Latest news with #HousesofCongress
Irish Post
15-05-2025
- Business
- Irish Post
Joe Biden wrestles with the verdict of history
DONALD Trump's first hundred days were hectic, unprecedented even. Since that milestone, the pace hasn't exactly slackened. Indeed, there's been a continued flurry of moves and announcements. Internationally, we have seen trade deals (of a sort) struck with Britain and China. The President continues to press for a settlement to the war in Ukraine, without clarifying what outcome he favours. The US has done some sort of deal with the Houthis in Yemen and is even negotiating with Iran. Meanwhile the first proper overseas trip of Trump's second term — aside from attending the funeral of Pope Francis — was to the Middle East, but to Qatar, Saudi Arabia and UAE rather than to Israel. And to cap all of that Presidential activity, Joe Biden has re-entered the fray after a few months' hibernation. Ex-Presidents usually take a bit more of a breather before setting out to write their memoirs and embellish their legacies. Joe Biden has come out of the blocks comparatively quickly. There are reasons for that. Biden is the oldest person ever to leave the White House (Donald Trump will overtake him on that score in 2029) and may feel he needs to hurry up in getting his story out there. But, more important than that for Joe Biden was the manner of his departure from the White House. He was the first President in a very long time who did not get the opportunity to bid for a second term in the Oval Office. The way he exited the 2024 race, pushed out the door by senior Democrats on the Hill (former Speaker Pelosi and Senator Chuck Schumer), still rankles with the former President who continues to believe that he could have beaten Donald Trump — though not many people share that assessment. In the minds of most observers his catastrophic debate performance against Donald Trump fatally undermined his candidacy. It became the view of his fellow Democrats that Biden's name on the ticket would hand Republicans whopping victories in the House of Representatives and the Senate. In that view of things, the Harris campaign staunched the wound and ensured that both Houses of Congress remain tightly balanced, with every chance that the Democrats will retake control of the House in January 2027. Like many leading political figures before him, Joe Biden is a proud man. You have to be to offer yourself as a candidate for the US Presidency. In his case, he rightly revels in his political achievements as a Senator, as Vice-President and as the man who deprived Donald Trump of re-election in 2020. Remarkably, all of that was achieved from modest beginnings as 'Irish Joe from Scranton'. He also sees himself, with some justification, as a successful President who revived the US economy after Covid, rallied western support for Ukraine in 2022 and passed an unprecedented infrastructure bill whose effects will be felt for a long time to come. Biden, who is known to have a stubborn streak and a quick temper, must also be getting weary of being pilloried by his successor, described repeatedly as the worst President ever, the root of all of America's failings that Trump has set himself up to cure. Biden knows that there are books about to appear that will present an unflattering evaluation of his age-related frailties. Hence his haste is getting his version on the record. One-to-one interviews were something he rarely did as President, but he has now sat down with the BBC and America's ABC. His performance on those channels was decent but not stellar. His weaknesses from last year were still in evidence. He's just not crisp in delivering his message. He did get some hits in at Trump and tried to deflect the criticism that he stayed too long in the 2024 race. His suggestion that Kamala Harris would not have won even if he had withdrawn earlier didn't do his loyal VP any favours as she tries to concoct a political future for herself. Many in her camp no doubt blame Biden's delayed exit for Harris's defeat. Democrats will not be too pleased to see Joe Biden back in the spotlight. If they are to line up a team to defeat Trump's Republicans next year, Democrats need to start profiling their coming generation rather that witnessing the former President rage against 'the dying of the light' as the Welsh poet Dylan Thomas once wrote. Joe Biden is most comfortable with international issues on which he has an unrivalled record. That makes me think that perhaps he ought to take on some more international travel as a senior statesman so as, in a soft sell manner, to remind people of how his America differed from Trump's. That might be a more gainful post-White House activity than raking over the coals of his Presidential tenure and of the 2024 election campaign. That train has left the station for the time being and only the historians of the future will be able to give his presidency its proper grade, probably somewhere in B+ territory, even if the final examination was sadly flunked. Daniel Mulhall is a retired Irish Ambassador (who has served in Berlin, London and Washington), a consultant and an author. His latest publication is Pilgrim Soul: W.B. Yeats and the Ireland of his Time (New Island Books, 2023). He can be followed on X: @DanMulhall and Bluesky: @ See More: Joe Biden, President Trump, US Politics
Yahoo
22-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
The Law and You: What does 'birthright citizenship' mean?
It is extremely difficult to change the U.S. Constitution. It is not simply waving a pen or a magic wand. The Constitution itself, in Article V, defines the process. For a proposal to become an official Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, two steps are required. First, the proposed Amendment must be passed by a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Second, it must be ratified (approved) by vote in three-fourths of the state legislatures, that is 38 of the 50 states. This strict multi-layered procedure must be followed to change anything that is in the Constitution. These steps were designed to help ensure that we are a stable 'government of laws, not of men,' according to John Adams in 1776. There are only 27 Amendments. The first ten are our Bill of Rights, and were adopted in 1791. To undo an Amendment that has been passed by two-thirds of the members in both Houses of Congress and the legislatures of at least three-fourths of the states is just as difficult, requiring the passage of another Constitutional Amendment. Only one Amendment has ever been repealed; that was Prohibition, which was adopted in 1919 by the 18th Amendment, then repealed by the 21st in 1933. The challenges to passing an Amendment are illustrated by two proposals regarding the rights of women. After decades of effort, beginning in the 1840's, women achieved the right to vote through the 19th Amendment in 1920. Trying to accomplish an Equal Rights Amendment, so that the Constitution guarantees women the same rights as men, has not yet been successful. Since 1868, what is called 'birthright citizenship' has been part of the U.S. Constitution. It is clearly stated in the 14th Amendment that 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.' There are at least 33 countries that have unrestricted birthright citizenship. These include Canada and all but one country in North and South America. Even before this Amendment, it was generally recognized that everyone born in the U.S. or its territories automatically became a citizen. A person born elsewhere could be a 'naturalized citizen' after living here for the required number of years and then formally renouncing allegiance to their birth country and swearing allegiance to the United States. This part of the 14th Amendment was adopted (1) to ensure that citizenship by birthright could not easily be taken away, and (2) to overturn the 1857 U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Dred Scott case, which held that free African-American people born in this country could never be citizens. The Congressional debates on the language of the 14th Amendment document that the phrase 'and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,' was understood to exclude only the children of foreign ministers and invading armies, and 'Indians not taxed.' They knew that the clause would extend citizenship to everyone else born on U.S. soil, even, as they said, 'Chinese and Gypsies.' The son of Chinese immigrants went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and established his birthright citizenship in United States v Wong Kim Ark (1898). Congress anticipated the possibility of a future government that opposed birthright citizenship. Consequently, they not only asserted it in a statute, the Civil Rights Act of 1866, but also in the Constitution. In the words of Sen. Benjamin Wade, their purpose was to 'fortify and make [the citizenship guarantee] very strong and clear.' The President does not have a role in the amendment process; it is entirely a legislative matter. However, apparently seeking to negate birthright citizenship all by himself, the President issued an Executive Order on January 20, 2025 declaring that a child born in the U.S. is not a citizen unless both parents are either U.S. citizens or 'lawful permanent residents' at the time of the child's birth. Lawsuits were immediately brought challenging the Constitutionality of that Executive Order. The courts hearing the cases promptly issued injunctions stopping the order from going into effect while the litigation continues. Eventually, the Supreme Court will likely decide. — Penny Clute has been an attorney since 1973. She was Clinton County district attorney from 1989 through 2001, then Plattsburgh City Court judge until her retirement in January 2012. ______________ RESOURCES Explanation of Birthright Citizenship and the issues: Text of Executive Order: Explanation of 'government of laws, not of men' quote: United States v Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898).
Yahoo
04-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump to address Congress after pausing aid to Ukraine and launching sweeping tariffs
Donald Trump is due to give a joint address to both Houses of Congress at 21:00 EST (02:00 GMT) It's the first time Trump will address Congress since returning to office in January The speech comes the day after Trump has ordered a pause on military aid to Ukraine and less than 24 hours after he announced sweeping 25% tariffs on goods entering the US from Canada and Mexico The president will be flanked by the House Speaker Mike Johnson and Vice-President JD Vance, who doubles as the ceremonial leader of the Senate Democratic and Republican lawmakers from both the House of Representatives and the Senate will be in attendance, though a group of Democrats have said they will skip the event. Elon Musk is also expected in the audience Senator Elissa Slotkin has been tapped by the Democrats to deliver the opposition party's rebuttal to Trump's address Trump to address Congress after pausing aid to Ukraine and launching sweeping tariffs
CBS News
04-03-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
Trump needs a "designated survivor" for his joint address to Congress. Here's what it means and how it works.
President Trump's speech Tuesday night will take place in front of members of both Houses of Congress and the entire presidential line of succession — with one notable exception. Each year, one Cabinet member is chosen as the " designated survivor" who will sit out the speech in case of a catastrophic event. The name of the designated survivor is not usually revealed to the public until shortly before the speech starts — or even sometimes after it starts. What is a designated survivor? The designated survivor is the informal name used for the person in the line of succession who does not attend the joint session of Congress so that there would be a leader available to step up in case of a catastrophic event. The line of succession was first determined by Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, but the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 set the modern line of succession if something should happen to the president and he or she cannot undertake his or her duties. First in line for the presidency is Vice President JD Vance. Second in line after the vice president is House Speaker Mike Johnson, third in line is Senate pro tempore Chuck Grassley, fourth in line is Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and fifth in line is Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. The line continues through other members of the Cabinet, in the order their departments were created, with the secretary of Homeland Security — currently Kristi Noem — at 18th in line. Since all of those people would normally be in attendance at the joint session of Congress, a designated survivor is chosen to stay away. Why does the practice of choosing a designated survivor exist? Unlike the line of succession, the designated survivor is not something determined by the Constitution. The practice is believed to have started during the Cold War in the 1950s, but it was not until 1981 that the first official designated survivor was named as then-Education Secretary Terrel Bell. How do they choose the designated survivor? It's not clear how the administration chooses a designated survivor since the process is classified. The person must be eligible to serve as president, so they must be a native-born American citizen and at least 35 years old. There have been several Cabinet members over the years who did not fit those criteria, including former Secretaries of State Madeleine Albright, who was born in what is now the Czech Republic, and German-born Henry Kissinger. Former Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala, who was named as designated survivor by President Bill Clinton in 1996, told ABC News in 2014 that she was shown the Situation Room and the White House staff "talked seriously about the responsibility of the designated survivor." What does the designated survivor do during the speech? There have been a few designated survivors who have been willing to discuss what they did during the speech. Then-Energy Secretary Bill Richardson, who was tapped by Clinton to be designated survivor in 2000, told ABC News in 2014 that he watched the speech from a friend's house in Sherwood, Maryland, about 90 miles outside Washington. "It's fun. You're sitting there, you're being watched. You got security. And there are a few thrills," he told ABC News. "My wife and my friends were impressed the fire trucks were there." Former Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman wrote an essay in 2017 in Politico about his own experience after being chosen. According to Glickman, he was taken a secure location outside Washington (in his case, his daughter's New York apartment), where he writes that he was "accompanied by key military staff and Secret Service, including a military officer carrying what I presumed to be the nuclear football — a black, leather-encased aluminum briefcase that would be used to authenticate the person ordering a nuclear strike." "I don't recall getting any specific instructions on what to do if the doomsday scenario happened," Glickman wrote. "All I knew is that if necessary, I could turn to that military officer accompanying me, holding that 45-pound bag, and trigger a military response, including a nuclear strike." Shalala, meanwhile, told ABC News that she stayed in Washington, waited it out at the White House and ordered pizza for her staff "I saw the president when he left and when he came back," Shalala said. "He said, 'Don't do anything I wouldn't do.'" Who has been named designated survivor in the past? The designated survivor is usually a member of the Cabinet, although the Secretaries of State, Defense and Treasury have never been chosen. There was no no designated survivor in 2021, since only 200 members of Congress attended the joint session of Congress amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Here are the last few designated survivors and the positions they held at the time: 2024: Education Secretary Miguel Cardona 2023: Labor Secretary Marty Walsh 2022: Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo 2021: No one 2020: Interior Secretary David Bernhardt
