Bernie Moreno endorses Nate Morris in Kentucky Senate race to replace Mitch McConnell
As POLITICO scooped Tuesday, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) is planning to file a discharge petition to force a floor vote on banning stock trading by members of Congress. Like the parallel push for a vote on releasing the Epstein files, it's poised to pit Johnson against rank-and-file Republicans who are thirsty to challenge elite corruption — whether their leadership likes it or not.
Luna's move puts Johnson in a bind.
Johnson has signaled that he's personally supportive of restricting stock trading by lawmakers. But allowing a vote to happen would trigger backlash from many fellow Republicans — and for what? The bill probably wouldn't go anywhere in the Senate.
Yet if Johnson stands in the way, he risks fueling a narrative triggered by the Epstein fight that he's protecting the rich and powerful and against transparency.
Luna has a way to go before she gets the 218 signatures needed to force a vote. But she has some political momentum on her side. The House Ethics Committee said Friday that Rep. Mike Kelly's (R-Pa.) wife bought shares in steelmaker Cleveland-Cliffs after Kelly's office learned that a Commerce Department action could benefit the company. Kelly has said he and his family 'look forward to putting this distraction behind us.'
Johnson's saving grace might be a GOP division over the right approach to executing a crackdown. Lawmakers have been meeting for months to try to hammer out a consensus bill, with some members concerned the process isn't going anywhere. Luna wants to force a vote just on a bill from Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.). Senate Homeland Security will mark up its own stock trading restrictions Wednesday.
Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), who could play a pivotal role in any effort to derail Luna's push as a member of the Rules Committee, is among those leading bipartisan talks on a potential compromise around a broader bill.
'Since I introduced the first bill on this subject, we've built a coalition in support of a comprehensive and strong solution to end stock trading for members of Congress,' Roy said. 'We're working over August to merge various ideas and get Republican leadership to move on it. We gave them time to finish the [megabill] — that time is passed.'
Rep. Seth Magaziner, the Rhode Island Democrat co-leading legislation with Roy, said he believes they are 'quite close' on a consensus bill coming together — possibly in August. But it would be for 'Congress only,' and not extend any stock trading ban to the president and vice president, as some Democrats are pushing for.
Lawmakers involved in the talks are also aiming for legislative branch enforcement, which is missing from the Burchett bill that relies on Justice Department enforcement. Burchett's legislation also doesn't address when lawmakers who currently own stocks would have to pay taxes after divesting.
'Where you'll start losing Democrats is if the bill doesn't have teeth,' said Magaziner, who argues that the Burchett bill alone will have problems drawing enough support from both sides of the aisle.
What else we're watching:
— Schumer's Epstein announcement: Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and other Senate Democrats plan to hold a press conference Wednesday afternoon on a new effort to get the 'full Epstein files.'
— Trump nominee staredown: Senate GOP leaders are threatening to rewrite the chamber's rule book if Democrats don't agree to expedite dozens of President Donald Trump's nominees before August recess. Senate Majority Leader John Thune told POLITICO that Republicans could revisit steps they took in 2018 to shorten debate time between nominees.
— Commerce votes on TSA bill: Senate Commerce Chair Ted Cruz said he's 'confident' his committee will approve legislation Wednesday that would put new guardrails on facial recognition technology used by the TSA. Travel lobbyists are raising concerns that the bill would make it more difficult to ensure airline passengers' safety.
Mia McCarthy, Jordain Carney, Calen Razor and Benjamin Guggenheim contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
13 minutes ago
- USA Today
Republicans are afraid of Mamdani in New York. That's a good thing.
Republicans think Zohran Mamdani will turn NYC into a socialist mecca because they forgot what a functioning government looks like. We're a few months out from New York City's municipal election, and Democratic nominee Zohran Mamdani is still the frontrunner in the mayoral race. It's a positive sign for progressives who want to see democratic socialists transform the party. In a July poll by Zenith Research and Public Progress Solutions, Mamdani received 50% of support while the rest of the candidates trailed behind. Former Democratic governor Andrew Cuomo, who is now running as an independent, received 22% of support, followed by Republican Curtis Sliwa at 13%. Current Mayor Eric Adams, who is also running as an independent, received just 7% support. Mamdani may be polling well, but his path to victory in November is anything but smooth. There are already five anti-Mamdani PACs that have formed since the primary, backed by business moguls and real estate tycoons who warn that the Democratic nominee would be bad for the city's economy. He's also having to answer for some of his previous posts about 'defunding the police' and comments on Israel. Republicans criticizing Mamdani for 'defund police' comment are hypocritical The biggest criticism of Mamdani has come from his previous comments about the New York City Police Department. In the wake of George Floyd's murder in 2020, Mamdani posted to X that the NYPD was 'racist, anti-queer & a major threat to public safety' and called for defunding the force. Mamdani has also proposed creating a Department of Community Safety separate from the police department, which would respond to mental health calls. But the Democratic nominee is attempting to distance himself from these previous claims, calling the posts 'out of step' with his current stance on public safety. He recently met with the family of Officer Didarul Islam, one of the four people killed in a recent shooting in Midtown Manhattan. Republicans criticizing him seem more than willing to ignore the way President Donald Trump pardoned Jan. 6 rioters who attacked police officers, or his own criminal convictions. But he is the "law and order" president, for sure. And the GOP is the "law and order" party, right? Voters are increasingly agreeing with Mamdani on Gaza Another criticism from the right is that Mamdani is too critical of Israel. Fox News recently resurrected a clip of Mamdani from a 2024 panel where the mayoral candidate claimed, 'Israel is not a place, it is not a country.' Mamdani seems to be taking these attacks to heart. He recently said he would not use the phrase 'globalize the intifada,' and would also discourage others from using it. Mamdani had previously refused to condemn the phrase. On the other hand, Mamdani's criticisms of Israel proved to be popular with voters in the Democratic primary. A poll from Data for Progress and the Institute for Middle East Understanding Policy Project found that his 'support for Palestinian rights' was important for 96% of his voters, while his 'willingness to criticize the Israeli government' was important to 88% of his voters. Opinion: People are starving in Gaza. Why are we so comfortable just letting that happen? While conservatives are trying to attack Mamdani for his previous stances on Israel and his sympathy for the Palestinian people, it doesn't seem like it'll work. Democrats should listen to their voters, not conservatives, to know how to approach this issue. Only 8% of Democrats support Israel's actions in Gaza, according to a recent Gallup poll, while 71% of Republicans support it. Some Republicans are even breaking with the party to denounce mass starvation in the region, including Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Georgia, who recently called the crisis a "genocide." Republicans are afraid of what Mamdani stands for. Good. Mamdani won the primary largely thanks to his mobilization of young voters. It worked out for him: voters under 40 made up 40% of early voting turnout. Now, the question is whether they'll turn out for the general election. I'm hopeful that they will. I have personally seen the way my generation has reacted to Mamdani's campaign. There is a palpable excitement reminiscent of Barack Obama's first run for the presidency, an excitement fueled by the idea that the Democratic Party can change, in spite of itself. Opinion: Zohran Mamdani rallied Gen Z voters. We can't abandon him now. The reasons conservatives are criticizing Mamdani are the reasons people my age voted for him. We believe in moving funding from the NYPD into areas like mental health care and community building. We support Palestinian rights. We want to see that working-class New Yorkers can remain in this city. We see taxing corporations and the wealthy as a good thing. Some may call these things unrealistic, and they may have a point. There's no way New York City becomes a socialist utopia if Mamdani is elected, since he must work with the city council, state and national governments to achieve many of his campaign priorities. But his very election could signal to the Democratic Party that they should run to, not from, progressive politics. Mamdani's path to victory is not an easy one. He will continue to face criticism from the right throughout the next few months. But if polling is any indication, he's still likely to be the next mayor of the largest city in the United States. Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeño on X, formerly Twitter, @sara__pequeno
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
How Democrats can stop talking past each other and start winning
A second group of moderates, including important donors, are libertarians who endorse ' Advertisement The third group of moderate Democrats yearns to turn back the clock to the New Deal coalition. A chief spokesperson is Ruy Teixeira of the Liberal Patriot newsletter. '[T]he New Deal Democrats were moderate and even small-c conservative in their social outlook,' he Advertisement Beginning in the 1970s, college-educated progressives began to focus on issues involving race, gender, the environment, and sexual freedom. Teixeira This brings us to the only moderate position that holds promise for Democrats: defining moderate as being pragmatic, rather than doctrinaire. College-educated progressives need to recognize that their priorities and their cultural values don't match those of most Americans. In 2024, inflation and the economy were Advertisement Centering that economic message is the first pragmatic step in rebuilding Democrats' brand to appeal to both college grads and noncollege grads. The second step is to recognize that cultural preferences differ across class lines. Non-elites value self-discipline because they need to get up every day, on time, without an attitude, to work at jobs with little autonomy. Consequently, they highly value traditional institutions that anchor self-discipline: religion, the military, the family. Those same institutions offer non-elites sources of social status independent of their subordinate positions in a capitalist economy. Blue-collar values reflect blue-collar lives. That's why, on cultural issues, college-educated progressives need to stop demanding a mind-meld with the Democratic Party. If you're playing to win, politics requires not purity but an ability to build coalitions with people whose values may differ from yours in fundamental ways. Democrats need to treat voters without college degrees as respected coalition partners, making tradeoffs. Advertisement This doesn't mean that progressives need to abandon their values; it means they have to act on them. Here are two uncomfortable facts: Progressive activists as a group are much
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Gutting EPA climate rules will put lives at risk
Removing the greenhouse gas regulations will increase extreme weather and pollution, which will put lives at risk, hurt the economy, and increase Americans' health costs by shifting costs to lost productivity and lost income. Advertisement The very real impact of extreme weather is hard to miss. Brutal heat is becoming the norm. Take last month, when Advertisement Further, an estimated But beyond the headlines of death and destruction, extreme weather is also having an impact on daily lives. Climate change compromises livelihoods, particularly for the millions who work outdoors. If it's too hot to harvest a crop or work on a construction site, it will impact workers' incomes as well as the bottom line for businesses. Extreme heat causes In the agriculture sector, extreme heat drives up food prices, because there are fewer days when food can be harvested — a Cutting regulation isn't saving ordinary Americans money; it's saving big business money. The EPA Advertisement The sad truth is the administration is abandoning its responsibility to act, and American citizens and people around the globe will pay the price. Denying the incontrovertible truth about climate change risks more death and damage to property and business. Further, under the guise of deregulation, the administration is strategically undermining the authority of scientists and the public's access to facts on how greenhouse gas emissions will impact lives and livelihoods. White House officials will not back down. Instead Congress and state and city officials, as well as courts, must block the plan. Otherwise, we risk deepening misunderstanding with the public, economic damage, more loss of life, and putting our long-term prosperity at risk. This isn't giving Americans more choice, it's stripping them of their right to clean air, safe communities, and a secure job.
