Clyburn blasts GOP proposal to oust him from Congress
'We have Republican supermajorities in South Carolina,' Norman told Fox News Digital on Wednesday. 'Let's use them to create more competition in our congressional seats. I have no doubt Republicans can be successful in every part of our state.' He added that a GOP-controlled 7–0 delegation would give Republicans a better chance at holding the House to help advance Donald Trump's agenda in Congress.
'Jim Clyburn is a nice man, and I respect him,' Norman said. 'But he is a liberal Democrat who helped put Joe Biden in the White House. That's not the kind of representation South Carolina needs.' Clyburn has served in Congress since 1993 and spent many years in leadership positions, including as Majority Whip from 2007 to 2011, and again from 2019 to 2023. Clyburn is also credited with helping deliver Biden's crucial 2020 primary win in the Congressman's home state. He was re-elected in 2024 by more than 20 points, and his D+13 district has long been considered safely Democratic.
'Norm is looking for some attention, and I suspect this is the way of trying to get it,' Clyburn said during an interview with CNN's Victor Blackwell on Wednesday night. 'I'm not concerned at all. I know the people of South Carolina very well. I know Ralph Norman very well. I know the governor of this state very well, who is as partisan of a Republican as he can be, but he's as fair of a Republican as he can be. Norm doesn't believe in fairness.'Clyburn's district was originally drawn as a majority-Black district in the 1990s to comply with the Voting Rights Act. The Supreme Court recently upheld the GOP's previous redistricting efforts in the 1st District, ruling they were partisan but not racially motivated.
Norman's call mirrors Republican efforts in other states, including Texas, to redraw congressional maps ahead of 2026, sparking a broader redistricting race between red and blue states. Clyburn argued that Democrats indeed have no choice but to respond.
'If you look back all the legislation that we've proposed, the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act and other bills that we've proposed on the Democratic side, we have always proposed bipartisan commissions to draw the lines. That's what we've done, and that's where we are,' he said on CNN. 'Now, I've never been all for that simply because I knew that we would get to this point when you might have to use politics in order to offset this stuff, and that's what's going on now. If Texas [does] what they say they're going to do, California is going to follow suit, New York, Illinois. And I guarantee you that we are going to fight fire with fire. That's what we've got to do.'
The post Clyburn blasts GOP proposal to oust him from Congress appeared first on Salon.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Atlantic
26 minutes ago
- Atlantic
Give the Moon a Big, Beautiful Base
No one can say that the Trump administration is entirely against alternative energy. In his first bold policy stroke as NASA's interim head, Sean Duffy has directed the agency to put a 100-kilowatt nuclear reactor on the moon by decade's end. This is not a lark. If humanity means to establish a permanent settlement on the moon, nuclear power will almost certainly be essential to its operation. And a lunar base may well be the most wondrous achievement in space exploration that people reading this will see during their lifetime. The moon has gone unvisited, except by robots, for more than 50 years, and as of several months ago, it seemed as though Americans would be staying away from it for a good while longer. President Donald Trump was taking cues from Elon Musk, who seemed inclined to shelve the plan to put Americans back on the lunar surface and focus instead on an all-out sprint to Mars. But Musk has since fallen out of favor, and last month, congressional Republicans secured a funding boost for the moon program. NASA astronauts are now scheduled to return to the moon in 2027, and if all goes well, they will be landing on it regularly, starting in the early 2030s. Each crew will carry parts of a small base that can grow piece by piece into a living space for a few people. The astronauts will also take a pair of vehicles for expeditions—a little rover that they can use for local jaunts in their space suits, and a larger, pressurized one that will allow them to go on 500-mile regolith road trips in street clothes. A base on the moon would be more democratic than those that Musk and his acolytes have advocated building on Mars. Given shorter travel times, a greater number of people would be able to experience its otherworldly ashen plains. Their homesick calls to Earth would have only second-long delays, as opposed to minutes for a call from Mars. But even a small encampment on the lunar surface is going to require considerable energy. Temperatures dip to –410 degrees Fahrenheit in the shade, and human bodies will need to keep cozy amid that deep chill. The International Space Station runs on solar power, but that won't be enough on most of the moon, where nights last for 14 days. Some of the agency's other off-world projects are powered by raw plutonium. Hunks of it sit inside the Mars rovers, for instance, radiating heat that the wheeled robots convert into electricity. These hot rocks are also encased inside NASA's probes to the outer planets and their moons. Without plutonium, the two Voyager spacecrafts couldn't continue to send data back to Earth as they recede from the solar system. The moon base will need more than a radioactive rock. It will need a reactor that actually splits atoms, like the one that Duffy has proposed this week. Even if that reactor were to fail, the resulting meltdown wouldn't present the same risks to humans that it would on Earth. The moon is already a radiation-rich environment, and it has no wind to blow the reactor's most dangerous effluvia around; the material would simply fall to the ground. Duffy framed his push to get the reactor in place as a matter of national security. NASA's program to return to the moon, called Artemis, will be an international effort, with several countries contributing pieces of the final base. (Japan's space agency has tapped Toyota to design the large, pressurized lunar vehicle.) But when the United States invited Russia to join, Vladimir Putin declined. He has instead opted to help out with a larger Chinese lunar base, which is supposed to include a nuclear reactor 10 times as powerful as the one that Duffy announced. Last month, Bhavya Lal, who served as an associate administrator at NASA during the Biden administration and is now a professor at RAND, and her fellow aerospace expert Roger Myers released a report arguing that a county could sneakily establish a sovereign zone on the moon in defiance of the Outer Space Treaty just by building a reactor. For instance, the Chinese could insist on a buffer around theirs for the sake of nuclear safety, and use that to keep Americans away from desirable ice-rich craters nearby. Lal and Myers seem to have captured the new administration's attention: Duffy's new directive ordering the development of the reactor specifically mentioned this risk. If worry over Chinese lunar land grabs is the motivation for a moon base, so much the better. Space exploration often requires a geopolitical spur. And if NASA can build this first small lunar settlement, something grander could follow close behind. Once the agency has mastered the construction of a 100-kilowatt lunar nuclear reactor, it should have little trouble scaling up to larger ones that can support tens, or even hundreds, of people—in bases of the size that now exist on Antarctica. Some space agencies have reportedly discussed building hydroponic greenhouses and other elaborate structures inside the voluminous caves that run beneath the moon's Sea of Tranquility. All of this infrastructure could enable some serious lunar dystopias. The moon's surface could become an industrial hellscape, pocked with mining operations where robots and human serfs extract platinum and titanium for use in advanced electronics back on Earth. Or the Outer Space Treaty could break down and the moon could become a heavily militarized zone—even a staging ground for nuclear weapons. But an inhabited moon could also be a global commons for research. Both the U.S. and China have developed designs for large radio telescopes on the lunar dark side, where they'd be shielded from Earth's radio noise and would greatly aid the search for signals from distant civilizations. In one design, robots would spread a metal mesh from a crater's center to its rim, turning its concave surface into a natural radio dish. One can imagine an astronomer at a lunar base, peering out from a porthole, seeing the Earth shining in the sky, picking out its individual oceans and continents, and knowing that on the moon's opposite side, a giant ear would be listening for messages from other Earths and other moons, all across the Milky Way and far beyond.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
The former Texas congressman compared Trump to Hitler in a searing new interview.
Former Democratic Texas congressman Beto O'Rourke has delivered an incendiary call to arms in the middle of a legal crisis in his home state. Speaking to a crowd in New Orleans, the 2020 presidential candidate unleashed on Texas Republicans as they attempt to wrangle fleeing Democratic lawmakers into voting for their redistricting 'power grab.' The former congressman connected the events in Texas to the federal GOP, lashing the entire Republican Party for their 'fascist' antics.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Opinion/Guest column: Health care cuts bode ill for Central Mass. economy
Consistent with the old maxim that all politics is local, it is also true that all policy is local. Whether on Capitol Hill or Beacon Hill, policies that lawmakers enact inevitably have repercussions — for good or bad — on communities such as Worcester. Sadly, the local impacts of Congress' enactment of President Trump's so-called 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' and of the White House's pending proposal to slash National Institutes of Health funding by 40%, will be onerous. A great deal has been reported on the patient impact of these policies. Appropriately so, considering that the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the $1 trillion cuts to health care programs in the 'Beautiful Bill' will cause over 10 million people to lose health insurance coverage by 2034 and the near certainty that the administration's proposed NIH cuts will impede development of new treatments for patients with critical health conditions. Less obvious, but also important, are the potentially devastating impacts these policies will inflict on the Central Massachusetts economy. By targeting health care and scientific research, they will not only harm the largest employers and biggest drivers of the regional economy but will also have a ripple effect on sectors outside of health care or research. The leaders of this region's two largest employers, UMass Memorial Health and UMass Chan Medical School, have been outspoken about the dire consequences of massive federal cuts to their institutions. UMass Memorial expects to lose at least $100 million in Medicaid funding annually, and UMass Chan cites an expected $94 million shortfall in NIH grants in the upcoming fiscal year, on top of $42 million in grant disbursements already withheld by the Trump administration. Cuts of this magnitude will have a devastating impact on patients, employees and the public service missions of both institutions. These cuts will also affect workers and businesses in sectors that work regularly with medical, research and education institutions. The construction industry is a case in point. Hospitals and research institutions rely upon highly skilled electricians, plumbers, HVAC technicians and other tradespeople to build, renovate and maintain complex facilities that adhere to the most stringent safety and health regulations. But as federal cuts cause some health services to be reduced and laboratories to close, construction and renovation projects will inevitably decline, impacting the livelihoods of tradespeople and construction firms. The same dynamic will replicate across other industries that provide supportive services to medical and research institutions, whether it be finance, legal, suppliers or countless others whose businesses rely, at least in part, on such work. Hard data back up this dynamic. In its 2025 annual analysis on the economic impact of NIH research, United for Medical Research reports that each $1 of NIH funding results in $2.56 of economic activity. So, when the federal government cuts research grants to Worcester research universities by an aggregate of tens or hundreds of millions of dollars, the secondary impact will hit businesses and workers well beyond the campuses of UMass Chan or WPI. Similar ripple effects will reverberate across the local economy when hospitals' finances are torpedoed by massive cuts to Medicaid and Medicare and rising volumes of uninsured patients. It is impossible to find a silver lining in policies that wreak such havoc on the engines of our local economy, and that feeling is exacerbated by the Congressional Budget Office's estimate that the 'Beautiful Bill' will also drive up the national deficit by $3.4 trillion. Nonetheless, it is imperative not to give up. Everyone impacted — patients, workers, businesses and institutional leaders — must speak up and remain engaged so future Congresses prioritize reversing these irrational policies. Jim Leary is an attorney and former state legislator from Worcester. This article originally appeared on Telegram & Gazette: Opinion/Guest column: Health care cuts bode ill for regional economy
