Latest news with #fiscalDiscipline
Fox News
26 minutes ago
- Politics
- Fox News
Padilla cuffed, McIver indicted: Can Congress come back from the brink?
You have lots of places to choose from to get your message out to the press if you're House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. It's best to get your message out succinctly, clearly and free of interference. So when Johnson decided to boast about the House making good on the first bill to codify DOGE cuts and slash $9.4 billion from USAID and public broadcasting, he stepped just outside the House chamber and into a throng of reporters gathered by the Will Rogers Statue. "Republicans will continue to deliver real accountability and restore fiscal discipline," said Johnson. But the Will Rogers Statue area is a major thoroughfare in the Capitol. At the moment Johnson spoke Thursday, dozens of House Democrats were headed toward the office of Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D. They were demanding answers about why federal agents tossed Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., to the ground and handcuffed him during a press conference in Los Angeles with Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. When Johnson finished talking about reeling in the money for public broadcasting and USAID, reporters only wanted to ask about Padilla. Yours truly included. "Did the federal agents go too far," I asked. "Was that a bridge too far?" A long line of angry House Democrats squeezed past Johnson in the Will Rogers corridor. But because Johnson chose to speak in such a heavily-trafficked locale, Democrats hectored Johnson as they marched to the Senate. "Yes it was!" shouted an unidentified Democrat as she strode past the scrum, answering my question for Johnson. But Johnson immediately pivoted to what Padilla did, standing up at Noem's press conference to holler questions at her from the back of the room. "It was wildly inappropriate," said Johnson of Padilla as he spoke to the Capitol press corps. "You don't charge a sitting cabinet secretary…" "That's a lie!" shouted another unidentified Democrat. "A lie!" yelled someone else. Rep. Sam Liccardo, D-Calif., stopped to snarl something at the Speaker. But it was impossible to hear over the din. "He was acting like a senator," charged Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y. "Why don't you stand up for Congress!" "Can you respond to these people heckling you Mr. Speaker?" I asked. "I'm not going to respond to that," replied Johnson. The Capitol was pulsing at this point. The crush of House Democrats barged into the office of Thune, who was at the White House. Lucky him. The Democrats then trooped back across the Rotunda and poured into Johnson's office. "When the Speaker of the House refers to a sitting Member of the U.S. Senate who simply tried to exercise his First Amendment rights as acting like a thug, we're very concerned about that," said Congressional Hispanic Caucus Chairman Adriano Espaillat, D-N.Y. "Both the Speaker and Leader Thune should step up to the moment and preserve the institution of Congress, which are a balance in democracy and important balance in democracy." One lawmaker who didn't join the angry Democratic mob was Rep. Madeleine Dean, D-Pa. Dean stood apprehensively just beyond the wall of reporters and outside the invisible bubble created by Johnson's security detail. When Johnson concluded speaking, Dean tried to pierce the security ring to have a civil conversation with the Speaker. "Mike! Mike!" said Dean, trying to capture Johnson's attention. "It's Madeline." Johnson finally realized that "Madeleine" wasn't some reporter trying to squeeze in an extra question for the Speaker. But someone he obviously knew. A fellow lawmaker. Someone from across the aisle with whom he must have a friendship and working relationship. Johnson and Dean spoke in hushed tones as they walked quietly across Statuary Hall. Some in the press corps followed, trying to divine what they were saying. This wasn't an offstage chat back in the Speaker's Suite or on a private telephone call. But it went down in a very public part of the U.S. Capitol. The conversation continued as the duo stopped adjacent to the "British Steps" near the Speaker's Office. Dean clenched both of her hands into fists as she and the Speaker were about to part ways. She lightly touched Johnson on the right arm as he ducked into the Speaker's Office. "Thank you, sir," said Dean. "What were you speaking to the Speaker about?" I asked the Congresswoman. "I just want to keep that to myself," answered Dean. "But the one thing I wanted to say is that it's up to the President to turn the temperature down. Everyone is inflamed. And agitated. But it starts with the President. He said 'I'm talking to the President,'" said Dean. But other Republicans may have tried to dial up the temperature by blasting Padilla. Padilla left Washington earlier in the week to be in LA during the riots. The senator was supposed to start at first base for the Democrats in the Congressional Baseball Game on Wednesday night. Republicans charged that Padilla should have stayed moored in Washington. "He has a responsibility to show up at work not to go make a spectacle," said Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyo. "The fact that he's in California and not in D.C. while the Senate is voting means he's not as concerned about doing his job here," said Senate Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La. Scalise conceded he had gone home to Louisiana when hurricanes threatened the state. He argued that he "wouldn't go back home to try to stir angst against the federal agents that were coming and help us get back on our feet." Outraged Democrats thundered on the Senate floor, railing against the plight of Padilla. "This is the stuff of dictatorships. It is actually happening," said Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii. "It's despicable. It's disgusting. It is so un-American," said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. "I think it's unprecedented," said Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz. "It's obnoxious, and it's rather escalatory." But the outrage wasn't limited to Democrats. "I've seen that one clip. It's horrible. It is shocking at every level. And it's not the America I know," said Sen. Lisa Murkowski," R-Alaska. The band of Democrats who ran over to Thune's office never did find him. But by nightfall, Thune said he spoke to Padilla, Senate Sergeant at Arms Jennifer Hemingway and tried to contact Noem. "We want to get the full scope of what happened," said Thune. This falls against the backdrop of the feds charging Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-N.J., for assaulting federal agents at a Newark detention facility earlier this spring. These episodes have shaken Congress. Lawmakers wonder what would happen if the shoe were on the other foot. And despite the partisan chasms, they're all lawmakers. They know that if something like this can happen to Padilla, well, they could be next. Confidence and trust are waning. "I remain hopeful that Leader Thune and other Republicans can walk us back from the brink," said Schatz. "But I am not so sure anymore."
The Guardian
2 days ago
- Business
- The Guardian
Rachel Reeves's economic vision is coming into focus – a year too late
A government this young should not look so old. Keir Starmer has not yet celebrated his first anniversary in Downing Street, but the government already moves with the plodding gait of a caretaker administration. There were painful stumbles at the start. The cut to winter fuel payments for millions of pensioners was announced within a month of the general election. Now, in the face of overwhelming opposition, it has been largely reversed. Meagre savings to the exchequer were procured at an exorbitant price in political capital. The early display of unsentimental cost-cutting by the chancellor was meant to show that Labour was serious about fiscal discipline. The legacy of Tory mismanagement – a £20bn revenue shortfall – could be cited in mitigation. Pensioners were never going to relish the confiscation of their entitlements, just as farmers were sure to complain about the loss of inheritance tax perks and businesses were unlikely to thank the chancellor for hiking their national insurance bills. But maybe some slack would be cut to an incoming government that dared to take tough decisions; maybe the memory of terrible Conservative rule was convertible into credit for their successors. The idea was to advertise Britain, under newly reliable management, as a beacon of orderliness in a chaotic world and a magnet for investment. Prudently rationed public resources would be deployed in ways that stimulate growth – upgrading transport and energy infrastructure; housebuilding. Prosperity would follow, buoying the national mood. This week's spending review is meant to be a pivotal moment in the execution of that plan. There will be increases in capital and day-to-day spending by £113bn and £190bn respectively; well in excess of what the Tories had proposed before the election. The very opposite of austerity, the Treasury insists. Rachel Reeves boasts of 'national renewal' paid as the dividend of fiscal and political stability. But Whitehall departments not chosen for munificence face harsh real-terms spending cuts. And the benefit of investment in new trains, homes and power stations won't be felt for years, decades in some cases. In a more benign climate, a newish government could make a virtue of policy designed for the long term, not bending every announcement for tactical gain. But that amounts to a plea for national forbearance, urging collective sacrifice in anticipation of future reward. After years of stagnant incomes and rising bills, there isn't much receptiveness among British voters for yet more deferral of gratification. Also, the time to get a reliable mandate for that kind of programme was before the election. The fatal flaw in Labour's economic strategy was overestimating how much goodwill would be available to the party once it had fulfilled its electoral utility as a tool for ousting the Tories. Keir Starmer won a huge majority by making himself inoffensive to as many people as possible. The campaign started from the premise that Labour loses whenever voters think it is planning a reckless tax-and-spending spree, or suspect that its leader is a leftwing fanatic. Those threats were neutralised with ferocious discipline, but at a cost in clarity about the post-election agenda. Starmer embodied a contradiction – change without upheaval. That was bound to unravel on first contact with the reality of government. In a bygone era, Reeves's attempt to deflect blame for painful choices on to the Tory legacy might have been more effective. There was obviously a mess to be cleared up and sometimes voters have long memories. The winter of discontent was brandished in evidence to disqualify Labour from office for more than a decade. Endemic sleaze and callous neglect of the public realm in the 90s did the same for the Conservatives. Their recent reign of disrepute should impose another long period of opposition penance. It probably will, but not necessarily to Labour's benefit. The conventional division of allegiance between two main parties is breaking down, perhaps irrevocably. Reform UK regularly leads in opinion polls. In terms of councils controlled, the Liberal Democrats are Great Britain's second-largest party. These might be transient trends. It isn't unprecedented for smaller parties to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the ruling when the main opposition is still discredited and divided after recent ejection from office. In late 1981, the SDP-Liberal Alliance polled at about 50%. In a general election, 18 months later, they won 23 seats. Reform is not the first party to be led by Nigel Farage and his previous vehicles – Ukip; the Brexit party – didn't convert their midterm menace into parliamentary seats. But that was when the Conservatives were competitive. In 2019, Farage didn't even try to rival Boris Johnson, withdrawing more than 300 candidates to make a Tory majority more likely. There are reasons to think the current fragmentation in party support describes a more durable shift in the structure of British politics. Reform's ascent, mostly at the expense of the Tories, conforms to an international pattern of populists and nationalists challenging more established rightwing parties and, in the American case, swallowing the old guard whole. The moribund centre-right tradition of English conservatism doesn't look any closer to resuscitation than the twitching corpse of the pre-Trump Republican party. Powerful social and cultural trends are driving these changes. They express a depth of frustration and disillusionment that is resistant to appeals from candidates who come across as advocates for continuity of the existing system. This helps explain Labour's failure to sustain its status as the nation's preferred alternative to the Tories almost as soon as the election was over. The campaign foregrounded safety and reassurance, defining change primarily as a switch of personnel at the top. In the absence of a clear agenda for the future, Starmer and Reeves ended up owning everything that is desultory about the present. In an age of endemic mistrust in politics, there was precious little benefit of the doubt to be earned. Almost overnight, Labour became just another load of politicians, sounding the same, doing unpopular stuff and making excuses for why things aren't getting any better. That feels unfair to ministers who argue, with justification, that last autumn's budget and Wednesday's spending review set Britain on a path that is very different from anything the Tories had in mind. But precious months were wasted where the gap was too hard to discern, when the only visible agenda was painful tinkering with the status quo. The problem is not the trajectory now, but the shallowness of the angle where the lines diverged last July. It is the hesitancy of the steps, the stiff posture, that makes Labour look less like a fresh team with a purposeful stride, more like the familiar retread of a much longer incumbency. Rafael Behr is a Guardian columnist One year of Labour, with Pippa Crerar, Rafael Behr and more On 9 July, join Pippa Crerar, Rafael Behr, Frances O'Grady and Salma Shah as they look back at one year of the Labour government and plans for the next four years Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Bloomberg
20-05-2025
- Business
- Bloomberg
South Africa's Budget Gets Third Reboot With Credibility on Line
By and S'thembile Cele Save South African Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana's third attempt to deliver a budget represents his sternest test yet. The document which he'll present to lawmakers at 2 p.m. on Wednesday in Cape Town, will need to show investors that the government remains committed to fiscal discipline. It will also need to win buy-in from political parties to get it over the line, after two previous versions were scrapped because of disagreement within the governing coalition over taxes.
