The pro-abortion rights red state romp changes 2022 estimates
Efforts to allow lawmakers to ban abortion in Kansas backfired spectacularly.
Posing the question ahead of voters on midsummer primary day, conservatives in kansas projected a low turnout that would pave the way for an abortion ban in the reliably red state.
Instead, they got negligible losses that kept the status quo, but also changed a whole bunch of estimates for 2022.
Efforts to allow lawmakers to ban abortion in Kansas played back impressively. It roused suburban voters and even those in conservative areas of the state who were reluctant to implement something that was practically called for in the Supreme Court’s overturning case, Roe v. Wade.
Joe Scarborough this morning called Republican positioning on forced labor “rapist’s legislation.” Even rural areas in KS supported YES, and voter turnout was huge (900,000, that’s the general election level). People will come out and vote on this issue.
Concern over abortion explodes among Democrats, fueling desire
A USA TODAY/Suffolk University poll found that concern about abortion access has increased among Democratic voters in the past month as the fallout from the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade reverberates.
Sixty-four percent of Democrats believe the court’s action puts them on the ballot in November, which could be a deciding factor in midterm elections where voter turnout is traditionally low. That’s more than double the 29% of Democrats who expressed this view a A USA TODAY/Suffolk poll was conducted in June after a draft of the landmark decision was leaked.
The growing strength of the issue, increasing the number of voters among abortion rights supporters, could boost Democrats’ chances of limiting losses in the House and challenging control of the Senate in the midterms. GOP hopes for a “wave” election that would put Republican candidates in office have been fueled by a campaign fueled by economic concerns.
Look for an election recap later today from Daily Kos.
And in other news…
Home panels: DHS officials intervened to lose Secret Service texts
After the Office of Inspector General requested Secret Service communications on Jan. 6, the work was halted
Top officials at the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Office of Inspector General intervened in efforts to recover deleted Secret Service texts that have been Attack on the US Capitol and tried to cover up his actions, two House committees said in a letter Monday.
Overall, the new revelations show that the main watchdog Secret Service and DHS took deliberate steps to stop the retrieval of texts it knew were missing, and then tried to hide the fact that it had decided not to pursue that evidence.
Good job, Democrats.
David Rothkopf/Daily Beast:
Biden keeps promise with Zawahiri strike
With the US out of Afghanistan, the president vowed to keep up the pressure on terrorists. Monday’s assassination of the Al Qaeda chief shows that he was as good as he ordered.
For years, even as vice president during the Obama years, Biden had argued that America’s “endless war” in Afghanistan should be ended, troops should be brought home and a new counterterrorism strategy should be employed. He and those close to him acknowledged that the enormous cost of what the Bush administration described as a “global war on terror” was a misallocation of resources. Instead, as a senior Biden aide told me shortly after he took office, “the focus should be … as it probably always should have been … on conducting targeted counterterrorism efforts led by the intelligence community, supported by law enforcement and the military. , and implemented using over-the-horizon technologies and, where necessary, special operations.
The withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan last year not only ended America’s longest war, but also created a moment of peace, or silence, for Biden’s preferred approach. Political opponents, military personnel and other critics reasoned departure would create a void that terrorists would surely fill and which in turn will put Americans at risk.
Biden argued that it would not. In a speech defending his decision to quit just 50 weeks ago on August 14 last year, after explaining his reason for quitting, he went on to say: “We will not take our eyes off the threat of terrorism. We will realign our counterterrorism capabilities and significant assets in the region to prevent the re-emergence of terrorists, a threat to our homeland from the horizon. We will hold the Taliban accountable for its commitment to not allow any terrorist to threaten the United States or its allies from the soil of Afghanistan… And we will focus our full attention on the threat we face today.
New York Time:
Analysis finds Biden’s climate and tax bill fiscally responsible
Despite Republican claims, the new legislation would be only a modest increase in corporate taxes, the Joint Committee on Taxation found.
An analysis by the Joint Committee on Taxation, Congress’ nonpartisan evaluator of tax legislation, shows the bill would raise about $70 billion over 10 years. But the increase would be premature: Until 2027, the bill would actually mean a net tax cut each year, as new credits and other incentives for low-emission energy sources would offset a new minimum tax on some large corporations.
That analysis, along with a broader estimate of the bill’s provisions by the nonpartisan Committee on a Responsible Federal Budget, suggests the legislation, if passed, would add only modestly to federal spending over the next 10 years. By the end of the decade, the bill would reduce federal spending compared to what would happen if it did not become law.
Ignore the GOP’s scaremongering about the Dems’ tax plans. They are worth doing.
In reality, the tax changes are so subtle that relatively few people should even notice them. Even the largest share of revenue boosters — from megacorporations — is actually only a partial recovery of the GOP’s massive corporate tax cut passed in 2017.
“Unless you’re a tax cheat, a hedge fund manager, or a corporation making over $1 billion, you won’t be affected,” it sums up. Stephen M. Rosenthal, Senior Fellow, Tax Policy Center.
Let’s look at the events one by one.
More than half of US voters think abortion is “very important” to the midterm elections
The big picture: While abortion is a motivating issue for some groups of voters, it is overshadowed by inflation, including rising gas prices, which 74% of respondents consider “very important.”
Yes but: “Low-turnout midterm elections can be a game, and abortion can make a difference, especially if gas prices continue to fall”, said KFF President and CEO Drew Altman.
James Surowecki / Medium:
America owes it to veterans. A new Burn-Pit bill would write this into law. So why do Republicans oppose it?
Now, as Stewart has pointed out, the bill that was voted on last week was no different than the bill that passed the Senate in June. No new rule was added to it. So it’s not clear why something that most Republican senators had no problem with last month has suddenly become unacceptable.
That being said, it’s not like Republicans only brought up this supposed budget gimmick after the fact. It may even be possible that Republicans like Cruz voted in substance last week despite Joe Manchin and Chuck Schumer colluding to pass the so-called Deflation Act. But Pennsylvania Senator Pat Toomey has been complaining about the provision for more than a month and is proposing amendments to change it. Indeed, unlike most of his Republican colleagues, Toomey first voted against the PACT Act because of it.
So what’s Toomey’s problem with the bill? This is a rather esoteric point. Basically, Toomey is unhappy that the bill reverses the roughly $40 billion the government currently spends each year on health care for these veterans. discretionary spend up to mandatory spending. Currently, there is a cap on how much spending Congress can authorize each year. So with $40 billion in veterans health care spending out of the way, Toomey claims Congress will now go ahead and spend another $40 billion on things he’d rather they didn’t spend it on. This is the apparent trick he is trying to pull off the bill.
I find this Twitter account very silly.
Michigan’s undecided Republican voters are looking for a fighter, but also a winner
A caucus of Michigan Republicans that has struggled for months to decide the primary race for governor could change Tuesday’s election as they say they weigh their desire to nominate a challenger against their hopes of winning in November.
The five-candidate GOP primary field for the state’s top job is all political newcomers with no voting records for public scrutiny. Most applicants have not raised enough money to consistently run television commercials to promote themselves.
And former President Donald Trump did not issue an endorsement by Friday evening, four days before the election. He is now supporting conservative commentator Tudor Dixon of Norton Shores.
The circumstances, political observers say, have left an unusually high number of undecided voters, forcing them to scrutinize the personalities and actions of the candidates and decide who they think is best suited to defeat Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.