ANONYMOUS - OUR VOICE

Clueless Biden: ‘There’s A Lot of Reason to Be Hopeful in 2020’

<div><img class="ff-og-image-inserted" src="https://api-assets.infowars.com/2022/01/biddne29478817890.jpg" /></div>
Joe Biden once again fumbled and bumbled his way through another speech to the American people on Tuesday, this time mistaking the current year as 2020.
“There’s a lot of reason to be hopeful in 2020,” Biden said Tuesday prior to a meeting with his COVID response team.
Yikes.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" readability="5.1483870967742">
Biden: “There’s a lot of reason to be hopeful in 2020”
It's 2022. <a href="https://t.co/XMyHcjiyjR">pic.twitter.com/XMyHcjiyjR</a>
— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) <a href="https://twitter.com/TPostMillennial/status/1478457337803378692?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 4, 2022</a></blockquote>
During the meeting, Biden once again pushed the false claim to the American people that the rapid spread of the mild Omicron variant is the fault of the unvaccinated, adding many will “needlessly die.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" readability="6.6932270916335">
As millions of “vaccinated” people test positive for covid, Joe Biden continues to spread the lie that this is a pandemic of the unvaccinated. This is simply not true. At all. <a href="https://t.co/vsejScxREf">pic.twitter.com/vsejScxREf</a>
— Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) <a href="https://twitter.com/ClayTravis/status/1478457422582792205?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 4, 2022</a></blockquote>
“Don’t be alarmed, if you’re unvaccinated, you have some reason to be alarmed. Many of you will…you’ll experience severe illness, many cases, if you get COVID-19 and unvaccinated. Some will die. Needlessly die,” Biden said.
He even urged parents with unvaccinated children to keep them away from unvaccinated people, despite COVID presenting virtually no risk to children.
[embedded content]
The puppet president in typical fashion concluded his remarks without taking any questions from the friendly corporate media.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" readability="7.9050445103858">
Biden once again stares blankly at reporters on his fake White House set, refusing to take any questions after telling Americans they're going to "die" while his staff whisks away reporters
None of this is normal and I am not a fan of this Truman Show reboot. <a href="https://t.co/2VNBJspSMC">pic.twitter.com/2VNBJspSMC</a>
— Danny De Urbina (@dannydeurbina) <a href="https://twitter.com/dannydeurbina/status/1478455320280244224?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 4, 2022</a></blockquote>
Watch his full remarks:
[embedded content]
<hr class="wp-block-separator" />
<a href="https://freeworldnews.tv/watch?id=61d3a987c948194f4c1774ef" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Ex-AOC Staffer Calls Biden ‘Old Ass Piece of Sh*t’</a>
 
 
source <a href="https://www.infowars.com/posts/clueless-biden-theres-a-lot-of-reason-to-be-hopeful-in-2020">https://www.infowars.com/posts/clueless-biden-theres-a-lot-of-reason-to-be-hopeful-in-2020</a>

news Clueless Biden: ‘There’s A Lot of Reason to Be Hopeful in 2020’

Joe Biden once again fumbled and bumbled his way through another speech to the American people on Tuesday, this time mistaking the current ...

The Golden Globes are this weekend, but they won’t be on TV

Guess what? The Golden Globes are this weekend!
If that’s totally new information to you, then you’re far from alone. In the past, the Golden Globes were a heralded stop on the awards circuit, advertised to TV viewers during the holiday season as a fun, glitzy, no-holds-barred night with the stars. Celebrities like Seth Meyers, Andy Samberg, Sandra Oh, and Ricky Gervais hosted. Last year — yes, in 2021 — Tina Fey and Amy Poehler hosted <a href="https://www.vox.com/22306479/golden-globes-2021-winners-losers">a very weird show</a>.
In 2022, the Hollywood Foreign Press Association (HFPA) will announce the winners of the Golden Globes on January 9. That marks a move back to the traditional slot just after the holidays; last year, thanks to the pandemic, they were in late February.
But that’s about the only thing that’s normal about the Globes in 2022. There’s no TV broadcast of a glittering ceremony this year, and not just because it’s really hard to pull off an awards show during a pandemic (let alone one with an open bar). There are bigger structural reasons, and the HFPA hasn’t managed to outrun them yet.
<figure class="e-image"><picture class="c-picture" data-cid="site/picture_element-1641339320_1996_88851" data-cdata='{"asset_id":23144596,"ratio":"*"}'><source srcset="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/x361XCipSMObImD1R3MhBYfzmjE=/0x0:4360x2790/320x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/B0JTaAUz84gUKYv4yT8QGPEl7ME=/0x0:4360x2790/520x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/flP6jHwnmwq7g9chodX4AZFnGuw=/0x0:4360x2790/720x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/8CNQ4puD3dfX77uCau0Ea_q1XCo=/0x0:4360x2790/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 920w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/7gzfRrDKu2tSHhOvIwLPfERvPEM=/0x0:4360x2790/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 1120w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/rsbbpyO1Smfiz-1IXAGrs5l277Y=/0x0:4360x2790/1320x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 1320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/cTz8m2eiWyX3b3AJxxMH4m6yi00=/0x0:4360x2790/1520x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 1520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/jFfUp1TN2t90bMduYK_s9RkxBfw=/0x0:4360x2790/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 1720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Iyx6xbs_ldFMythDP6fxn0qaC3Y=/0x0:4360x2790/1920x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 1920w" sizes="(min-width: 1221px) 846px, (min-width: 880px) calc(100vw - 334px), 100vw" type="image/webp" /> <img alt="An image of the boarded-up door of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association’s building, with the name above the doors." data-upload-width="4360" sizes="(min-width: 1221px) 846px, (min-width: 880px) calc(100vw - 334px), 100vw" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/0RzPRrgg0h7QEZPIbsoROT3hc2Y=/0x0:4360x2790/1200x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg" srcset="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/-6V5ahZcyUuWor6fSQ8igNdkwM0=/0x0:4360x2790/320x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/YH0NnIehuxjphSTHuYKtLF4Yy7Y=/0x0:4360x2790/520x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Wl3y43Qasw2Q8faCuRkUN8kKVhY=/0x0:4360x2790/720x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/e-DD-DpxkEh1QHSnHwZEGcqaSzI=/0x0:4360x2790/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 920w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/uBSz8uw1lZoNz7lx2uI2wNezobc=/0x0:4360x2790/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 1120w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/mSaDuMYUp-3Fcawa00WlTb-k71c=/0x0:4360x2790/1320x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 1320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/pe3lD9g2vCNVBv8qvFNzhIZjMQA=/0x0:4360x2790/1520x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 1520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/ynrGrViB8ug4FuA4EI79HmTYgxA=/0x0:4360x2790/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 1720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/aK_myrAsJNV0Bm4CUs5xhIwEW5Q=/0x0:4360x2790/1920x0/filters:focal(0x0:4360x2790):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144596/1232826411.jpg 1920w" /></picture>
<figcaption>The Hollywood Foreign Press Association hands out the Golden Globes — but this year the organization has been in turmoil.</figcaption>
<cite>Valerie Macon/AFP via Getty Images</cite></figure>
First of all, the HFPA — which normally averages around 90 members, all of whom are supposed to be LA-based journalists who write about the movie business for non-US outlets — doesn’t publish its membership list. Various efforts by journalistic outlets, like <a href="https://www.vulture.com/2015/01/who-exactly-picks-the-golden-globes-winners.html">Vulture in 2015</a> and <a href="https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-02-21/hfpa-golden-globes-2021-who-are-the-members">the LA Times in 2021</a>, have revealed that while some HFPA members are journalists, others are actors, producers, and socialites.
The <a href="https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-02-21/hfpa-golden-globes-2021-who-are-the-members">two</a> <a href="http://latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-02-21/hfpa-golden-globes-2021">articles</a> that composed the LA Times’s investigation into the organization’s membership and dealings, published a week before last year’s Globes were set to air, were bombshells with lasting consequences for the group. Among the revelations:
<ul>
<li>There were no Black members in the group.</li>
<li>Some members were described by insiders as fractious and unprofessional: “Those who have interacted with the organization describe members falling asleep during screenings, hurling insults at one another during news conferences, and frequently engaging in personal feuds.”</li>
<li>The story described a system of kickbacks and internal payments made from the organization to members.</li>
<li>It’s been an open secret that HFPA members are wined and dined and plied with gifts by studios seeking nominations and votes for their shows and films, but the story described this in far more detail. One revelation involved the Paramount Network, the producers of Netflix’s Emily in Paris, which treated 30 HFPA members to a trip to Paris with two nights at a $1,400-a-night hotel. The show was nominated for two Golden Globes.</li>
</ul>
The investigation gestured toward one big conclusion: The HFPA was corrupt, outdated, and past its relevance. Its members had long benefited from the (<a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/1/9/14207138/golden-globes-predict-oscars-academy-awards-2021">only half-true</a>) perception that the Golden Globes “predict” the Oscars; in truth, the show is most useful as a dry run for acceptance speeches for Oscar hopefuls. But that time might be coming to an end.
As often happens in Hollywood, a powerful person or group is only as strong as its last headline. Most of the ensuing ruckus targeted the organization’s lack of diversity among its members. Two days before the ceremony, <a href="https://twitter.com/TIMESUPNOW/status/1365394230332563461?s=20">Time’s Up announced a protest</a>. Poehler and Fey made some pointed jokes in their monologue, and in a short segment during the broadcast, HFPA vice president Helen Hoehne, flanked by current and former HFPA presidents, announced that “Black representation is vital” and “we must have Black journalists in our organization.”
About a week later, on March 6, <a href="https://twitter.com/goldenglobes/status/1368387355975897093?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1368387355975897093%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indiewire.com%2F2021%2F03%2Fgolden-globes-hfpa-diversity-times-up-1234621788%2F">the HFPA released a mea culpa statement</a> promising to engage in a series of activities aimed at broadening the membership and increasing its diversity, increasing transparency in their operations and voting methods, and examining their practices for ethical violations. They announced these actions would take place within the next 60 days.
<a href="https://twitter.com/ava/status/1368393713861332992?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1368393713861332992%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indiewire.com%2F2021%2F03%2Fgolden-globes-hfpa-diversity-times-up-1234621788%2F">Not everyone was convinced</a>, and in mid-March <a href="https://www.indiewire.com/2021/03/pr-firms-pressure-hollywood-foreign-press-association-reform-1234623875/">more than 100 publicity agencies</a> circulated a letter denying the HFPA access to their clients if reforms did not take place. The same day, the HFPA pledged to add 13 Black members to their membership.
A month later, on April 18, problems flared again when former eight-term HFPA president Philip Berk sent an email that, <a href="https://deadline.com/2021/04/how-many-more-chances-hfpa-nbcuniversal-changes-golden-globes-1234740137/">according to Deadline’s summary</a> of <a href="https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-04-19/former-hfpa-president-faces-a-backlash-over-email-calling-black-lives-matter-a-hate-movement">the LA Times story</a>, “declared Black Lives Matter is a ‘racist hate movement.’” NBC issued a statement on April 20 declaring that Berk should be expelled and that “swift action on this front is an essential element for NBC to move forward with the HFPA and the Golden Globes.” Additionally, MRC, which owns Dick Clark Productions (the company that produces the Globes for NBC), issued a statement, which said that they were “deeply disappointed by this latest development” and that “meaningful change” and a “clear, actionable roadmap” must be included in the May 6 plan. Berk was expelled the same day, but that day the HFPA’s crisis communications firm and diversity consultant also quit — not a great sign.
On May 3, the HFPA <a href="https://variety.com/2021/film/news/golden-globes-diversity-crisis-hfpa-1234965482/">announced its intentions to increase its membership</a>, while specifically recruiting Black members and others from underrepresented groups. But it seems a number of Hollywood insiders and the organization’s TV partner were unsatisfied. On May 7, Netflix announced it would boycott the Golden Globes; a number of A-list celebrities, as well as Amazon Studios, soon followed. Tom Cruise <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57065562#:~:text=Tom%20Cruise%20has%20handed%20back,broadcast%20the%20ceremony%20next%20year.">returned his three Golden Globes</a>.
And on May 10, NBC, which pays millions of dollars for the Globes’ broadcast rights, <a href="https://variety.com/2021/tv/awards/golden-globes-nbc-2022-1234969976/">announced it wouldn’t air the ceremony in 2022</a>. “A change of this magnitude takes time and work,” the network announced, “and we feel strongly that the HFPA needs time to do it right.” NBC suggested that if reforms were sufficiently instituted, the Golden Globes would be back on TV in 2023.
Things have continued to move in the months since. In August, <a href="https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/golden-globes-hollywood-foreign-press-association-bylaws-election-1235035432/">the HFPA voted on new bylaws</a>, which among other things removed the Southern California residency requirement and forbade members from accepting promotional materials and gifts from studios or publicists. NBC said it was a “positive step forward.” And in October, <a href="https://www.indiewire.com/2021/10/new-hollywood-foreign-press-association-105-1234668670/">the organization announced 21 new members</a>, including six Black members.
But the show isn’t returning, or at least, it seems, not this year. Given the rise of Covid-19 cases in recent weeks, it’s possible that may be a boon to the organization, which won’t have to navigate tricky protocols. I reached out on Monday to the HFPA regarding any plans for this weekend’s awards, and a publicist said they’d “have more to share this week.” On Tuesday afternoon, a publicist sent out a press release confirming that the awards would take place at the Beverly Hilton on Sunday, but would not have an audience, and only “select members and grantees” would be permitted to attend. There was no indication that the show would be broadcast, and earlier in the day, Variety <a href="https://variety.com/2022/film/columns/golden-globes-no-celebrity-presenters-1235146563/">broke the news</a> that no celebrities had agreed to present the awards.
But questions about the show itself are kind of beside the point. If you’ve spent enough time observing Hollywood’s machinations, it’s hard not to be cynical about all of these protests and changes. After all, the general composition of the HFPA has been known for years, as has their (now hopefully former) proclivity to accept lavish gifts, which aren’t technically payment for votes but certainly can’t hurt. Publicists and studios — the very entities that courted the HFPA members — surely knew about all of this ahead of time. And despite the public declarations of boycotts, <a href="https://puck.news/news_brief/how-studios-are-subverting-the-golden-globes-boycott/?gclid=Cj0KCQiA2sqOBhCGARIsAPuPK0j9qn3mpYMybK8ADqZTsZ03fyc9vjpbnUfNSpH1PQEq8euo1o0PPpMaAoN2EALw_wcB">there have been reports</a> that the studios have been privately finding ways to reach out to HFPA members anyway.
The viewing numbers for the Golden Globes have dipped precipitously over the past decade, too, as have those of virtually all awards and live TV events (<a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/216526/super-bowl-us-tv-viewership/">including the Super Bowl</a>). According to the LA Times, NBC’s fee to broadcast the show had “ballooned” in recent years: In the previous fiscal year, the network had paid $27.4 million, up from $3.64 million in fiscal year 2016-17. Dipping viewership (which translates to dipping ad revenue) and ballooning costs are not a great business decision for NBC, which also has the Olympics to worry about this year. One has to wonder if the network is contemplating its options going forward.
<figure class="e-image"><picture class="c-picture" data-cid="site/picture_element-1641339320_243_88852" data-cdata='{"asset_id":23144587,"ratio":"*"}'><source srcset="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/7BTll2Dogt2VCcDCvbWCG3BNt8Y=/0x0:5568x3712/320x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/XsT-iAm4LogYcrXl_sBJO1xJtBQ=/0x0:5568x3712/520x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/73YbN1iz_dkKtEq7b-6uRuMPZ7E=/0x0:5568x3712/720x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/lFU4U2jZrLhmXI5e3NjWLT21-kE=/0x0:5568x3712/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 920w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/BQZBo4trep2EiVoOlZO1e0BrK60=/0x0:5568x3712/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 1120w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/45XpnFaAdQP5omY0ydOYPKpmSQo=/0x0:5568x3712/1320x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 1320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/uWUYfIUPvxJw_vUGT-8zUvxcRoc=/0x0:5568x3712/1520x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 1520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/K1r449ItZhln7YqyfSxFos7N77U=/0x0:5568x3712/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 1720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/TYdanfeHasl93oshntPQDZRQ6Fs=/0x0:5568x3712/1920x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 1920w" sizes="(min-width: 1221px) 846px, (min-width: 880px) calc(100vw - 334px), 100vw" type="image/webp" /> <img alt="78th Annual Golden Globe® Awards: Show" data-upload-width="5568" sizes="(min-width: 1221px) 846px, (min-width: 880px) calc(100vw - 334px), 100vw" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Fcu1YFfL3-oWv7fLpvsmHGqKESg=/0x0:5568x3712/1200x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg" srcset="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/nMglcoN0ipfjOFpvd4b8IGd5SPE=/0x0:5568x3712/320x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/KKaFrD5tI0wieBVmtYNYS93OqxE=/0x0:5568x3712/520x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/D5CcVA8VEF3MW8d7OKjMozAc2LU=/0x0:5568x3712/720x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/IABP-33OiyXjsa5yf_UvSxpUBCI=/0x0:5568x3712/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 920w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/1M_vCbkPyfZ9MwpSL_7oSRbeLKI=/0x0:5568x3712/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 1120w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/ejtw4w_7z1TdIk_Em7wvy3PBV9k=/0x0:5568x3712/1320x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 1320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/bi2ooLkL4DsLRclMkh1xktzgIY4=/0x0:5568x3712/1520x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 1520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Dej43ScbbdH27ZFSvOobrD29Bws=/0x0:5568x3712/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 1720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/QLfIf_-WaSL90i6ycWH2TTO0nkc=/0x0:5568x3712/1920x0/filters:focal(0x0:5568x3712):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144587/1304637134.jpg 1920w" /></picture>
<figcaption>The 2021 ceremony was weird.</figcaption>
<cite>Kevin Mazur/Getty Images for Hollywood Foreign Press Association</cite></figure>
And no wonder. The list of nominees <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/13/movies/golden-globes-nominees-list.html">is relatively strong</a> — this season’s big contenders like The Power of the Dog, Belfast, and West Side Story appear alongside outsiders like CODA and Annette, plus there are TV nominations — but it’s hard to imagine most average viewers seeing any need to spend their Sunday night tuned into a TV show where an organization they vaguely remember being embattled gives out awards to people in real time. Any exciting bits or provocative speeches will end up on YouTube tomorrow, or even moments after they happen. The case to viewers is increasingly hard to make.
And, in fact, the Critics’ Choice Awards smelled blood in the water, announcing that their own awards show (voted on by a membership that numbers around 450), hosted by Taye Diggs and Nicole Byer, would be broadcast on the CW on the same day as the Golden Globes. (They’ve since postponed for pandemic reasons.)
Plenty of critics’ groups and industry groups don’t have a televised broadcast. (I belong to two of them!) But without the broadcast, the HFPA’s source of income is cut off, and that puts the organization — whose prominence has never really been in line with their actual industry influence as journalists — in a precarious position.
Just prior to last year’s event, I proposed that we <a href="https://www.vox.com/22301883/golden-globes-2021-bad-corrupt-emily-paris-music-minari">stop caring about the Globes</a>. After last year’s event, my colleague Emily VanDerWerff and I argued that the Globes were <a href="https://www.vox.com/22306479/golden-globes-2021-winners-losers">no longer needed</a>. But the past year has made me wonder if there will even be a Golden Globes in the future, and whether that’s just a foretaste of Hollywood’s shifting awards landscape.
 
 
source <a href="https://www.vox.com/22866782/golden-globes-2022-watch-hfpa-controversy">https://www.vox.com/22866782/golden-globes-2022-watch-hfpa-controversy</a>

vox The Golden Globes are this weekend, but they won’t be on TV

Guess what? The Golden Globes are this weekend! If that’s totally new information to you, then you’re far from alone. In the past, the Gold...

Marjorie Taylor Greene and Big Tech’s never-ending censorship loop

<div><img class="ff-og-image-inserted" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/DNkABGINfqXmaM4zZg6zmu2Acf0=/0x506:4976x3111/fit-in/1200x630/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23145160/AP21341833772594.jpg" /></div>
It’s not exactly surprising that Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) — a politician who’s built her career by promoting viral conspiracy <a href="https://www.vox.com/22254103/marjorie-taylor-greene-david-hogg-obama-hillary-facebook-posts">theories like QAnon</a> — was <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/02/politics/marjorie-taylor-greene-twitter-suspension/index.html">suspended on Sunday from Twitter</a> <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/03/technology/facebook-marjorie-taylor-greene.html">and on Monday from Facebook</a> for posting misinformation about Covid-19 vaccines.
It’s equally unsurprising that Greene and her supporters reacted by <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/03/technology/facebook-marjorie-taylor-greene.html">accusing Twitter and Facebook of censoring her</a> for her political beliefs, rather than for making repeated false statements <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/19/technology/marjorie-taylor-greene-twitter.html">denying the harms of Covid-19</a> and the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/10/technology/twitter-suspends-marjorie-taylor-greene.html">effectiveness of vaccines</a>.
But Marjorie Taylor Greene’s suspension from social media resurfaces a question ahead of the anniversary of the January 6 Capitol riot and the 2022 midterm election cycle: How will social media companies deal with the oncoming onslaught of contentious speech from elected officials and political candidates running for office this year?
“I haven’t seen or heard anything about how [social media companies] are planning on handling it,” said Katie Harbath, a director of public policy at Facebook from 2011 to March of last year who now leads a tech policy consultancy firm. “From what I’ve seen, they wait until something’s at their front door that they have to decide on. I’m just really worried.”
In 2019 and 2020, the world was caught up in a fierce debate about whether or not tech companies should intervene when politicians like former President Donald Trump used social media to broadcast <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/covid-misinformation-is-killing-people1/">harmful misinformation</a> or encourage violence. That debate peaked around the January 6 riot and Trump’s subsequent ban from the sites. Prior to that, Facebook and Twitter had let Trump and other world leaders get away with breaking their rules because their speech was largely <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/22233450/trump-twitter-facebook-ban-world-leader-rules-exception">deemed “newsworthy”</a> — but they retreated from that position with the Trump ban. It was a controversial but justifiable move in the view of Facebook and Twitter, given the imminent violent threat to US democracy.
But for the past several months, there hasn’t been much movement on the topic of social media platforms’ approach to moderating politicians’ speech. Facebook <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/2021/6/4/22519076/trump-facebook-two-years-oversight-board">kicked the can down the road</a> until 2023 about whether or not Trump will be allowed back on its platform. Twitter is still in the process of crafting a new policy about <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/19/22340643/twitter-public-survey-world-leader-rules-enforcement">how it should police world leaders</a>, which it says it expects to roll out in the coming months.
Now, Greene’s situation is a reminder that whether or not social media companies are ready for it, the debate about how politicians should be allowed to use social media is reigniting. And it’s happening in a political climate that’s highly <a href="https://www.brown.edu/news/2020-01-21/polarization">polarized</a> and <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/21546119/trump-conspiracy-theories-election-2020-coronavirus-voting-vote-by-mail">conspiracy-theory-driven</a>.
Much like her political ally, Trump, Greene has built a career around making bombastic, inflammatory, and false statements on social media.
Before her recent suspension, Greene had already accumulated four “strikes” from Twitter for posting Covid-19 misinformation, and a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/19/technology/marjorie-taylor-greene-twitter.html">12-hour suspension in July</a>. Her fifth strike, which triggered her permanent suspension, was a post including the false statement that “extremely high amounts of Covid vaccine deaths are ignored.” Greene posted a similar message on Facebook, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/03/technology/facebook-marjorie-taylor-greene.html">which responded with a 24-hour account suspension on Monday</a>.
While Twitter permanently banned Greene’s personal account, she still has access to Twitter through her official congressional Twitter account that has nearly 400,000 followers. She’s now actively fundraising for <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-emergency-contributions-fight-twitter-ban-2022-1">“emergency contributions” to her political campaign</a> to fight “Big Tech censorship.”
Greene, like some other far-right and conservative figures who have been banned from mainstream social media, has turned to the social media app Telegram — which has <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/22238755/telegram-messaging-social-media-extremists">more lax content moderation and encrypted chat</a> — to reach her followers. “Twitter is an enemy to America and can’t handle the truth,” Greene said in a post on Telegram in response to Twitter’s suspension. “That’s fine, I’ll show America we don’t need them and it’s time to defeat our enemies.”
On Monday, Republican House leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) <a href="https://www.republicanleader.gov/leader-mccarthy-statement-on-twitters-continued-efforts-to-silence-americans/">made a public statement that didn’t reference Greene</a> by name but seemed to be referring to her case, urging for <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/5/28/21273241/section-230-explained-trump-social-media-twitter-facebook">a landmark internet law called Section 230</a> to be changed so that tech companies can be held legally liable for their content moderation decisions.
Today, under <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/why-trump-bans-from-twitter-facebook-dont-violate-first-amendment-2021-1">First Amendment law</a>, companies like Facebook and Twitter are considered private actors that are well within their legal rights to ban whoever they want. That includes those like Greene who have repeatedly violated their stated terms of service.
But legality aside, there is widespread concern about how much influence private corporations like Facebook and Twitter should have in politics. Facebook and Twitter have shirked the responsibility to weigh in on political matters, with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg saying that the company <a href="https://www.marketwatch.com/story/facebook-shouldnt-be-the-arbiter-of-truth-zuckerberg-tells-fox-news-2020-05-27">shouldn’t be an “arbiter of truth”</a> and Twitter founder and former CEO Jack Dorsey making <a href="https://twitter.com/jack/status/651003891153108997">freedom of expression</a> a central tenet of the company’s philosophy. But despite these companies’ reluctance to make judgment calls on political speech, the reality is that both companies continue to have to deal with these issues every day by virtue of having people discuss politics on their platform. And that opens them up to criticism and accusations of censorship.
“Private companies have so much power. There are only a few platforms — and Twitter and Facebook are two of them — that control so much of the public discourse,” said Gautam Hans, a professor at Vanderbilt Law School who specializes in First Amendment law and technology policy. “I think that makes all of us a little uncomfortable.”
In some ways, Greene’s case around breaking social media rules was clear-cut because it was about Covid-19, an issue that Facebook and Twitter have been stricter about moderating since the pandemic began in early 2020.
But when it comes to other topics like <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/why-trump-bans-from-twitter-facebook-dont-violate-first-amendment-2021-1">Trump’s “Big Lie” false narrative</a> about the 2020 election being stolen from him, or whether the January 6 Capitol riot was justified, social media’s guidelines for what is and isn’t acceptable are a lot more ambiguous.
Around the time of the 2020 presidential election, for example, Twitter and Facebook increased their efforts to police voter misinformation. The companies regularly labeled or removed information that made false claims about voter fraud or the election being rigged.
But now, one year later, it’s unclear exactly how those standards might change, particularly as many <a href="https://time.com/6112488/trump-2020-election-republicans/">Republican members of Congress and candidates continue to support “The Big Lie.”</a>
In the time period immediately after the Capitol riot, social media platforms also employed urgent measures to try to minimize the glorification of the violence that occurred. Facebook, for example, issued an emergency policy to remove any praise of the storming of the Capitol, or calls to bring weapons to locations anywhere in the US.
Facebook did not respond to a question about whether those measures are still in place on the one-year anniversary of the event, when some <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/house/587924-4-in-10-republican-voters-approve-of-jan-6-panel-survey-finds">34 percent of Americans</a> believe that violent action against the government is sometimes justified, according to recent polling.
Facebook Vice President of Content Policy Monika Bickert said on a November call that the company is “taking steps to combat election interference and misinformation while also working to help people vote,” but she provided few details about any potential new plans.
“We’re enforcing our policies against removing voter interference content and we’ll continue to refine our strategy to combat content that discusses the legitimacy of voting methods, like voter fraud claims,” Bickert said on that call. “And this is all building on our efforts during the US 2020 elections and we’ll have more to share as we get closer to next year’s elections.”
A company spokesperson for Twitter sent the following statement to Recode on Tuesday:
<blockquote>
Our approach both before and after January 6 has been to take strong enforcement action against accounts and Tweets that incite violence or have the potential to lead to offline harm. Engagement and focus across government, civil society, and the private sector are also critical. We recognize that Twitter has an important role to play, and we’re committed to doing our part.
</blockquote>
There’s a long way that Facebook and Twitter could go to make their policies on politicians’ speech more clear. But even then, the problem around the complicated boundaries of political speech won’t be entirely resolved.
“You can have all the clear rules and guidelines,” said Hans. “But fundamentally, there’s always some human discretion that comes into this, and that’s a little disconcerting.”
<hr class="p-entry-hr" />
Correction, January 4, 5:12 pm ET: A previous version of this story referred to Greene as a nationally elected politician. She is a national politician elected by the citizens of Georgia.
 
 
source <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/22867140/marjorie-taylor-greene-facebook-twitter-suspension-big-tech-content-moderation">https://www.vox.com/recode/22867140/marjorie-taylor-greene-facebook-twitter-suspension-big-tech-content-moderation</a>

vox Marjorie Taylor Greene and Big Tech’s never-ending censorship loop

It’s not exactly surprising that Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) — a politician who’s built her career by promoting viral conspiracy the...

The Elizabeth Holmes saga is far from over

<div><img class="ff-og-image-inserted" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/e4uP6O4OzOyaBtA9BK1KAn1vBAQ=/0x0:5000x2618/fit-in/1200x630/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23145411/GettyImages_1237527316.jpg" /></div>
Elizabeth Holmes’s trial is finally over, but that doesn’t mean her time in the spotlight is finished. After months of arguments and seven days of deliberation, jurors <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/01/03/technology/elizabeth-holmes-trial-verdict">convicted</a> the former Theranos CEO on four of 11 counts of conspiracy and fraud. Now, as Holmes awaits her final sentence, Hollywood is producing its own versions of the former CEO’s story.
Some say the Holmes trial represents an indictment of Silicon Valley’s “fake it till you make it” <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jan/04/elizabeth-holmes-verdict-analysis">approach</a>, and indeed, criminal cases — let alone guilty verdicts — against tech leaders are a rare occurrence. Upcoming productions from Hulu and Apple, however, may soon deliver the real reckoning. These dramatic retellings of the Theranos saga could define how the world comes to understand Holmes and the Silicon Valley culture that gave rise to her.
On the legal front, Holmes’s fate is not yet sealed. The jury found the 37-year-old former CEO guilty on one count of conspiracy to defraud investors and three counts of wire fraud. But while the jurors found Holmes not guilty on one count of conspiracy to defraud patients and three counts of wire fraud related to patients, they remained deadlocked on three other fraud counts related to misleading investors. Presiding Judge Edward Davila <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/03/technology/elizabeth-holmes-guilty.html">plans to declare</a> a mistrial for those undecided charges.
Federal prosecutors will also have to decide <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/03/technology/elizabeth-holmes-conviction-appeal.html">whether to pursue</a> a new trial for those three unresolved charges, and the defense will likely appeal the guilty verdicts. Holmes faces fines of up to $250,000 for each count (plus restitution) and a maximum of 20 years in prison. It will likely take <a href="https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/elizabeth-holmes-trial-theranos/card/ManylRlZhDvfIUtywzSd">months</a> for the judge to decide on Holmes’s sentence, and there is <a href="https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/elizabeth-holmes-trial-theranos/card/ManylRlZhDvfIUtywzSd#:~:text=There%20is%20no%20mandatory%20minimum,a%20maximum%20of%2020%20years.&text=From%20there%2C%20Ms.%20Holmes%20can,an%20appeal%20of%20her%20conviction.">no mandatory minimum sentence</a>. So it’s possible Holmes won’t go to prison at all.
But inevitably, Holmes will face the court of public opinion.
As the tech industry continues its yearslong effort to treat <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/22665179/silicon-valley-theranos-elizabeth-holmes-covid-tests">Holmes as an aberration</a>, the entertainment business is just getting started. The projects from Hulu and Apple — Amanda Seyfried and Jennifer Lawrence, respectively, will play Holmes — plan to deliver a referendum on what went wrong at Theranos, and stand to shape how the public remembers Holmes and her company in ways her camera-free trial never could.
Silicon Valley cast off Elizabeth Holmes not long after news broke about the Theranos technology not working. Tech industry leaders then <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/22665179/silicon-valley-theranos-elizabeth-holmes-covid-tests">argued</a> for years that the blood-testing startup did not follow their approach. They pointed out that Theranos was largely funded by private investors, not major venture capital firms, and that the company didn’t include prominent biotech experts on its board.
This argument doesn’t entirely hold up. Holmes did have support from some prominent tech investors, including <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/04/technology/elizabeth-holmes-verdict.html">venture capitalist Don Lucas and Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison</a>. Often dressing in a uniform black turtleneck and embracing her status as a college dropout-turned-founder, Holmes also welcomed comparison to Silicon Valley royalty, like Steve Jobs and Mark Zuckerberg. Even throughout the trial, Holmes’s lawyers tried to defend Theranos’s misleading claims about its blood-testing technology as <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/04/technology/elizabeth-holmes-verdict.html?referringSource=articleShare">par for the course</a> in the startup world.
“Holmes’s alleged fraud was really a symptom of much broader root causes that promoted her actions, and she’s not alone,” Len Sherman, a business professor at Columbia and former Accenture senior partner, told Recode. “That just happens to be the extreme case that got to trial and is garnering — hopefully — a lot of attention.”
Silicon Valley might try to draw attention away from the Theranos story, but Hollywood is putting a spotlight on it. Since the Wall Street Journal <a href="https://www.vox.com/2018/5/21/17374596/john-carreyrou-bad-blood-book-theranos-elizabeth-holmes-apple-steve-jobs-kara-swisher-decode-podcast">first sounded the alarm</a> on the accuracy of the company’s blood tests in 2015, several documentaries have investigated what went wrong at Theranos. These include the Alex Gibney-directed HBO documentary <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/3/15/18263903/theranos-elizabeth-holmes-documentary-dropout-inventor-podcast">The Inventor</a> and ABC’s investigative podcast The Dropout.
Big-budget streaming series and feature films are next. Hulu is releasing a new miniseries <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/15/22838297/hulu-amanda-seyfried-elizabeth-holmes-theranos">based on the ABC podcast</a> in March — it’s also called The Dropout — and has already released <a href="https://screenrant.com/dropout-amanda-seyfriend-elizabeth-holmes-show-images/">images of Seyfried</a> as Holmes. And though it has not announced a release date, Apple <a href="https://deadline.com/2021/12/theranos-movie-jennifer-lawrence-adam-mckay-elizabeth-holmes-apple-dont-look-up-reteam-1234886185/">recently confirmed</a> it will be backing and distributing a Theranos movie directed by Adam McKay and starring Jennifer Lawrence. It’s called Bad Blood, and is based on the eponymous book by John Carreyrou, the Wall Street Journal investigative reporter who first reported on Theranos’s faulty technology.
Cameras <a href="https://www.cnet.com/how-to/theranos-trial-elizabeth-holmes-takes-stand-prosecution-rests/">were not allowed</a> in the courtroom at Elizabeth Holmes’s trial, which means <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/3/15/18263903/theranos-elizabeth-holmes-documentary-dropout-inventor-podcast">these documentaries</a>, TV series, and films will continue to be the primary way people watch (rather than read about) Theranos. But these treatments will also become a chance for the public to decide what it thinks about Holmes and her company, according to Dan Birman, a documentary director and professor at the University of Southern California.
“When we get into a major story like this, it’s a constant sorting process that will happen over time,” Birman said. “That’s what history does.”
Theranos isn’t the only disgraced tech company getting the streaming treatment. Next month, Showtime will release a series called Super Pumped: The Battle for Uber, which stars Joseph Gordon-Levitt as <a href="https://www.theverge.com/entertainment/2021/12/23/22851481/uber-showtime-series-super-pumped-trailer-joseph-gordon-levitt">Uber’s co-founder and former CEO Travis Kalanick</a>. Apple is similarly working on a limited series called WeCrashed <a href="https://www.apple.com/tv-pr/news/2021/01/apple-tv-orders-wecrashed-new-limited-series-starring-oscar-golden-globe-and-sag-award-winners-jared-leto-and-anne-hathaway/">about the rise and fall of WeWork</a>, in which Jared Leto will star as the company’s former CEO, Adam Neumann, and Anne Hathaway will play his wife, Rebekah Neumann.
You might even say that taking shots at Silicon Valley founders is becoming a bit of a Hollywood tradition. These projects follow in the footsteps of the 2010 blockbuster about the founding of Facebook, The Social Network, with Jesse Eisenberg playing a sinister Mark Zuckerberg. There were also two films about Steve Jobs: the 2015 drama written by Sorkin, starring Michael Fassbender as the Apple founder, and the 2013 biopic, starring Ashton Kutcher. None of these movies offer flattering portrayals of the tech titans.
In the meantime, there are even more Theranos courtroom scenes that have yet to be written. A separate trial that centers on Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, Theranos’s former chief technology officer and Holmes’s ex-boyfriend, is scheduled to <a href="https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2021/12/14/trial-for-theranos-ex-president-balwani-delayed.html">begin on February 15</a>. Balwani is also charged with defrauding patients and investors, but his case was separated from Holmes’s because her lawyers <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/29/elizabeth-holmes-theranos-balwani-523496#:~:text=Legal-,Elizabeth%20Holmes%20accuses%20former%20lover%2C%20business%20partner%20of%20abuse,the%20onus%20on%20Sunny%20Balwani.&text=SAN%20JOSE%2C%20Calif.,-%E2%80%94%20Disgraced%20entrepreneur%20Elizabeth&text=A%20weeping%20Holmes%2C%20now%2037,subservience%20to%20Balwani%2C%20now%2056.">expected to accuse him</a> of abuse as part of her defense. His upcoming case is a reminder that the story of Theranos never seems to end.
 
 
source <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/22867202/elizabeth-holmes-theranos-trial-hulu-apple">https://www.vox.com/recode/22867202/elizabeth-holmes-theranos-trial-hulu-apple</a>

vox The Elizabeth Holmes saga is far from over

Elizabeth Holmes’s trial is finally over, but that doesn’t mean her time in the spotlight is finished. After months of arguments and seven ...

A partisan judge just gave Navy SEALs permission to defy a direct order

<div><img class="ff-og-image-inserted" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/wlEjdUffNOMhj0K-Y9tp6EkVw7Y=/0x223:5184x2937/fit-in/1200x630/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23144619/1237352421.jpg" /></div>
One of the most well-settled principles of US national security law is that courts give tremendous deference to the military’s decisions regarding how to maintain discipline among its own personnel. “The essence of military service,” the Court held in <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/475/503">Goldman v. Weinberger</a> (1986), “is the subordination of the desires and interests of the individual to the needs of the service.” Servicemembers voluntarily give up some of their constitutional rights when they choose to join the armed services.
And yet, on Monday, a notoriously partisan federal judge in Texas thumbed his nose at decades of law and Supreme Court precedents, holding that members of the military may refuse an order to take the Covid-19 vaccination if they object to it on religious grounds. In a brief order in <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.355696/gov.uscourts.txnd.355696.66.0_3.pdf">US Navy SEALs 1-26 v. Biden</a>, US District Court Judge Reed O’Connor claims that a policy requiring nearly all servicemembers to be vaccinated against Covid-19 violates both the First Amendment and a federal religious liberty statute.
The plaintiffs in the SEALs case are <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.355696/gov.uscourts.txnd.355696.12.0.pdf">represented by the America First Policy Institute</a>, a young policy shop led by former Trump administration officials and other former consiglieri to the ex-president.
O’Connor, a former <a href="https://www.vox.com/2021/4/2/22360341/obamacare-lawsuit-supreme-cour">Republican Capitol Hill staffer</a>, is probably best known for his failed effort to repeal Obamacare in its entirety. Although O’Connor attempted to strike down the landmark health law in 2018, his decision was widely mocked <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/12/18/20858157/fifth-circuit-obamacare-texas-united-states">even by prominent conservative opponents of Obamacare</a>. He was eventually <a href="https://www.vox.com/2021/6/17/22538462/supreme-court-obamacare-california-texas-stephen-breyer-standing-individual-mandate-constitution">reversed by the Supreme Court</a> in an opinion joined by four of the Court’s Republican appointees.
O’Connor’s SEALs opinion isn’t just wrong under established precedent, it is egregiously wrong. It’s also weakly argued. He spends less than six pages discussing the core issue in the case — whether the military’s vaccination policy must include exemptions for personnel with religious objections — and does not even acknowledge Supreme Court cases that directly refute his analysis, including the Goldman decision mentioned above.
Under ordinary circumstances, O’Connor would be swiftly reversed. But his decision will be appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, a court dominated by Donald Trump appointees and other hardline conservatives who <a href="https://www.vox.com/22770305/biden-vaccine-mandate-workplace-osha-supreme-court">share many of O’Connor’s sensibilities</a>.
Should this case reach the Supreme Court, its fate is unclear. The Court’s Republican majority is typically quite <a href="https://www.vox.com/2020/12/2/21726876/supreme-court-religious-liberty-revolutionary-roman-catholic-diocese-cuomo-amy-coney-barrett">sympathetic to cases brought by religious conservatives</a>, although the Court has also <a href="https://www.vox.com/2021/12/22/22848155/supreme-court-vaccine-mandate-osha-cms-covid-joe-biden">rejected several requests</a> from health care workers seeking religious exemptions from vaccination requirements.
And it is equally unclear whether the Supreme Court’s 6-3 conservative majority will honor its own precedents urging the judiciary to defer to an elected branch led by President Joe Biden.
The Supreme Court has long held that courts typically should defer to the elected branches on military matters, even if that means individual rights apply with less force to servicemembers.
Under ordinary circumstances, for example, the Court has held that “a party seeking to uphold government action based on sex must establish an ‘<a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1428365285620704265&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr">exceedingly persuasive justification</a>’ for the classification.” But in <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/453/57">Rostker v. Goldberg</a> (1981), the Court permitted the Selective Service System to discriminate against men by requiring them, and not women, to register for the draft.
As the Court explained in Rostker, “it is difficult to conceive of an area of governmental activity in which the courts have less competence” than on questions of military governance. “The complex, subtle, and professional decisions as to the composition, training, equipping, and control of a military force are essentially professional military judgments, subject always to civilian control of the Legislative and Executive Branches.”
This judicial deference to the military sometimes comes at a high price — the same doctrines that require courts to defer to a military vaccination requirement also <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2010/11/12/131273781/supreme-court-won-t-block-don-t-ask-don-t-tell">bolstered discriminatory policies such as Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell</a>. But such deference is also supposed to prevent highly political judges like O’Connor from imposing their preferences on the military.
Indeed, the Supreme Court has specifically held that this deference to the elected branches applies when a servicemember seeks a religious exemption from a military regulation. That was in Goldman, which held that a Jewish officer was <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/475/503">not exempt</a> from an Air Force regulation prohibiting him from wearing a yarmulke — or any other form of head covering while he was indoors.
“Our review of military regulations challenged on First Amendment grounds is far more deferential than constitutional review of similar laws or regulations designed for civilian society,” Justice William Rehnquist wrote for his Court in Goldman. Granting an exemption, Rehnquist warned, would undermine servicemembers’ “habit of immediate compliance with military procedures and orders” — a habit that “must be virtually reflex with no time for debate or reflection.”
Goldman eviscerates the plaintiffs’ First Amendment arguments in the SEALs case, and yet O’Connor does not mention it once in his entire opinion.
I want to emphasize the sheer audacity of this omission. State bars typically impose a duty of “candor toward the tribunal,” which requires lawyers to disclose binding precedents that negate their arguments. The <a href="https://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&ContentID=27271&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm">Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct</a>, for example, provide that “a lawyer shall not knowingly ... fail to disclose to the tribunal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel.”
If a mere lawyer had filed a brief arguing that the military’s Covid-19 vaccination policy violates the First Amendment, but failed to cite the Goldman decision in that brief, that lawyer could face professional discipline or even disbarment. And O’Connor must have known about the Goldman decision because it is <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.355696/gov.uscourts.txnd.355696.43.0_1.pdf">discussed in the government’s brief</a> defending the military policy. Yet he did not even hold himself to the minimal ethical standard demanded of the lawyers who practice in his court.
Nor does O’Connor discuss the Supreme Court’s most recent decision governing religious liberties in the national security context, <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16062632215534775045&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr">Trump v. Hawaii</a> (2018), which held that “‘any rule of constitutional law that would inhibit the flexibility’ of the President ‘to respond to changing world conditions should be adopted only with the greatest caution,’ and our inquiry into matters of entry and national security is highly constrained.”
In fairness, O’Connor determined that the military’s policy violates both the First Amendment and the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), and the Supreme Court’s decision in <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5322529599500468186&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr">Burwell v. Hobby Lobby</a> (2014) does indicate that RFRA sometimes provides more robust protections than the First Amendment does.
But Hobby Lobby was not a national security case — it involved an Obama administration rule requiring most employers to include contraceptive coverage in their employees’ health plans. And O’Connor doesn’t even try to argue that RFRA provides the SEALs plaintiffs with greater protections than they enjoy under the First Amendment. Indeed, he explicitly rejects this claim, writing that “for the same reasons Plaintiffs succeed on their RFRA claim, they also prevail on their First Amendment claim.”
There are obvious downsides to the Supreme Court’s decisions demanding judicial deference to the military — sometimes military personnel raise compelling claims that their individual rights are being denied needlessly. But there’s also a very significant upside to these cases.
The Court’s decisions establishing that the military is “subject always to civilian control of the Legislative and Executive Branches” play an important role in maintaining elected civilian control over the armed forces. Judges should not exercise command over the military for the simple reason that they are not elected, and thus unaccountable to the people if they exercise that command unwisely or maliciously.
I want to be careful not to exaggerate the immediate significance of O’Connor’s opinion. Wrong as it is, it will apply only to a small fraction of servicemembers. The <a href="https://www.army.mil/article/252821/active_army_achieves_98_percent_vaccination_rate_with_less_than_one_percent_refusal_rate">overwhelming majority of servicemembers are vaccinated</a>.
But O’Connor is claiming a power to override lawful orders given to members of the military. And he’s inviting other members of the military to seek out sympathetic judges if they disagree with an elected president’s policies.
Given O’Connor’s highly partisan record, he should not be trusted with that power.
 
 
source <a href="https://www.vox.com/2022/1/4/22866839/supreme-court-covid-vaccination-navy-seals-reed-oconnor-religion-military">https://www.vox.com/2022/1/4/22866839/supreme-court-covid-vaccination-navy-seals-reed-oconnor-religion-military</a>

vox A partisan judge just gave Navy SEALs permission to defy a direct order

One of the most well-settled principles of US national security law is that courts give tremendous deference to the military’s decisions re...

New year, New Dems?

It might be a new year, <a href="https://www.vox.com/22846344/democrats-build-back-better-voting-rights-immigration-manchin">but Democrats are facing a lot of old challenges.</a>
Namely, they still need to agree on their top priorities, even as lawmakers who made that a difficult task last year — <a href="https://www.vox.com/2021/12/19/22845122/manchin-build-back-better-psaki">like Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV)</a> — are poised to continue to do so.
Thus far, resistance from Manchin has meant Democrats <a href="https://www.vox.com/2021/12/19/22844969/manchin-build-back-better-setback-biden-social-spending-bill">struggled to advance everything from their Build Back Better Act</a>, the party’s sweeping social spending and climate bill, to <a href="https://www.vox.com/22736509/freedom-to-vote-act">voting rights.</a> Manchin, and in some cases Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), have repeatedly derailed the social spending legislation, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/03/politics/schumer-filibuster-rules-manchin-sinema/index.html">while also opposing the filibuster reform needed to pass other bills</a> without Republican support. Making any progress on these goals depend heavily on securing both lawmakers’ backing because Democrats possess the slimmest possible Senate majority. (There are other <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-democratic-senators-hiding-behind-joe-manchin">moderate senators who’ve been reluctant to back filibuster changes</a> in the past, though they’ve been less vocal.)
The time lawmakers have to rally behind both these bills and potential rules changes is also running short as the midterm elections — when Democrats are projected to lose the House majority — approach this fall. Historically, the party in power faces blowback during midterm elections; the GOP believes that this trend, combined with economic conditions, redistricting, and strong fundraising will give it the advantage in the coming elections.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has promised votes on both the Build Back Better Act and filibuster reform in the coming weeks. They’re set to expose any continued disagreements within the caucus and highlight how much support both measures actually have. The Build Back Better vote has yet to be scheduled, but the vote on the rules change is expected to happen by January 17 if Republicans filibuster another voting rights bill, as they are expected to do. The rules vote would enable Democrats to support a change or exception to the filibuster to pass voting rights.
“We hope our Republican colleagues change course and work with us,” <a href="https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Dear%20Colleague%201.3.22.pdf">Schumer wrote in a Dear Colleague letter in January</a>. “But if they do not, the Senate will debate and consider changes to Senate rules on or before January 17, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, to protect the foundation of our democracy: free and fair elections.”
<figure class="e-image"><picture class="c-picture" data-cid="site/picture_element-1641339532_2073_70308" data-cdata='{"asset_id":23143163,"ratio":"*"}'><source srcset="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Q00FTVzQevy4OM-awHhOFfZxhZQ=/0x0:5413x3609/320x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/091SWOlFzkDsBacOCjWrDI6Pr64=/0x0:5413x3609/520x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/FEiM4NRS-Bo2uLt1CIeuUQ_vAcI=/0x0:5413x3609/720x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/X2bL4i2JQywlS-JwKD_Pfxr1FW8=/0x0:5413x3609/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 920w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/YZPeou1NLaRiK6xY6LNxBXDd6zY=/0x0:5413x3609/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 1120w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/kd_aVbpuZc1JAUrpxA_c2m4sp_Q=/0x0:5413x3609/1320x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 1320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/gUYqV1rVuCKHFeDffZAWGdw1oP4=/0x0:5413x3609/1520x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 1520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/UWn7AAnGZo2Nlvs9kuXP1SvlSOM=/0x0:5413x3609/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 1720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/BNfLbU_BuGzhztFY48sMigM17UE=/0x0:5413x3609/1920x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 1920w" sizes="(min-width: 1221px) 846px, (min-width: 880px) calc(100vw - 334px), 100vw" type="image/webp" /> <img alt="" data-upload-width="5413" sizes="(min-width: 1221px) 846px, (min-width: 880px) calc(100vw - 334px), 100vw" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/waCrgJqr08GflFm5ghCqNbI4m7I=/0x0:5413x3609/1200x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg" srcset="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/q6P1HyuJUVLrB-oRAl3KLu34k-U=/0x0:5413x3609/320x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/VccMSRAzOITHfuSCqRos1eTnuWo=/0x0:5413x3609/520x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/4YjFMQCH6gJAiWiXi08CunqKJE8=/0x0:5413x3609/720x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/ceVVzf-H1p_nNdGOF3UZugbusPo=/0x0:5413x3609/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 920w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/d3NlcrxoWtxgUpNythiJ4JeqKVE=/0x0:5413x3609/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 1120w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/EObgFzMk7sgIUL0pk2ZvoVLu2-U=/0x0:5413x3609/1320x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 1320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Fse9kFMNSyC9PbW0LLTG0JKQViU=/0x0:5413x3609/1520x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 1520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Y189JXwvOxPKzeyNkKQGa14BUNM=/0x0:5413x3609/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 1720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/r2HYh6MeGKO8jzh_Jh16-k1luJM=/0x0:5413x3609/1920x0/filters:focal(0x0:5413x3609):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143163/GettyImages_1359012818.jpg 1920w" /></picture>
<figcaption>Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer speaks to reporters at the US Capitol on December 14.</figcaption>
<cite>Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images</cite></figure>
Currently, neither Build Back Better nor filibuster reform has the Democratic backing needed to move forward. To make progress on either issue, the party will need to overcome long stalemates.
Democrats are struggling to pass legislation because they’ve had the same internal conflicts for months.
On the Build Back Better Act, <a href="https://www.vox.com/2021/12/19/22845122/manchin-build-back-better-psaki">Democrats still need to win over Manchin</a>. Thus far, they’ve had a hard time proposing a version of the bill that he’s willing to accept. After months of negotiations with Manchin, and the release of a proposal from Biden, Democrats hoped they were close to a deal last winter. But in December, Manchin announced that he wouldn’t be able to support the most recent version of BBB, citing estimated longterm costs of the $1.75 trillion measure and its potential effects on inflation.
“I cannot explain the sweeping Build Back Better Act in West Virginia and I cannot vote to move forward on this mammoth piece of legislation,” <a href="https://www.manchin.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/manchin-statement-on-build-back-better-act">he said in a December statement</a>. He said on Tuesday that he <a href="https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1478410046329532420">hasn’t engaged in negotiations on the bill since then</a>.
But Manchin doesn’t seem to have closed the door completely to <a href="https://twitter.com/ella_nilsen/status/1478423246404042757">some version of the bill</a>. <a href="https://www.axios.com/scoop-manchin-new-play-2cb59ff0-1577-44bf-81a4-a0d72b7e9be2.html">According to an Axios report</a>, Manchin could be open to a bill that eliminates an extension of the expanded child tax credit, or perhaps restricts this benefit more narrowly based on income level. Such cuts are likely to prompt pushback from progressives and other members of the Democratic caucus.
The expanded child tax credit, a landmark Democratic anti-poverty measure which was passed as part of the American Rescue Plan in 2021, is a proposal Manchin has called out repeatedly for its potential longterm costs. Manchin has said he’s against the measure because he believes it will cost far more than estimated if it were extended.
Democrats’ most recent version of the Build Back Better Act cost about $1.75 trillion, roughly within the limits Manchin had requested. But he believes its actual price could wind up being much higher; certain programs like the expanded child tax credit, which are set to sunset after one year, could be renewed by Congress. He argues that if programs set to end in the near term were instead set to expire in 10 years, the costs would be not be covered. And he believes the programs will be renewed due to their popularity.
<figure class="e-image"><picture class="c-picture" data-cid="site/picture_element-1641339532_8376_70309" data-cdata='{"asset_id":23143185,"ratio":"*"}'><source srcset="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/hVbLOcSH68HZGfRU5B_LN5Iiwwk=/0x0:5443x3629/320x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/DM5HmpAoBGvx_RidI7tcuxlTcCw=/0x0:5443x3629/520x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/XqaBUR6fOuc7WeQrBVBufALDAfc=/0x0:5443x3629/720x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/_cSdR8exks2MFHtM6FYr5shaHUI=/0x0:5443x3629/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 920w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/f5_UFtSoG4UP2VuuF9Vi6njthto=/0x0:5443x3629/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 1120w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/JUxvw7jaDBB7j1Ey7Fu5S41L0qY=/0x0:5443x3629/1320x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 1320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/wo_hvLfsNo_Q3YuuBB664O2uGq8=/0x0:5443x3629/1520x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 1520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/axpVoL-9Cecu4AylKCrbTyJgwKg=/0x0:5443x3629/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 1720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/5HEt-iefA_UGJ80BWgNDioX7HcQ=/0x0:5443x3629/1920x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 1920w" sizes="(min-width: 1221px) 846px, (min-width: 880px) calc(100vw - 334px), 100vw" type="image/webp" /> <img alt="" data-upload-width="5443" sizes="(min-width: 1221px) 846px, (min-width: 880px) calc(100vw - 334px), 100vw" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/YCsrxwfG_KXLgnGfxFvSsg5m2S0=/0x0:5443x3629/1200x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg" srcset="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/VLja5Ay7NF9oXFc9UdVH3ctchek=/0x0:5443x3629/320x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/PutClQY4mt7n6NEZXeWa-XfN1f8=/0x0:5443x3629/520x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/a1c7jMp_WwcaxdonAIU-yfkry84=/0x0:5443x3629/720x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/V6AHwehRqeXMsRPdu4NlPyzMyMY=/0x0:5443x3629/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 920w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/PZOBdiGZefWoMkprgwQvI5YcQWQ=/0x0:5443x3629/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 1120w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/RKb4_bDwzjtoH2ZDRIqBj8pRjuY=/0x0:5443x3629/1320x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 1320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/mJe9P8uLKgp3fYXCgtMDXw1ABkE=/0x0:5443x3629/1520x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 1520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/tMB3NjTXNwz-T6gf2Ka3FaM7ywg=/0x0:5443x3629/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 1720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/kDuJ1hhdJwM44FC0mprfaF_Bb8Q=/0x0:5443x3629/1920x0/filters:focal(0x0:5443x3629):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143185/GettyImages_1359569228.jpg 1920w" /></picture>
<figcaption>Sen. Joe Manchin speaks to a member of his staff outside of a caucus meeting with Senate Democrats at the US Capitol Building on December 17,</figcaption>
<cite>Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images</cite></figure>
As evidence, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/10/politics/build-back-better-cbo-score/index.html">Manchin has cited a report from the Congressional Budget Office</a>, which shows that the full costs of the bill’s programs would be much higher if all of them continued for 10 years. The expanded child tax credit, for example, would cost as much as $1.6 trillion if extended for ten years <a href="https://www.crfb.org/blogs/cbo-estimates-permanent-build-back-better">compared to $185 billion for a one-year extension.</a>
The White House, however, notes that it would implement new revenue raisers to address these costs, if any of the programs were extended.
The expanded child tax credit is among the policies that’s had widespread Democratic support and major impacts so far: In October 2021, it reduced child poverty rates by as much as 28 percent compared to what they would have been otherwise, <a href="https://www.povertycenter.columbia.edu/news-internal/monthly-poverty-october-2021">according to the Columbia University Center on Poverty and Social Policy</a>.
To ultimately pass a pared-down Build Back Better Act, however, Democrats will have to find a measure that all wings of the party, including Manchin, are willing to support, which could mean dropping this provision despite its popularity.
When it comes to voting rights and the filibuster, Democrats also don’t have agreement yet.
<a href="https://www.vox.com/22736509/freedom-to-vote-act">Last fall, all 50 Senate Democrats united behind the Freedom to Vote Act</a>, which would guarantee 15 days of early voting for federal elections, make Election Day a public holiday, and expand the types of ID people could use to vote. But 50 senators isn’t enough — most bills need 60 votes to pass in the Senate if they get blocked through a filibuster. Since Republicans are expected to stymie any voting rights bill by filibustering it, it would need 60 votes, support the legislation doesn’t have.
To get around this requirement, Democrats could approve an exception to the filibuster, but that would require the support of all 50 senators in the caucus. Both Manchin and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) have been adamant about preserving the filibuster — likely even on voting rights bills — and it’s unclear whether they’ll be swayed this time around.
<div>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Asked if he needs any change to Senate/filibuster rules to come with Republican support, Manchin says: "That's my absolute preference."
— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) <a href="https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1478409779789938688?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 4, 2022</a></blockquote>
</div>
In December, Democrats made an exception to the filibuster to pass an increase to the debt ceiling with 50 votes. Some Democrats including <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senator-sees-debt-limit-increase-model-pass-voting-legislation-rcna8762">Sens. Raphael Warnock (D-GA)</a> and <a href="https://www.vox.com/2021/12/14/22834318/debt-ceiling-vote-filibuster">Alex Padilla (D-CA)</a> emphasized that the maneuver demonstrated how accessible such exceptions are, and have since argued for another one to protect voting rights.
“We think it’s so important that we change the rule in order to save the economy,” <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senator-sees-debt-limit-increase-model-pass-voting-legislation-rcna8762">Warnock previously told NBC News</a>. “Well, the warning lights on our democracy are blinking right now, and we seem unwilling to respond with the same urgency to protect the democracy that we have to protect the economy.” Republicans agreed to the debt ceiling exception, however, and aren’t expected to do the same on voting rights.
<figure class="e-image"><picture class="c-picture" data-cid="site/picture_element-1641339532_6521_70310" data-cdata='{"asset_id":23143204,"ratio":"*"}'><source srcset="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/6yk8UXUwCEQMKDAOdFmYPlY4tbw=/0x0:3848x2565/320x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Ke6_LvfRAFtlzkRuCbBBZ6pV8Kg=/0x0:3848x2565/520x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/1EooKHJdmwShgL9U57h7P7ToTWg=/0x0:3848x2565/720x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/DS-cjygaU1R3xpAPqqQ6z-ARskc=/0x0:3848x2565/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 920w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/r2j--BqQaW4fi55BdbhsJX8io78=/0x0:3848x2565/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 1120w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/WLA_zHzVkKvsRB2tgCqtVnmjoBI=/0x0:3848x2565/1320x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 1320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/l3L0rVeBOoPB0QZ1_vbM4Z5yIyI=/0x0:3848x2565/1520x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 1520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/SH1AGzzjXuFexSpSN_JCHBuIw1Q=/0x0:3848x2565/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 1720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/kVxtx8q1OnvE4J9Gc8bRcBoKMVE=/0x0:3848x2565/1920x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 1920w" sizes="(min-width: 1221px) 846px, (min-width: 880px) calc(100vw - 334px), 100vw" type="image/webp" /> <img alt="" data-upload-width="3848" sizes="(min-width: 1221px) 846px, (min-width: 880px) calc(100vw - 334px), 100vw" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Ym_o51a4bFZHiXVmhvtfEU8Z0TA=/0x0:3848x2565/1200x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg" srcset="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/I_PbY0lUcvuFBmY1XoWzffkXTI0=/0x0:3848x2565/320x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Ls3eXgQRZziuIt07ej3ILEsPBfg=/0x0:3848x2565/520x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/7UCAAkKjiLaRWJD-sm-enbceoHE=/0x0:3848x2565/720x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Cw-BNw6AgXFizfPuDe8mzyVnyMM=/0x0:3848x2565/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 920w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Lthdv-CxHx70fV1foZjCvjtorIc=/0x0:3848x2565/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 1120w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/CSNROAvVSnXc5CSI12w1ezrAK0g=/0x0:3848x2565/1320x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 1320w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/jgcnw7a9UI_rpU_5meP3rqGyeqE=/0x0:3848x2565/1520x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 1520w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/j8NiaYdvYAEWaUeScstiId-7I38=/0x0:3848x2565/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 1720w, https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Nt_bF9ayBemNUKWALDy2lh2w5xU=/0x0:3848x2565/1920x0/filters:focal(0x0:3848x2565):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23143204/GettyImages_1358823816.jpg 1920w" /></picture>
<figcaption>A student rallies for voting rights in front of the White House in December.</figcaption>
<cite>Leigh Vogel/Getty Images for UnPac</cite></figure>
Democratic leaders will use the upcoming one-year anniversary of the January 6 insurrection to make their case for voting rights legislation, directly tying the need to pass a bill with former President Donald Trump’s undermining of the 2020 election results and the state measures limiting the right to vote that have passed since.
“January 6th was a symptom of a broader illness — an effort to delegitimize our election process, and the Senate must advance systemic democracy reforms to repair our republic or else the events of that day will not be an aberration — they will be the new norm,” <a href="https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Dear%20Colleague%201.3.22.pdf">Schumer wrote in the January letter</a>.
Possible filibuster changes that Democrats could consider include a specific carveout enabling lawmakers to approve the legislation with a simple majority, or changes to the filibuster that would require anyone blocking the bill to physically do so by making remarks on the Senate floor. Thus far, none of these options have garnered the backing of the 50 senators who are needed, though.
Democrats have been debating Build Back Better since last summer, and changing the filibuster since they won their Senate majority in January 2021. Now, Senate leaders are pressuring members to publicly show what they actually stand, by scheduling votes on both the Build Back Better Act and a filibuster rules change.
Last December, Schumer emphasized that the Senate would confront these votes early on, putting lawmakers on the spot about their positions.
“Senators should be aware that the Senate will, in fact, consider the Build Back Better Act, very early in the new year so that every Member of this body has the opportunity to make their position known on the Senate floor, not just on television,” <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/schumer-dear-colleague-letter-from-dec-20/de5b9bc2-47e1-4eea-bf03-fdbb6e81e740/?itid=lk_inline_manual_44">he wrote in a December letter.</a> The vote on Build Back Better is slated to take place soon, and the vote on the filibuster rules is expected before the end of the month.
Given the disagreement within the caucus, these votes are likely to reveal that the party is still at an impasse in both instances. In the past few months, a group of moderate senators including Tim Kaine (D-VA), Angus King (I-ME), and Jon Tester (D-MT) have been <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2021/12/08/biden-filibuster-voting-rights-senate-523917">trying to find consensus on filibuster reform</a>, though they haven’t secured it yet.
The rules change vote will also be an opportunity for lawmakers to debate their approaches to filibuster reform, forcing a broader conversation about possible options. Though votes on both Build Back Better and the rules change are widely expected to fail in the short term, they could spur progress, too, showing Democrats how much support they’re working with, and catalyzing additional negotiations within the caucus.
Because of Republican obstruction, Democrats need to find common ground among themselves to get pretty much any of their main priorities done.
The coming months will reveal if they’re able to do it.
 
 
source <a href="https://www.vox.com/22864859/democrats-filibuster-voting-rights-build-back-better">https://www.vox.com/22864859/democrats-filibuster-voting-rights-build-back-better</a>

vox New year, New Dems?

It might be a new year, but Democrats are facing a lot of old challenges. Namely, they still need to agree on their top priorities, even as...