.

Former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, chairman of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, said in a statement that Alabama’s new map is a “brazen defiance” of the courts.

“The result is a shameful display that would have made George Wallace—another Alabama governor who defied the courts—proud,” Holder said in a statement.



Source link

National Latino museum’s funding threatened by congressional clash


A funding dispute between lawmakers who’ve been working for decades in a bipartisan effort to create a national Latino museum underscores the challenges around defining U.S. Latino history amid increasingly partisan culture wars.

Republicans who pushed to defund the Smithsonian’s upcoming National Museum of the American Latino and the Molina Family Latino Gallery — a small space inside the National Museum of American History used for temporary exhibits featuring Latino history— may be having a change of heart after seemingly reaching some common ground with Smithsonian leadership this week.

Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart, R-Fla., and Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-Texas, co-chairs of the Congressional Hispanic Conference, led a meeting Tuesday with Smithsonian Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III and his staff after feeling “deeply disappointed and offended” by a bilingual exhibit titled “¡Presente! A Latino History of the United States,” they said in a joint statement Wednesday evening.

The exhibit in question was promoted as “a preview” of the national Latino museum’s potential when it opened last year at the Molina Family Latino Gallery.

But shortly after its debut, conservative Latinos criticized the exhibit for elevating leftist ideologues, celebrating LGBTQ Latinos and advancing “the classic oppressor-oppressed agenda,” among other concerns. They called for the national Latino museum’s defunding.

These concerns reached the House Appropriations Committee this month. In a mostly party-line vote, the committee approved a Republican bill that included zeroing out federal funding for the “planning, design, or construction” of the national Latino museum and the operation of the Molina Family Latino Gallery.

“Defunding the museum now may mean that it may be delayed 10 more years,” Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., said during a committee hearing last week.

But after Tuesday’s meeting, Díaz-Balart and Gonzales said the Smithsonian showed serious commitment to rectifying its actions. “Procedural changes in the review of content and leadership have been made,” effectively opening the door “to allow funding to go further,” they said in a statement.

The Molina gallery’s current exhibit features significant figures such as Indigenous freedom fighter Toypurina, Mexican American civil rights leader César Chávez, Puerto Rican baseball star Roberto Clemente, Guatemalan labor organizer Luisa Moreno, Colombian American drag queen José Sarria and Cuban American singer Celia Cruz, according to the Smithsonian.

It was specifically “designed to explore the rich history and culture, as well as the complexities and common threads, of U.S. Latino communities,” Jorge Zamanillo, director of the Smithsonian’s national Latino museum, told NBC News in a statement Thursday night.

The 4,500-square-foot gallery showcases historical artifacts, documents and personal stories. The elements are organized under four historical themes: “Colonial Legacies,” “War and U.S. Expansion,” “Immigration Stories” and “Shaping the Nation.”

According to the Smithsonian, the “¡Presente!” exhibit was developed based on conversations curators had with museum visitors about what they don’t know about Latino history.

Whose history?

When Congress approved legislation in 2020 to start the process of creating a national Latino museum, some federal funding was appropriated to the Smithsonian to get the ball rolling.

That legislation included language agreeing not to portray a single political ideology in the museum’s exhibits.

Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, the current bill’s main sponsor, said he included the defunding language in support of his Republican Hispanic colleagues who expressed “serious concerns” about Smithsonian exhibits promoting socialism and depicting Latinos as victims. They pointed to some examples.

According to Republican committee members, the creators of the exhibit chose to highlight a convicted military deserter instead of “the thousands of courageous Latino military heroes that served our country proudly and honorably.”

After Díaz-Balart voiced some of these concerns during last week’s hearing, Rep. Adriano Espaillat, D-N.Y., defended the exhibit, saying dissent can be patriotic.

“It’s at the very core of democracy,” he said. “To disagree when something is wrong, to right a wrong, is more American perhaps as much as the Constitution of this nation.”

Espaillat added that he can agree with some of the concerns, but “there are dozens, maybe hundreds, of parts to that exhibit” reflecting a wide range of Latino experiences from people with similar heritage, but distinct identities.

A scene from the inaugural exhibition at the Molina Family Latino Gallery, which opened to the public in June 2022 at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History.
A scene from the inaugural exhibition at the Molina Family Latino Gallery, which opened to the public in June 2022 at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History.Patricia Guadalupe for NBC News

“And just because we cannot agree, we disagree on one part of it, we’re going to drive a stake through the heart of what could be a major institution for the Latino community? I think that’s flawed and mistaken,” said Espaillat, who’s also deputy chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

Another example cited by Republicans was “the lightness with which serious topics are portrayed, such as scented exhibits meant to simulate raft rides of those risking their lives to flee tyranny, romanticization of socialism, and failure to adequately document or portray the reality of totalitarianism.”

During last week’s committee hearing, Díaz-Balart said he first expressed these concerns to the Smithsonian back in December, but the institution responded with “lip service.” Republicans argued the only way to make the Smithsonian act on their concerns was to withhold funding.

Even though the fight over the museum’s funding has moved outside the committee’s reach following last week’s vote — making it harder for lawmakers to reverse course — Díaz-Balart and Gonzales said they’re engaging in discussions with Simpson and other members to provide federal funding for the national Latino museum following their meeting with the Smithsonian.

Zamanillo said the team at the national Latino museum is looking forward to “working with all members of Congress as we begin the long journey toward building and opening the National Museum of the American Latino.”

What’s next?

As of Thursday, it’s unclear how much more can lawmakers do to change the provision defunding the museum before Congress leaves for recess this weekend.

The museum’s funding dispute comes as the House gets ready to vote on a series of spending bills for fiscal year 2024. While the bills are part of a routine appropriations process to fund government agencies starting in October, Republican policy riders have included language on some of these must-pass bills targeting critical race theory, diversity efforts, drag shows and Pride flag displays.

A scene from the inaugural exhibition at the Molina Family Latino Gallery, which opened to the public in June 2022 at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History.
A scene from the inaugural exhibition at the Molina Family Latino Gallery, which opened to the public in June 2022 at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History.Patricia Guadalupe for NBC News

The national Latino museum is expected to cost $600 million to $800 million; half of the funding will come from Congress and the other half from private fundraising. That fundraising process could greatly benefit from having a permanent home for the museum selected, museum supporters have said.

Two sites by the National Mall are being considered. Both sites are property of the National Park Service; ownership would need to be transferred to the Smithsonian before any construction could begin, and the construction has to be approved by Congress. By law, a site for the museum has to be designated by Dec. 27, 2024.

It took the Smithsonian 10 to 15 years to create similar museums such as the National Museum of African American History and Culture and the National Museum of American History.

For the first time in its history, the Smithsonian is simultaneously creating two museums from scratch, the National Museum of the American Latino and the Smithsonian American Women’s History Museum. Unlike the Latino museum, the women’s museum hasn’t endured any defunding or delays, according to the Smithsonian.





Source link

The UFO congressional hearing was ‘insulting’ to US employees, a top Pentagon official says


WASHINGTON (AP) — A top Pentagon official has attacked this week’s widely watched congressional hearing on UFOs, calling the claims “insulting” to employees who are investigating sightings and accusing a key witness of not cooperating with the official U.S. government investigation.

Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick’s letter, published on his personal LinkedIn page and circulated Friday across social media, criticizes much of the testimony from a retired Air Force intelligence officer that energized believers in extraterrestrial life and produced headlines around the world.

Retired Air Force Maj. David Grusch testified Wednesday that the U.S. has concealed what he called a “multi-decade” program to collect and reverse-engineer “UAPs,” or unidentified aerial phenomena, the official government term for UFOs.

Part of what the U.S. has recovered, Grusch testified, were non-human “biologics,” which he said he had not seen but had learned about from “people with direct knowledge of the program.”

A career intelligence officer, Kirkpatrick was named a year ago to lead the Pentagon’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office, or AARO, which was intended to centralize investigations into UAPs. The Pentagon and U.S. intelligence agencies have been pushed by Congress in recent years to better investigate reports of devices flying at unusual speeds or trajectories as a national security concern.

Kirkpatrick wrote the letter Thursday and the Defense Department confirmed Friday that he posted it in a personal capacity. Kirkpatrick did not return messages seeking comment.

He writes in part, “I cannot let yesterday’s hearing pass without sharing how insulting it was to the officers of the Department of Defense and Intelligence Community who chose to join AARO, many with not unreasonable anxieties about the career risks this would entail.”

“They are truth-seekers, as am I,” Kirkpatrick said. “But you certainly would not get that impression from yesterday’s hearing.”

In a separate statement, Pentagon spokeswoman Sue Gough denied other allegations made by Grusch and other witnesses before a House Oversight subcommittee.

The Pentagon “has no information that any individual has been harmed or killed as a result of providing information” about UFO objects, Gough said. Nor has the Pentagon discovered “any verifiable information to substantiate claims that any programs regarding the possession or reverse-engineering of extraterrestrial materials have existed in the past or exist currently.”

Kirkpatrick wrote, “AARO has yet to find any credible evidence to support the allegations of any reverse engineering program for non-human technology.”

He had briefed reporters in December that the Pentagon was investigating “several hundreds” of new reports following a push to have pilots and others come forward with any sightings.

Kirkpatrick wrote in his letter that allegations of “retaliation, to include physical assault and hints of murder, are extraordinarily serious, which is why law enforcement is a critical member of the AARO team, specifically to address and take swift action should anyone come forward with such claims.”

“Yet, contrary to assertions made in the hearing, the central source of those allegations has refused to speak with AARO,” Kirkpatrick said. He did not explicitly name Grusch, who alleged he faced retaliation and declined to answer when a congressman asked him if anyone had been murdered to hide information about UFOs.

Messages left at a phone number and email address for Grusch were not returned Friday.



Source link