Brazil's Lula challenged by 1st decree rejection in Congress in decades
SAO PAULO (AP) — Brazil's Congress on Wednesday nullified a presidential decree for the first time in decades, rejecting a move by President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva to hike a financial transactions tax and signaling flagging support for his left-of-center administration.
Lula's allies had only 98 votes against 383 in the lower house to keep the tax increase on some transactions, including foreign exchange and credit cards. Two hours later, senators also defeated the decree.
It was the first time lawmakers overturned a presidential decree in Brazil since 1992, in a rebuke of Lula one year ahead of the country's next presidential election campaign.
The rejection came despite members of Lula's administration saying that the content of the decree had been negotiated with legislative leaders, including Speaker Hugo Motta and Sen. Davi Alcolumbre, the president of the Senate.
Motta, seen as a moderate, said that the vote 'speaks for itself' and that 'Each branch of power has to understand the other's limits. That's democracy.' He did not elaborate.
Thomas Traumann, an independent political consultant and former Brazilian minister, said the decision by lawmakers indicates Lula does 'not have a stable majority in Congress.' He called it a historic defeat for the president about a year before the campaign trail begins.
'If this was a parliamentary system, it would have been the end of this government,' Traumann said.
The previous president to have a decree nixed by Congress was Fernando Collor more than 32 years ago, only weeks before he was impeached and removed from office. His decree at the time was about government-issued bonds.
Since the presidency of Michel Temer between 2016 and 2018, Brazil's congress has had control over much of the country's budget, but the president can raise some taxes by decree.
Finance Minister Fernando Haddad said on Thursday the Brazilian government is considering three alternatives to deal with Congress' decision — take it to the Supreme Court, seek new sources of income or slashing the country's budget.
____
Follow AP's coverage of Latin America and the Caribbean at https://apnews.com/hub/latin-america
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
an hour ago
- Associated Press
Meet the Senate parliamentarian, the official tying Republicans in knots over their tax bill
WASHINGTON (AP) — A few Republicans reacted with indignation Thursday after the Senate parliamentarian advised that some of the measures in their tax and immigration bill could not be included in the legislation. Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., tweeted on X that Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough should be fired, 'ASAP.' Rep. Greg Steube, R-Fla., intimated that she was partisan, asking why an 'unelected swamp bureaucrat, who was appointed by Harry Reid over a decade ago' gets to decide what's in the bill?' It's hardly the first time the parliamentarian's normally low-key and lawyerly role has drawn a blast of public criticism. MacDonough also dashed Democratic plans over the years, advising in 2021 that they couldn't include a minimum wage increase in their COVID-19 relief bill. Later that same year, she advised that Democrats needed to drop an effort to let millions of immigrants remain temporarily in the U.S. as part of their big climate bill. But the attention falling on MacDonough's rulings in recent years also reflects a broader change in Congress, with lawmakers increasingly trying to wedge their top policy priorities into bills that can't be filibustered in the Senate. The process comes with special rules designed to deter provisions unrelated to spending or taxes — and that's where the parliamentarian comes in, offering analysis of what does and doesn't qualify. Her latest round of decisions Thursday was a blow to the GOP's efforts to wring hundreds of billions of dollars from Medicaid over the next decade. Senate Republicans could opt to try to override her recommendations, but they are unlikely to do so. Here's a closer look at what the Senate parliamentarian does and why lawmakers are so focused on her recommendations right now. The crucial role of the parliamentarian Both the House and Senate have a parliamentarian to provide assistance on that chamber's rules and precedents. They are often seen advising whoever is presiding over the chamber on the proper procedures to be followed and the appropriate responses to a parliamentary inquiry. They are also charged with providing information to lawmakers and their respective staff on a strictly nonpartisan and confidential basis. The parliamentarians and their staff only offer advice. Their recommendations are not binding. In the case of the massive tax and spending bill now before both chambers, the parliamentarian plays a critical role in advising whether the reconciliation bill's provisions remain focused on fiscal issues. How MacDonough became the first woman in the job MacDonough, an English literature major, is the Senate's first woman to be parliamentarian and just the sixth person to hold the position since its creation in 1935. She began her Senate career in its library before leaving to get a law degree at Vermont Law School. She worked briefly as a Justice Department trial attorney before returning to the Senate in 1999, this time as an assistant in the parliamentarian's office. She was initially appointed parliamentarian in 2012 by Democrat Harry Reid of Nevada, Senate majority leader at the time. She was retained by Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., when he became majority leader in 2015. She helped Chief Justice John Roberts preside over Trump's 2020 Senate impeachment trial and was beside then-Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., for Trump's second trial the following year. Trump was acquitted both times. When Trump supporters fought past police and into the Capitol in hopes of disrupting Congress' certification of Joe Biden's Electoral College victory, MacDonough and other staffers rescued those ballots and hustled mahogany boxes containing them to safety. MacDonough's office, on the Capitol's first floor, was ransacked and declared a crime scene. Can the Senate ignore the parliamentarian's advice? Yes. The parliamentarian makes the recommendation, but it's the presiding officer overseeing Senate proceedings who rules on provisions in the bill. If there is a dispute, it would be put to a vote. Michael Thorning, director of structural democracy at the Bipartisan Policy Center, a think tank, said he doubts Republicans will want to go that route. And indeed, some Republican senators said as much Thursday. 'It's the institutional integrity, even if I'm convinced 100% she's wrong,' said Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D. Thorning said lawmakers from both parties view MacDonough as 'very much an honest broker.' 'And the Senate relies on her,' Thorning said. 'Sometimes, those decisions cut your way, and sometimes, they don't. I also think members recognize that once you start treating the parliamentarian's advice as just something that could be easily dismissed, then the rules start to matter less.' Have parliamentarians been fired? Majority leaders from both parties have replaced the parliamentarian. For more than three decades, the position alternated between Robert Dove and Alan Frumin depending upon which party was in the majority. Thorning said the two parliamentarians weren't far apart though, in how they interpreted the Senate's rules and precedents. MacDonough succeeded Frumin as parliamentarian. He said the small number of calls Thursday for her dismissal 'tells you all people need to know about the current parliamentarian.' 'Senators know this isn't somebody playing politics,' Thorning said.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Automakers want US to move faster on self-driving car rules
By David Shepardson WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Major automakers want Congress and the Trump administration to move faster to make it easier to deploy autonomous vehicles without human controls as new robotaxi tests expand. Congress has been divided for years about whether to pass legislation to address deployment hurdles, while the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has not moved quickly to rewrite safety rules or allow exemptions for up to 2,500 vehicles without human controls annually and ease other hurdles. "The auto industry wants, it needs a functioning and effective auto safety regulator. We don't have that today," said Alliance for Automotive Innovation CEO John Bozzella at a U.S. House of Representatives hearing on Thursday. "The agency isn't nimble. Rulemakings take too long if they come at all." Autonomous Vehicle Industry Association Director Jeff Farrah urged Congress to pass long-stalled nationwide legislation to allow the United States to globally lead on AVs as China moves aggressively in the field. "Right now we are fighting with one hand tied behind our back," Farrah said. Companies have pushed for more action for years. U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said in April that a new department framework to boost autonomous vehicles would help U.S. automakers compete with Chinese rivals. Earlier this month, NHTSA said it would speed reviews of requests from automakers to deploy self-driving vehicles without required human controls like steering wheels, brake pedals or mirrors. Representative Frank Pallone of New Jersey, a Democrat, cited reports showing NHTSA has lost as much as 35% of its expert staff this year through layoffs and other exits, which puts the ability of the agency to function at risk. NHTSA said "significantly fewer people have left" than Pallone suggested and that it remains "staffed to continue to conduct all safety- and mission-critical work" and is boosting its Office of Autonomous Safety. Meanwhile, U.S. traffic deaths remain sharply above pre-COVID levels. Despite falling 3.8% in 2024 to 39,345, they are still significantly higher than the 36,355 killed in 2019 and double the average rate of other high-income countries. "NHTSA is failing to meet the moment," Insurance Institute for Highway Safety President David Harkey told lawmakers. "In recent years, it has approached its job with a lack of urgency, using flawed methodologies that underestimate the safety benefits of obviously beneficial interventions," he said. NHTSA routinely fails to write regulations even when directed by Congress and has often gone years without a Senate-confirmed leader. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Chicago Tribune
an hour ago
- Chicago Tribune
Senators diverge sharply on damage done by Iran strikes after classified briefing
WASHINGTON — Senators emerged from a classified briefing Thursday with sharply diverging assessments of President Donald Trump's bombing of three Iranian nuclear sites, with Republicans calling the mission a clear success and Democrats expressing deep skepticism. CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, came to Capitol Hill to give the classified briefings, originally scheduled for Tuesday. Many Republicans left satisfied, though their assessments of how much Iran's nuclear program was set back by the bombing varied. Sen. Tom Cotton said a 'major blow' and 'catastrophic damage' had been dealt to Iran's facilities. 'Their operational capability was obliterated. There is nobody working there tonight. It was highly effective. There's no reason to hit those sites anytime soon,' said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. Democrats remained doubtful and criticized Trump for not giving Congress more information. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said the briefing 'raised more questions than it answered.' Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., said the strike appears to 'have only set back the Iranian nuclear program by a handful of months.' 'There's no doubt there was damage done to the program,' said Murphy, but 'allegations that we have obliterated their program just don't seem to stand up to reason.' 'I just do not think the president was telling the truth when he said this program was obliterated,' he added. The session came as senators weighed their support for a resolution affirming that Trump should seek authorization from Congress before launching more military action against Iran. A vote on that resolution could come as soon as Thursday. Democrats, and some Republicans, have said the White House overstepped its authority when it failed to seek the advice of Congress. They also want to know more about the intelligence that Trump relied on when he authorized the attacks. A similar briefing for House members will be held Friday. A preliminary U.S. intelligence report found that Iran's nuclear program had been set back only a few months, contradicting statements from Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about the status of Iran's nuclear facilities, according to two people familiar with the report. They were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. 'You want to call it destroyed, you want to call it defeated, you want to call it obliterated — choose your word. This was an historically successful attack,' Hegseth said at a Pentagon briefing Thursday. On Wednesday, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and Ratcliffe sent out statements backing Trump's claims that the facilities were 'completely and fully obliterated.' Gabbard posted on social media that 'new intelligence confirms what @POTUS has stated numerous times: Iran's nuclear facilities have been destroyed.' She said that if the Iranians choose to rebuild the three facilities, it would 'likely take years to do.' Ratcliffe said in a statement from the CIA that Iran's nuclear program has been 'severely damaged.' He cited new intelligence 'from a historically reliable and accurate source/method that several key Iranian nuclear facilities were destroyed and would have to be rebuilt over the course of years.' Most Republicans have defended Trump and hailed the tentative ceasefire he brokered in the Israel-Iran war. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., went as far as to question the constitutionality of the War Powers Act, which is intended to give Congress a say in military action. 'The bottom line is the commander in chief is the president, the military reports to the president, and the person empowered to act on the nation's behalf is the president,' Johnson told reporters. But some Republicans, including some of Trump's staunchest supporters, are uncomfortable with the strikes and the potential for U.S. involvement in an extended Middle East conflict. 'I think the speaker needs to review the Constitution,' said Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. 'And I think there's a lot of evidence that our Founding Fathers did not want presidents to unilaterally go to war.' Paul would not say whether he would vote for the resolution by Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., that would require congressional approval for specific military action in Iran. A simple majority in the Senate is needed to pass the resolution and Republicans hold a 53-47 advantage. 'I will have Republican votes, plural,' Kaine said. 'But whether it's two or 10, I don't know.' Kaine authored a similar resolution in 2020 aimed at limiting Trump's authority to launch military operations against Iran. At the time, eight Republicans joined Democrats in approving the resolution. 'I think I have a chance to get some votes from people who are glad that President Trump did this over the weekend, but they're saying, 'Ok, but now if we're really going to go to war, it should only have to go through the Congress,'' Kaine told The Associated Press before the briefing. While Trump did not seek approval, he sent congressional leaders a short letter Monday serving as his official notice of the strikes, which occurred Saturday between 6:40 p.m. and 7:05 p.m. EDT, or roughly 2:10 a.m. on Sunday in Iran. The letter said the strike was taken 'to advance vital United States national interests, and in collective self-defense of our ally, Israel, by eliminating Iran's nuclear program.'
