Latest news with #Politico.com
CBC
01-04-2025
- Business
- CBC
Republican senators face uncomfortable vote on Trump's Canadian tariffs
Senate Democrats are putting Republican support for some of Donald Trump's tariff plans to the test by forcing a vote to nullify the emergency declaration that underpins the levies on Canada. Republicans have watched with some unease as the president's attempts to remake global trade have sent the stock market downward, but they have so far stood by Trump's on-again-off-again threats to levy taxes on imported goods. Even as the resolution from Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia offered them a potential off-ramp to the tariffs levied on Canadian imports, Republican leaders were trying to keep senators in line by focusing on fentanyl that comes into the U.S. over its northern border. "I really relish giving my Republican colleagues the chance to not just say they're concerned, but actually take an action to stop these tariffs," Kaine told The Associated Press in an interview last week. Kaine's resolution — expected to go to a vote as early as Tuesday — challenges Trump's use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act, also called IEEPA, to declare an emergency at the northern border in order to hit Canada with tariffs. The IEEPA includes a provision allowing any senator to force a vote to block emergency powers. To be successful in the Senate, Kaine's measure would need the support of all 46 of his Democratic colleagues in the chamber, as well as four Republicans. Kentucky Republican Rand Paul is a co-sponsor of Kaine's measure. "I live in a state where we have three of the big automobile manufacturers. They're all opposed to the tariffs, and I think that it would hurt them," Paul told a U.S. radio show on Sunday. "The bourbon industry in Kentucky, they don't like the tariffs." According to Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson moved earlier this month to block the ability of tariff critics to force a floor vote in that chamber. That means it is highly likely that Trump won't be prevented legislatively from pursuing his tariff agenda with Canada, but if Kaine's resolution succeeds, it would still be a symbolic rebuke to the president. Several Republican senators represent states that share a land or water border with Canada, a list that includes Susan Collins of Maine, Pennsylvania's Dave McCormick, Steve Daines of Montana, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and both senators from Idaho and Ohio. Fentanyl a 'smoke screen,' Kaine says Kaine, in an op-ed in the Washington Post late last week, accused Trump of "using [a] fake emergency as a smoke screen to collect tariff revenue," citing public polling that the measure is unpopular with Americans, as well as a Yale University study indicating they could cost the average American family up to $2,000 more each year. A small fraction of the fentanyl that comes into the U.S. enters from Canada, and more drugs flow in the opposite direction. Customs and Border Protection seized 43 pounds of fentanyl at the northern border during the 2024 fiscal year, and since January, authorities have seized less than 1.5 pounds, according to federal data. Meanwhile, at the southern U.S.-Mexico border, authorities seized over 21,000 pounds last year. WATCH l White House has given shifting explanations for tariff need: Why some of Trump's tariff justifications don't stand up 27 days ago Duration 3:35 Most Republicans in the Senate have signalled they aren't exactly fans of tariffs, but argued that Trump is using them as a negotiating tool. "I am supportive of using tariffs in a way to accomplish a specific objective, in this case ending drug traffic," Republican Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota told reporters last month. He said this week that his "advice remains the same." While Trump's close allies in the Senate were standing steadfastly by the idea of remaking the U.S. economy through tariffs, others have begun openly voicing their dissatisfaction with trade wars that could disrupt industries and raise prices on autos, groceries, housing and other goods. "I'm keeping a close eye on all these tariffs because oftentimes the first folks that are hurt in a trade war are your farmers and ranchers," said Daines. WATCH l Breaking down Trump's auto tariff plans: Why experts think Trump's new auto tariff plan 'defies logic' | About That 18 hours ago Duration 25:38 U.S. President Donald Trump is imposing a 25 per cent tariff on vehicles not made in the U.S. Andrew Chang explains why this threat is different. Plus, is now the perfect time to buy a home in Canada? Sen. John Kennedy, a Louisiana Republican, said he would prefer to see the U.S. and its trading partners move to remove all tariffs on each other, and conceded that Trump's tariff threats had injected uncertainty into global markets. "We're in uncharted waters," Kennedy told reporters. "Nobody knows what the impact of these tariffs is going to be." Recession more likely: Goldman Sachs Earlier this month, Trump hit Canada and Mexico with 25 per cent across-the-board duties, with a lower 10 per cent levy on Canadian energy — then partly paused the tariffs a few days later. Trump said at the time that the pause would last until April 2, which is Wednesday. Trump has called Wednesday "Liberation Day" — the day when he intends to impose "reciprocal" tariffs by increasing U.S. duties to match the tax rates that other countries charge on imports. The measures will bring "tremendous wealth" back to the U.S., Trump said Monday. But economists at Goldman Sachs have raised their forecast for inflation and lowered it for U.S. economic growth for the end of the year. They now see a 35 per cent chance of a U.S. recession in the next year, up from an earlier forecast of 20 per cent, "reflecting our lower growth forecast, falling confidence, and statements from White House officials indicating willingness to tolerate economic pain," according to Goldman Sachs economist David Mericle.
Yahoo
07-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Politico pushes back at 'misinformed,' 'flat-out false' claims over subscriptions to federal agencies
The top executives at Politico are strongly pushing back against what they call "misinformed" and "flat-out false" claims made against the outlet over subscription fees that came from federal agencies. "Politico has been the subject of debate on X this week. Some of it has been misinformed, and some of it has been flat-out false. Let's set the record straight," Politico CEO Goli Sheikholeslami and editor-in-chief John Harris jointly wrote in a note to readers. "Politico is a privately owned company. We have never received any government funding – no subsidies, no grants, no handouts. Not one dime, ever, in 18 years. Millions of people around the world read our journalism on and in newsletters. It is supported by advertising and sponsorships," they continued. "Politico Pro is different." Politico Denies It's A 'Beneficiary Of Government Programs' As Questions Swirl Over Receiving Taxpayer Funds Sheikholeslami and Harris then detailed the costly subscription service. "It is a professional subscription service used by companies, organizations, and, yes, some government agencies. They subscribe because it makes them better at their jobs – helping them track policy, legislation and regulations in real time with news, intelligence and a suite of data products," they wrote. "At its core, Politico Pro is about transparency and accountability: Shining a light on the work of the agencies, regulators and policymakers throughout our vast federal government. Businesses and entities within the government find it useful as they navigate the chaotic regulatory and legislative landscape." Read On The Fox News App They said the majority of Politico Pro subscribers are in the private sector and that 90% renew their subscription to the service. "Government agencies that subscribe do so through standard public procurement process – just like any other tool they buy to work smarter and be more efficient. This is not funding. It is a transaction – just as the government buys research, equipment, software and industry reports. Some online voices are deliberately spreading falsehoods," they continued. "Let's be clear: Politico has no financial dependence on the government and no hidden agenda. We cover politics and policy – that's our job." White House Announces Doge Is Canceling Payments To Politico On Wednesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt vowed any government payments Politico had been receiving will end as President Donald Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) cracks down on spending. "I can confirm that the more than $8 million taxpayer dollars that have gone to, essentially, subsidizing subscriptions to Politico on the American taxpayers dime, will no longer be happening," Leavitt said. "The DOGE team is working on canceling those payments now," she continued. "This is a whole government effort to assure that we are going line by line when it comes to the federal government's books." There was speculation on social media that the $8 million in question all came from USAID, the agency currently being targeted by DOGE co-founder Elon Musk, but only $44,000 of it came from that agency. Base Politico Pro subscriptions are typically between $12,000 and $15,000 for three users, according to a person with knowledge of the pricing and The Washington Times. Government agency spending on Politico subscriptions pre-dates the Biden administration, according to article source: Politico pushes back at 'misinformed,' 'flat-out false' claims over subscriptions to federal agencies
Fox News
07-02-2025
- Business
- Fox News
Politico pushes back at 'misinformed,' 'flat-out false' claims over subscriptions to federal agencies
The top executives at Politico are strongly pushing back against what they call "misinformed" and "flat-out false" claims made against the outlet over subscription fees that came from federal agencies. "Politico has been the subject of debate on X this week. Some of it has been misinformed, and some of it has been flat-out false. Let's set the record straight," Politico CEO Goli Sheikholeslami and editor-in-chief John Harris jointly wrote in a note to readers. "Politico is a privately owned company. We have never received any government funding – no subsidies, no grants, no handouts. Not one dime, ever, in 18 years. Millions of people around the world read our journalism on and in newsletters. It is supported by advertising and sponsorships," they continued. "Politico Pro is different." Sheikholeslami and Harris then detailed the costly subscription service. "It is a professional subscription service used by companies, organizations, and, yes, some government agencies. They subscribe because it makes them better at their jobs – helping them track policy, legislation and regulations in real time with news, intelligence and a suite of data products," they wrote. "At its core, Politico Pro is about transparency and accountability: Shining a light on the work of the agencies, regulators and policymakers throughout our vast federal government. Businesses and entities within the government find it useful as they navigate the chaotic regulatory and legislative landscape." They said the majority of Politico Pro subscribers are in the private sector and that 90% renew their subscription to the service. "Government agencies that subscribe do so through standard public procurement process – just like any other tool they buy to work smarter and be more efficient. This is not funding. It is a transaction – just as the government buys research, equipment, software and industry reports. Some online voices are deliberately spreading falsehoods," they continued. "Let's be clear: Politico has no financial dependence on the government and no hidden agenda. We cover politics and policy – that's our job." On Wednesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt vowed any government payments Politico had been receiving will end as President Donald Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) cracks down on spending. "I can confirm that the more than $8 million taxpayer dollars that have gone to, essentially, subsidizing subscriptions to Politico on the American taxpayers dime, will no longer be happening," Leavitt said. "The DOGE team is working on canceling those payments now," she continued. "This is a whole government effort to assure that we are going line by line when it comes to the federal government's books." There was speculation on social media that the $8 million in question all came from USAID, the agency currently being targeted by DOGE co-founder Elon Musk, but only $44,000 of it came from that agency. Base Politico Pro subscriptions are typically between $12,000 and $15,000 for three users, according to a person with knowledge of the pricing and The Washington Times. Government agency spending on Politico subscriptions pre-dates the Biden administration, according to
