Monthly Archives: April 2021

Theres a growing rift between corporate America and the GOP two groups that have long been bedfellows.

The latest incident involves a restrictive voting law passed in Georgia with dozens of other states working on their own measures meant to limit voting. Over 300 companies, CEOs and other executives signed a statement printed in The New York Times to defend the right to vote and oppose any discriminatory legislation, while Major League Baseball moved its All-Star Game from Atlanta to Denver.

Republicans reacted furiously and warned of retribution, including eliminating tax breaks for companies taking a stand on the issue. Texas governor backed out of throwing the ceremonial first pitch at the Texas Rangers home opener. And Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell bluntly warned companies to stay out of politics though he later softened his tone.

Meanwhile, Democrats are trying to capitalize on the fracture.

As a management professor, I study how corporate executives values and political views affect the decisions they make on behalf of their companies. While I believe CEOs are partly responsible for the growing business-GOP divide, its not the only factor driving it.

The close relationship between corporate America and the Republican Party dates back to the 1970s. Companies provided financial support to conservative war chests and in return received business-friendly policies like reduced corporate taxes and regulations.

The alliance has arguably been quite a success for Big Business. Corporate taxes as a share of U.S. gross domestic product are only about 1%, the lowest since the 1930s and down from 4.1% in 1967.

But this union has become increasingly strained in recent years over a range of social issues, particularly regarding LGBTQ rights.

For example, in 2015 many companies including Apple and Walmart denounced so-called religious freedom laws like one passed in Indiana that would allow businesses to discriminate against LGBTQ customers. The following year there was a similar corporate backlash over North Carolinas ban on transgender individuals using public bathrooms. Boycotts by several companies, including PayPal and the NCAA, led to a partial repeal in 2017.

Companies were also vocal during former President Donald Trumps presidency over such matters as his travel ban from Muslim-majority countries and his comments following the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. For some, it seemed like the role he and other Republicans played in laying the ground for the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the Capitol may have been the last straw, as dozens of companies including AT&T and Marriott said they would cut off donations to the 147 Republicans who voted against certifying President Joe Bidens election.

The push for more restrictive voter laws continues the battle over the election. Republicans in states across the country cite alleged fraud in the 2020 election despite no evidence that any occurred as the impetus behind their push.

Why have companies become more outspoken in recent years and willing to upset an alliance that has helped them reduce their tax bills and regulatory hurdles?

My research suggests there are three driving forces for this trend.

The CEO is the corporations top decider, which means his or her political leanings can filter into business decisions.

And in recent years, CEOs of some of the largest U.S. companies have cited their own personal values as their reason for speaking out on social issues. As Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan told The Wall Street Journal in 2016, Our jobs as CEOs now include driving what we think is right.

In my own research, Ive found a CEOs political affiliation can affect how a company spends money. CEOs who mostly donate to Democrats tend to spend more on their employees, community activities and environmental issues, regardless of their companys profitability. That is, they seem to believe its simply the right thing to do.

Republican CEOs, on the other hand, tend to tie spending on outside issues to financial performance, reflecting the notion that companies are responsible to shareholders first and foremost.

More recent research also demonstrates that liberal executives tend to pay more attention to gender diversity inside their companies and are less likely to reduce their workforce when economic conditions deteriorate, consistent with the values that liberals prioritize.

But relatively few CEOs are staunchly liberal, so the impact of the CEO on this trend may be limited. A recent study found that only about 18% of the more than 3,500 people who served as CEOs of companies in the Standard & Poors 1500 from 2000 to 2017 donated primarily to Democratic candidates, while 58% gave mostly to Republicans.

Employees also play an important role driving corporate activism.

Recent management research shows that companies with more liberal employees spend more resources on improving gender and race diversity and sustainability issues. Similarly, a 2019 study found that companies are more likely to concede to activists demands over issues like reducing carbon emissions and increasing front-line workers pay when they have a more liberal workforce.

Companies may be responding to research showing the benefits of listening to their employees and showing their voices matter. For example, workers tend to show more trust and commitment toward a company when they feel it shares their values, which leads to higher productivity. A 2017 survey found that 89% of employees said theyd accept a reduced salary to work at a company whose values match their own.

Other research shows engagement in social activities like protecting the environment leads to less employee turnover.

In my own research, which tracked companies engagement on same-sex marriage issues in the 2000s and 2010s, I found that the likelihood of CEOs speaking out on same-sex marriage significantly increased when there were more employees who donated to Democrats which was true even when the CEO leaned conservative.

Public opinion is another factor likely driving the growing rift with the GOP.

Corporate executives tend to follow public sentiment, as they want to minimize the risk of losing customers for their products and services.

The debate over same-sex marriage is a good case in point. Public support for allowing gay people to marry surpassed 50% for the first time in 2011 its now at 67%. Until then, very few CEOs had made a public statement on the issue, according to my same-sex marriage research. Once popular opinion hit the halfway point, however, a lot more companies including ones led by conservative CEOs begin speaking out in favor. Interestingly, even liberal CEOs said very little until 2011, including those who already provided employees with domestic partner benefits.

And more recently, it has become even more critical for companies to consider public sentiment when deciding whether to take a stand on a hot-button issue. Thats because their younger customers, especially millennials, increasingly say CEOs have a responsibility to speak out and they would be more likely to buy products if they do.

On the voting laws, a recent poll found that most people favor legislation that makes it easier to vote, not harder.

[Get the best of The Conversation, every weekend. Sign up for our weekly newsletter.]

But corporate America isnt necessarily moving away from the Republican Party and toward the Democrats.

Instead, businesses are trying to make clear that their concerns are not partisan in nature. The 100-plus companies that signed a statement supporting voter rights and against bills that would restrict access emphasized this point.

I believe a closer look at the three main factors especially the role of workers and the public behind the growth in corporate activism suggests something else. Companies arent drifting away from the Grand Old Party. Rather, the GOP seems to be doing the drifting, not only from corporate America, but the American public as well.

View post:

Why corporate America appears to be drifting away from the Republican Party - The Conversation US

To hear more audio stories from publishers like The New York Times, download Audm for iPhone or Android.

Republican legislators in Oklahoma and Iowa have passed bills granting immunity to drivers whose vehicles strike and injure protesters in public streets.

A Republican proposal in Indiana would bar anyone convicted of unlawful assembly from holding state employment, including elected office. A Minnesota bill would prohibit those convicted of unlawful protesting from receiving student loans, unemployment benefits or housing assistance.

And in Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis signed sweeping legislation this week that toughened existing laws governing public disorder and created a harsh new level of infractions a bill hes called the strongest anti-looting, anti-rioting, pro-law-enforcement piece of legislation in the country.

The measures are part of a wave of new anti-protest legislation, sponsored and supported by Republicans, in the 11 months since Black Lives Matter protests swept the country following the death of George Floyd. The Minneapolis police officer who killed Mr. Floyd, Derek Chauvin, was convicted on Tuesday on murder and manslaughter charges, a cathartic end to weeks of tension.

But while Democrats seized on Mr. Floyds death last May to highlight racism in policing and other forms of social injustice, Republicans responded to a summer of protests by proposing a raft of punitive new measures governing the right to lawfully assemble. G.O.P. lawmakers in 34 states have introduced 81 anti-protest bills during the 2021 legislative session more than twice as many proposals as in any other year, according to Elly Page, a senior legal adviser at the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law, which tracks legislation limiting the right to protest.

Some, like Mr. DeSantis, are labeling them anti-riot bills, conflating the right to peaceful protest with the rioting and looting that sometimes resulted from such protests.

The laws carry forward the hyperbolic message Republicans have been pushing in the 11 months since Black Lives Matter protests against racial injustice swept the country: that Democrats are tolerant of violent and criminal actions from those who protest against racial injustice. And the legislation underscores the extent to which support for law enforcement personnel and opposition to protests have become part of the bedrock of G.O.P. orthodoxy and a likely pillar of the platform the party will take into next years midterms.

This is consistent with the general trend of legislators responding to powerful and persuasive protests by seeking to silence them rather than engaging with the message of the protests, said Vera Eidelman, a lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Union. If anything, the lesson from the last year, and decades, is not that we need to give more tools to police and prosecutors, its that they abuse the tools they already have.

Laws already exist to punish rioting, and civil rights advocates worry that the new bills violate rights of lawful assembly and free speech protected under the First Amendment. The overwhelming majority of last summers nationwide Black Lives Matter protests were peaceful more than 96 percent involved no property damage or police injuries, according to The Washington Post, which also found that police officers or counterprotesters often instigated violence.

Most of the protests held across Florida last summer were also peaceful, though a few in Miami, Tampa and Jacksonville produced some episodes of violence, including the burning of a police car and a sporting goods store. Still, as they embraced the bill that Mr. DeSantis signed into law, Republican leaders expressed scorn for cities that trim police budgets and tolerate protesters who disrupt business and traffic.

We werent going to allow Florida to become Seattle, said Chris Sprowls, a Republican who is the speaker of the Florida House, mentioning cities where protests lasted for months last year and demonstrators frequently clashed with the police. We were not going to allow Florida to become Portland.

The Florida law imposes harsher penalties for existing public disorder crimes, turning misdemeanor offenses into felonies, creating new felony offenses and preventing defendants from being released on bail until they have appeared before a judge. A survey conducted in January by Ryan D. Tyson, a Republican pollster, found broad support in the state for harsher penalties against protesters who damage personal and business property or assault law enforcement.

But the law goes farther. If a local government chooses to decrease its law enforcement budget to defund the police, as Mr. DeSantis put it the measure provides a new mechanism for a prosecutor or a city or county commissioner to appeal the reduction to the state.

The law also increases penalties for taking down monuments, including Confederate ones, making the offense a second-degree felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison. It makes it easier for anyone who injures a protester, such as by driving into a crowd, to escape civil liability.

State Senator Shevrin D. Jones, a Democrat from Broward County and a vocal critic of the law, noted that Mr. DeSantis had been quick to emphasize how necessary the bill was the day after the deadly Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol but had made no mention of that event during Mondays bill signing, focusing solely on the summer protests.

That was evidence, he said, that bills aimed at punishing protesters were disproportionately targeting people of color. This bill is racist at its core, Mr. Jones said.

So far, three bills aimed at limiting protests have been signed into law Floridas and new laws in Arkansas and Kansas that target protesters who seek to disrupt oil pipelines. Others are likely to come soon.

In Oklahoma, Republican lawmakers last week sent legislation to Gov. Kevin Stitt that would criminalize the unlawful blocking of a public street and grant immunity to drivers who strike and injure protesters during a riot. Last June, a pickup truck carrying a horse trailer drove through a crowd of Black Lives Matter protesters on a Tulsa freeway, injuring several people and leaving one paralyzed. The driver, who said he had sped up because he feared for the safety of his family, was not charged.

The bills author, State Senator Rob Standridge, said the Tulsa incident had prompted him to seek immunity for drivers who strike protesters. He said Tuesday he wasnt aware of any drivers who had been charged after striking protesters in Oklahoma. My hope is that this law never is utilized, he said in an interview. Carly Atchison, a spokeswoman for Mr. Stitt, declined to say whether he would sign the bill, which passed with veto-proof majorities.

Tiffany Crutcher, whose twin brother, Terence Crutcher, was shot and killed in 2016 by a Tulsa police officer who was later acquitted on a manslaughter charge, said the Oklahoma proposal represents Republican efforts to extend the Trump administrations hostility toward people of color.

Dr. Crutcher said she was convinced that if Mr. Stitt signed the legislation, it would be applied in harsher terms against those protesting racial injustice than for white protesters demonstrating for gun rights or against abortion.

We all know that over the last four years that we saw white supremacy, bigotry and racism show its ugly head in so many forms, said Dr. Crutcher, who quit her job as a physical therapist to work for racial justice after the death of her brother. This is the continuation of the Trump administration that showed us every day that Black lives didnt matter.

While Republican lawmakers present the anti-protest legislation as support for the police, law enforcement agencies dont necessarily back the new proposals.

The Iowa bills, part of a law enforcement package proposed by Gov. Kim Reynolds, would strip local governments of state funding if cities and counties defund their own law enforcement budgets something that no Iowa jurisdiction has sought to do. And state lawmakers cut a proposal by Ms. Reynolds to track police-stop data by race.

The states police departments didnt ask for new tools to crack down on protesters or grant immunity to drivers who strike protesters marching in streets, said Kellie Paschke, a lobbyist for the Iowa Peace Officers Association, an umbrella group for the police.

In Kentucky, where protests following the police killing of Breonna Taylor lasted for months last year, the State Senate passed a bill that would make it a crime to insult or taunt a police officer with offensive or derisive words or gestures that would have a direct tendency to provoke a violent response. The measure would have required that those arrested on such a charge be held in jail for at least 48 hours a provision that does not automatically apply to those arrested on murder, rape or arson charges in Kentucky.

Though the legislation died in the statehouse over bipartisan concerns about free speech, the bills lead sponsor, State Senator Danny Carroll, a Republican who is a retired police officer, said he planned to refile it next session. Mr. Carroll said the bill was needed to ensure community safety and protect law enforcement personnel.

They are under attack constantly, he said, noting that police officers decades ago could arrest someone for cussing them out, until court rulings curtailed such police powers.

In the hours after Mr. DeSantis signed the Florida bill on Monday, as the nation awaited the Chauvin verdict, progressive community organizers in the state worried about how law enforcement agencies might react to any protests that resulted from the decision. Mon Holder, senior director of advocacy and programs for Florida Rising, a social justice organization, said her team had spent a lot of time informing activists of their rights under their new law.

Its a tactic to silence our voices, she said.

After the verdict was announced, she remained concerned about how the police would deal with community members if they chose to gather outside, to be together after an emotional year.

To console each other, to cry, to grieve, she said. The fact that we have to think twice about that is troublesome.

Dan Levin contributed reporting.

See the rest here:

G.O.P. Bills Target Protesters (and Absolve Motorists Who Hit Them) - The New York Times

The Republican Party has suffered a total moral collapse and is now held together by a bunch of nutcases happy to endorse autocracy and neo-fascism, according to Howard Dean, the former presidential candidate and ex-chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

The Democratic Party grandee tells Molly Jong-Fast he wont run for office again, so he is no longer treading on eggshells, in a fiery edition of The New Abnormal.

Dean said there are still one or two decent Republicans in Washington, D.C. but they lack the backbone to stand up to the people who have taken over the party.

I hate to call Republicans right-wing fascists because often they supported me, but this is unrecognizable, he said. They believe in autocracy not democracy, they are racist. Its just shocking. Whats happened to the Republican Party.

He has said Republican members of the House of Representatives were particularly inept. There are some House Republicans who are basically a sentient YouTube comment section, Dean said. They have nothing to contribute, frankly, to American politics, except for incendiary and sometimes delusional public statements.

After the Jan. 6 insurrection, Dean said the need to keep these people from power has become all-encompassing, and he called on members of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party to follow the lead of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in moderating their language while continuing to push their agenda within the Democratic framework because the alternativea Republican administration containing the likes of Sen. Josh Hawley and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeois too alarming.

These people are crazy. Theyre conspiracy theorists, theyre whack jobs. Theyre embedding their own reality. I mean, if they ever really run the country, its going to be a disaster for us. Cause you... this is why autocrats dont run good economies because they start believing in their own BS, he said.

You have a Republican Party, which emotionally, essentially are neo-fascist. They fundamentally do not believe that another legitimate point of view exists other than theirs.

The former governor of Vermont said he had never been a Biden supporter but hes been stunned by the presidents performance so far and is pleased he wasnt making the same mistake as President Obama, who spent too much time waiting around for bipartisan support.

Bernie Sanders said that [Bidens] Rebuilding America bill was the most progressive piece of legislation hed seen since Johnson and the war on poverty. And, I mean, it is, Dean said. I think hes probably off to the best start of any president Ive seen in my lifetime.

Listen to The New Abnormal on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, and Amazon.

Read more from the original source:

Howard Dean: The Republicans Are Now a Neo-Fascist Party - The Daily Beast

Miles T. Armaly and Adam M. Enders, political scientists at the University of Mississippi and the University of Louisville, argue that Trump appeals to voters experiencing what they call egocentric victimhood as opposed to those who see themselves as systemic victims.

In their January 2021 paper, Why Me? The Role of Perceived Victimhood in American Politics, Armaly and Enders argue that:

A systemic victim looks externally to understand her individual victimhood. Egocentric victimhood, on the other hand, is less outwardly focused. Egocentric victims feel that they never get what they deserve in life, never get an extra break, and are always settling for less. Neither the oppressor, nor the attribution of blame, are very specific. Both expressions of victimhood require some level of entitlement, but egocentric victims feel particularly strongly that they, personally, have a harder go at life than others.

There were substantial differences between the way these two groups voted, according to Armaly and Enders:

Those exhibiting higher levels of egocentric victimhood are more likely to have voted for, and continue to support, Donald Trump. However, those who exhibit systemic victimhood are less supportive and were less likely to vote for Trump.

The same pattern emerged in the case of racial resentment and support for or opposition to government aid to African-Americans, for building a wall on the Mexican border and for political correctness: egocentric victims, the authors report, tilted strongly in a conservative direction, systemic victims in a liberal direction.

In an effort to better understand how competing left and right strategies differ, I asked Kevin Arceneaux, a political scientist at Temple, a series of questions. The first was:

How would you describe the differences between the mobilizing strategies of the civil rights movement and Trumps appeals to discontented whites? Arceneauxs answer:

The civil rights movement was about mobilizing an oppressed minority to fight for their rights, against the likelihood of state-sanctioned violence, while Trumps appeals are about harnessing the power of the state to maintain white dominance. Trumps appeals to discontented whites are reactionary in nature. They promise to go back to a time when whites were unquestionably at the top of the social hierarchy. These appeals are about keying into anger and fear, as opposed to hope, and they are about moving backward and not forward.

What role has the sense of victimhood played in the delusional character of so many Trump supporters who continue to believe the election was stolen? Arceneaux again:

Their sense of victimhood motivates the very idea that some evil force could be so powerful that it can successfully collude to steal an election. It fits the narrative that everyone is out to get them.

Looking toward the elections of 2022 and 2024, Trump not only remains at the heart of the Republican Party but also embodies the partys predicament: Candidates running for the House and Senate need him to turn out the partys populist base, but his presence at the top of the ticket could put Congress and the White House out of reach.

Still, Arceneaux argues that without Trump, I do believe that the Republicans will struggle to turn out non-college-educated whites at the same rate.

Ed Goeas, a Republican pollster, observes that turning out working-class voters in 2024 will most likely not be enough for Trump to win: There are a large number of Republican voters (around 40 percent), who were either reluctant Trump voters or non-supportive voters, who make a Trump win in the general election look very undoable.

Ed Rogers, the Republican lobbyist I mentioned at the beginning of this column, argues that if Trump runs in 2024 despite the clout he wields today he is liable to take the party down in defeat:

I dont think Trump can win a two-person race in a general election. He cant get a majority. He pulled a rabbit out of the hat in 2016 and he got beat bad by an uninspiring candidate in 2020. 2024 is a long way away but I dont know what might happen to make Trump have broader appeal or more advantages than he did in 2020.

Stuart Stevens, a Republican media consultant who is a harsh critic of Trump, emailed me to say that Trump is the Republican Party and as a result:

We are in uncharted waters. For the first time since 1860, a major American political party doesnt believe America is a democracy. No Republican will win a contested primary in 2022 or 2024 who will assert that Biden is a legal president. The effect of this is profound and difficult to predict. But millions of Americans believe the American experiment is ending.

What is driving the Republican Party? Stevenss answer is that it is the threat of a nonwhite majority:

The coordinated effort to reduce voter access for those who are nonwhite is because Republicans know they are racing the demographic clock. The degree to which they are successful will determine if a Republican has a shot to win. Its all about white grievance.

Paul Begala, a Democratic consultant, described what may be Trumps most lasting imprint on his party: He said many prospective presidential candidates, including Josh Hawley, Kristi Noem, Ted Cruz and Ron DeSantis, seem to me to be embracing the growing nativist, anti-immigrant, anti-diversity fire Trump lit.

In the 28 years since the 1992 election, Begala continued by email, there has been more diminution in white voting power than in the previous 208 years dating back to the nations first presidential election.

For the Republican Party, Begala wrote, as white power diminishes, white supremacy intensifies.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. Wed like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here's our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

Read more from the original source:

Opinion | Why Trump Still Rules the Republican Party - The New York Times

With help from Shia Kapos and Sarah Owermohle

'IT JUST GETS NOWHERE' A recent spate of high-profile shootings in America has, once again, sparked calls for Congress and the White House to act on legislation. But if the past is prologue, nothing will get done. It never does.

Fewer national debates are as intractable as those around gun policy. Its remarkable or, depending on your vantage point, dispiriting. Over the past decade, mass casualty events have become a macabre fixture of our culture. And yet, one can count on his or her hand the number of Republican lawmakers who, while in office, changed their position on gun control legislation during that period of time.

I asked a series of gun control advocacy groups to help me compile a list. Collectively, they identified five current House Republican members.

Two of the five Reps. Chris Smith of New Jersey and Fred Upton of Michigan havent really changed positions at all; theyve just backed away from lesser-known NRA-backed bills. Reps. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois and Vern Buchanan of Florida both of whom recently began supporting background-check legislation did not return a request for comment. Neither did Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio, who announced that hed support legislation that prevents the sale of military-style weapons to civilians after years of opposing it.

The stream is moving in both directions, however. Two Republican supporters of a 2019 background-check bill Reps. Brian Mast and Mario Diaz-Balart of Florida opposed a version of it in March, arguing that liberals altered its core purpose.

The relative stasis of the gun policy debate is a source of immense frustration and confusion for a lot of voters who wonder how nearly 40,000 people can die from gun violence (the majority by suicide) in a given year, only to have lawmakers do nothing about it. But for those who have worked in the trenches, its become one of the defining examples of political gridlock. Peter King, the former Republican New York congressman who supported gun control legislation, recalled trying to talk some of his GOP colleagues into backing those bills.

It just gets nowhere, he told Nightly. You can discuss tax issues. You can discuss appropriations bills. But on this, its a sacred right. When you grow up thinking guns are almost an absolute right, you really have to see a strong case on the other side to infringe on that right.

That gridlock is fed by a number of factors, advocates say. There is muscle memory: Politicians recall formative cycles, like 1994, when backlash to President Bill Clintons assault weapons ban fed a GOP takeover of the House and cemented the idea that gun control pushes lead to electoral waves. There are structural hurdles: A gerrymandered House means Republicans worry about primary elections above all else. And then there are cultural dynamics.

There is a paradox that has always bedeviled the gun debate, Jim Kessler, a longtime gun control advocate, said. As violent crime rises some voters seek stricter gun laws, and others go out and buy guns.

Kessler went on to argue that culture will end up working against the GOP, and that savvy Republicans will move to support gun control measures as their states become more suburban. Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), perhaps the most notable Republican to change his tune on gun policy, won re-election in 2016 because of his support for background checks, Kessler said, not in spite of it.

There is something to the idea that cultural changes can facilitate political outcomes. Peter Ambler, the executive director of the gun control group Giffords, noted that more voters and politicians became comfortable with gay marriage as they began to know people who were gay and out. Sadly, you are seeing more of that with gun violence, where it is becoming more of a kitchen table issue, Ambler added.

In the end, that may be the way this all progresses, with politicians being affected on a personal level and then embracing reform. But heres something to ponder: What if even that exceedingly ghastly outcome proves an insufficient foe to the status quo? What if more gun violence doesnt mean movement on gun legislation?

After all, the research is already quite persuasive: Developed countries with more guns have more gun deaths. And if folks need more information on it, it could come soon: the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was only recently allowed to study gun violence as a public health matter.

But, as Frank Luntz, the famed GOP messaging guru, noted, the issue is not headlines or data or finding the convincing message or the right messenger. Its ideology.

It's really not a messaging issue for Republicans, said Luntz. They simply think banning guns will not make people safer. They blame the criminal, not the gun, for gun-related crimes.

Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. Reach out with news, tips and ideas for us at [emailprotected] and [emailprotected], or on Twitter at @samstein and @renurayasam.

A message from Gilead Sciences, Inc.:

Known to keep pushing. Decades of discovery lie behind every breakthrough. From HIV to viral hepatitis to todays battle with COVID-19, Gilead scientists have been pushing boundaries for over 30 years. So that we can bring tomorrows life-changing therapies forward today. To know more, visit Gilead.com.

ACHIEVABLE ACHIEVEMENTS Sen. Angus King is still undecided on whether to support D.C. statehood, an important goal for many of the Democrats he aligns with. And the independent Mainer is in no rush.

Im still kind of pondering it, King said today. There are just other issues Im engaged in at this point.

King is one of five Democratic caucus members who have yet to support the statehood bill, souring what should be a milestone week for the movement to empower the capital city. On Thursday the House will approve statehood for the second time, and now Democrats have a supportive president in Joe Biden.

But the statehood proposal, like other central elements of the Democratic agenda, may not make it to the Senate floor this year given its lack of unified support from Bidens party. With infrastructure and voting rights bills proving difficult enough to get to the presidents desk, Democrats are putting long-held progressive priorities like a 51st state, Supreme Court expansion and a $15 minimum wage on the proverbial back burner while they focus on whats actually achievable, Burgess Everett and Sarah Ferris write.

After a Trump era that emboldened its left flank to push ambitious plans, the partys legislative agenda is gliding down from loftiness to pragmatism.

Passing infrastructure is more important than anything that were not sure that we can actually get the votes to pass, said Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), who supports both D.C. and Puerto Rico statehood. Right now we need to focus our limited floor time on the most important stuff for the Biden administration to be successful and our country to be successful if we can do the other stuff, great.

Apostolic Faith Church on Chicago's South Side serves as a vaccination site operated by CORE, an organization that is going into communities to get residents vaccinated. | Photo by POLITICO's Shia Kapos

THE CORE OF CHICAGOS SHOTS PLAN Illinois Playbook author Shia Kapos emails us this dispatch about vaccination efforts in Chicago:

Amid what she called an alarming rise of Covid-19 cases among Black residents on the citys South Side, Mayor Lori Lightfoot toured a new vaccination site at Chicago State University part of a recently launched effort to close the vaccine disparities throughout the city.

While 50 percent of adult Chicagoans in the rest of the city have been vaccinated, a mere 12 to 19 percent of Black South Siders have received the vaccine, Lightfoot said. We can turn these numbers around the cases, the deaths, the hospitalizations but we can only turn them around if Black South Siders get the vaccine.

The key to making that happen may rest in a new partnership with an organization once known less for its work in health care than for its famous (and sometimes controversial) founder.

In the decade-plus since actor Sean Penn founded the Community Organized Relief Effort, or CORE, after the 2010 earthquakes in Haiti, the group has earned a reputation for its disaster-relief efforts across the Caribbean, notably in Haiti and Puerto Rico. For the last year, CORE has been in the trenches in the United States, combatting the coronavirus. Initially, it helped organize Covid-19 testing sites. Now, with the pandemic in a new stage, the group has pivoted to setting up vaccination sites in partnership with the city of Los Angeles, state of Georgia, and Chicago.

The partnership with CORE is part of Chicagos effort to advance a vaccine strategy that is focused on equity and inclusion and that pushes vaccines into communities that need them most, said Lightfoot. And COREs background working in international relief efforts bolsters not only its logistical abilities, but gives the group insight into how to build trust with the community it aims to serve.

People arent comfortable going across Chicago to get medical treatment, let alone a Covid vaccination, said John Holton, the area program manager for Chicago CORE. Its not enough to see politicians or notable names getting the vaccine, or Black or brown doctors promoting it, he said: Its about seeing people from the community who are reflective of their own experiences. So they can relate.

That attitude permeates how CORE approaches its work.

It partners with tech companies to ease the appointment-making process. It staffs its sites with volunteers from the community to make the people it serves more comfortable. And it works with hyper-local community health care organizations to administer the vaccines (on the South Side, that means teaming with the Howard Brown Health center). And it uses familiar community sites places known to South Siders, places theyre comfortable with to attract hesitant residents.

At the new vaccination site at CSU, the CORE-organized health teams will administer 750 first doses of the Pfizer vaccine each day. COREs vaccination site at the Apostolic Faith Church will accommodate another 250.

The church site is quiet, peaceful and familiar to visitors. On a recent sunny day, I ran into a drummer who teaches at a nearby music school, a businessman escorting his elderly parents, and a mom who jogged in while her tweens waited in the car outside.

I like that its in the neighborhood. I didnt want to have to go out of my way to get it, Arthur Adams, a licensed general contractor, told me as he walked out, patting his arm. He acknowledged being nervous about the vaccine, but decided to get it after his mom received it without a problem. I knew if I wanted to be around her, I needed to get the shot.

DOJ opens broad probe of Minneapolis police: Attorney General Merrick Garland announced that the Justice Department will conduct a broad investigation into alleged abuses at the Minneapolis Police Department, examining whether its officers have a pattern or practice of violating the civil rights of residents. The move, made public one day after a Minneapolis jury found former police officer Derek Chauvin guilty in the murder of George Floyd, appears to signal a return by the DOJ to more aggressive and frequent use of such probes, aimed at rooting out systemic civil rights abuses in police departments.

Biden: 200 million Americans have been vaccinated: This is an American achievement a powerful demonstration of unity and resolve, what unity will do for us and a reminder of what we can accomplish when we pull together as one people to a common goal, Biden said at a White House event.

FDA inspection report casts doubt on J&J vaccine contractors ability to restart production: A Johnson & Johnson contractors plant for producing coronavirus vaccines is not large or sanitary enough, and the company has not resolved issues that led to the contamination of millions of doses, the FDA said in a report released today.

Lofgren: Capitol officer being investigated for directions to pursue only anti-Trump protesters on Jan. 6: On the morning of Jan. 6, a Capitol Police officer radioed units outside the building and told them to scout out only anti-Trump troublemakers not pro-Trump protesters, according to the findings of an internal investigation revealed at a public hearing by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.).

Nightly asks you: A New York Times headline-turned-viral meme posits that you can be a different person after the pandemic. How has the pandemic changed you? Use the form to send your answers, and well include select responses in Fridays edition.

SUPER FRUSTRATED Conceding that soccers controversial new Super League was officially dead in the water, Italian team Juventus chief, Andrea Agnelli, searched for a scapegoat and landed on Brexit.

The Super League, which launched to political consternation and supporter unrest on Sunday night, had crumbled by this morning after a slew of clubs backed out amid a wave of protest from European leaders, fans and soccer stars.

The Juventus chairman, reportedly one of the leading architects of the rebel league, told Reuters that hed heard speculation that if six teams would have broken away and would have threatened the [English Premier League], politics would have seen that as an attack to Brexit and their political scheme.

While admitting that the concept was no longer feasible, Agnelli claimed people had lied to him about their interest in the project.

Im not going to say how many clubs contacted me in just 24 hours asking if they could join, he said, without naming them. Maybe they lied, but I was contacted by a number of teams asking what they could do to join.

BASED ON A TRUE PANDEMIC Health care reporter Sarah Owermohle, remote in hand, emails a Law & Order review to Nightly:

Law & Order isnt just lightly mentioning Covid, as some shows have done here and there over the past year. Its the center of multiple storylines. The plots abound in the long-running Law & Order: SVU and the brand-new Organized Crime spinoff: A crime family selling fraudulent masks and hijacking Covid-19 vaccines for the rich and privileged; a serial rapist going unnoticed while the citys public resources were stretched thin at the height of the pandemic; a woman lying about her trysts, citing public shaming of people who dont socially distance.

And then there are the little moments: people unsure if they should shake hands, wearing masks as they talk, or declaring that a witness is unavailable they died from Covid-19.

For more than 30 years, Law & Order and its spinoffs have branded themselves as using storylines ripped from the headlines. And over the past year, those headlines have provided plenty of fodder sometimes providing an uncomfortable fit for a show lionizing the criminal justice system.

Alongside the pandemic narratives are equally raw discussions of race, Black Lives Matter and widespread distrust of police. George Floyds name is uttered in several episodes, while multiple plots are lifted straight from the events of this past year. Audience favorite Detective Olivia Benson is confronted plainly with her implicit racial bias. The threads of systemic injustice run throughout, with white characters like Benson struggling with their positions in the system, and Black characters voicing the impact of racism in ways rarely made explicit in primetime network cop dramas.

Law & Order is not a perfect franchise. (No television show but The Sopranos truly is.) But it is commendable, if not a bit disorienting, to watch a TV staple wrangle in real-time with the uncomfortable and sometimes devastating realities happening around us. (Some plotlines, however, like that of vaccination parties run by the mafia, are pure fiction though if you see these, send me tips.) That said, its hard to imagine a popular TV show let alone one dealing with justice or set in a pandemic hotspot totally ignoring events that have left such an indelible mark on the national consciousness. Its perhaps safe to assume that shows filming right now will continue to churn out Covid-related storylines, and the wealth of pandemic-related plotlines will not dry up any time soon. I, for one, am glad to watch them in the name of work.

A point of critique though: Law & Order characters keep pulling down their masks to talk. That, Detectives Benson and Stabler, is not what infectious disease expert Anthony Fauci advises.

A message from Gilead Sciences, Inc.:

Decades of discovery lie behind every breakthrough. For more than 30 years, Gilead scientists have been pushing the boundaries of whats possible. Weve worked to advance the science that has unlocked therapeutics for HIV, viral hepatitis, and even COVID-19.

Today, Gilead therapeutics are at work, effectively providing treatment for millions. But were not stopping any time soon. Were committed to the relentless pursuit of scientific discovery. To keep pushing to the next goal. To bring tomorrows life-changing therapies forward today. And then reach farther.

To learn more, visit Gilead.com.

Did someone forward this email to you? Sign up here.

Follow this link:

Five Republicans who've changed their minds on guns - Politico

An infrastructure package proposed by U.S. Senate Republicans on Thursday is about a quarter the size of Democratic President Joe Biden's sweeping $2.3 trillion proposal and focuses narrowly on broadband access and traditional infrastructure projects. read more

Here is a spending comparison between the $568 billion Republican proposal and Biden's more expansive one, which includes funds for schools and eldercare:

ROADS AND BRIDGES:

Republicans - $299 billion

Biden - $115 billion

BROADBAND ACCESS:

Republicans - $65 billion

Biden - $100 billion

PUBLIC TRANSIT:

Republicans - $61 billion

Biden - $85 billion

AIRPORTS:

Republicans - $44 billion

Biden - $25 billion

DRINKING WATER AND WASTEWATER:

Republicans - $35 billion

Biden - $111 billion

RAIL:

Republicans - $20 billion

Biden - $80 billion

PORTS AND INLAND WATERWAYS:

Republicans - $17 billion

Biden - $17 billion

TRANSPORTATION SAFETY:

Republicans - $13 billion

Biden - $20 billion

ELECTRIC VEHICLES:

Republicans - $0

Biden - $174 billion

MANUFACTURING:

Republicans - $0

Biden - $580 billion

SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION AND REPAIR:

Republicans - $0

Biden - $100 billion

HOME- AND COMMUNITY-BASED CARE:

Republicans - $0

Biden - $400 billion

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Go here to read the rest:

Factbox: Republicans vs. Biden: What's in their infrastructure plans? - Reuters

A group of Republicans and Democrats are putting forward a new plan aimed at bolstering the nation's economic competitiveness against China. It represents a big test of whether Republicans and Democrats can still collaborate on key issues in Congress.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer along with Republican Sen. Todd Young introduced legislation on Wednesday to pour federal money into industries like semiconductors and artificial intelligence. Other co-sponsors included Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna of California and GOP Rep. Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin.

The package would also expand the National Science Foundation, providing $100 billion over five years to fund a new research and development agency. It also allocates $10 billion to build regional hubs across the US to boost domestic manufacturing and create new companies as well.

"This legislation will enhance American competitiveness with China and other countries by investing in American innovation, building up regions across the country to lead in the innovation economy, creating good-paying American manufacturing and high-tech jobs, and strengthening America's research, development, and manufacturing capabilities," Schumer said in a statement.

Khanna of California, a top House progressive, said in an interview that the broad coalition reflected deep backing for the measure. He believes lawmakers "hit the sweet spot" with a package aimed at countering China's economic influence, a rare area of bipartisan agreement in Congress.

"I think it is a huge step in that direction in terms of improving our competitiveness, improving our job creation and improving our support of critical industries," Khanna said in an interview with Insider. "It's a key area."

The White House released a statement supporting the package, though signaling it could still change.

"We look forward to working with Congress to further shape this legislation to renew America's global leadership in science and technology and to make sure we develop and manufacture the technologies of the future," White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in a statement.

China's economic ascent has prompted a groundswell of Republican and Democratic calls for the government to invest more money into research and development in recent years. The pandemic also exposed the reliance of the US on global supply chains that originate in China.

Read more:

Republicans and Democrats are teaming up to take a 'huge step' in the US's battle against China - Business Insider