Our Team in Action!

Josh Newman SD29 RE-ELECTED 2020-2024

Assemblyman Freddie Rodriguez re-elected to AD52 2021-2025

 

Governor Newsom with New State Party Chair Rusty Hicks!

Our Dream Team!

Encounter at Governor’s annual party.

Former President Barack Obama, center, waves to the crowd after speaking at a campaign rally to support Democratic California congressional candidates, Josh Harder, T.J. Cox, Gil Cisneros, Katie Porter, Harley Rouda, Mike Levin, from left, at the Anaheim Convention Center in Anaheim on Saturday, Sept. 8, 2018. (Photo by Kevin Sullivan, Orange County Register/SCNG)

 

 

The reason our School Board is so dysfunctional.

Welcome

Progressives, Independents, and Democrats!

Congratulations Governor Newsom!

Come to our monthly meetings.

 

We support Chino, Chino Hills, and South Ontario in Assembly Districts 53 and 59, State Senate Districts 22 and 32, and Congressional Districts 35 and 40
Our Facebook for Chino Valley Democrats LINK

Don and Jan Bridge and ACT Union Pres and VP

Registering voters at the Summer Concerts in the Park

Congratulations Christina Gagnier, Chino Valley Unified School Dist. Board!

President of our Club, Marian Arguello receives a special CHINO Woman of the Year award from Assembly representative Freddie Rodriguez (AD52) !

https://sd22.senate.ca.gov/sites/sd22.senate.ca.gov/files/SusanRubio-300x300.jpg

CA State Senator Susan Rubio SD22

Our club in action!

The Arguellos posing for their fans!

 

American Cancer Society Relay for Life Volunteers in the Community- 2019

Rally demanding CD39 Republican Ed Royce address Healthcare!

 

We regfister voters and recruit club members at the Summer Concerts in the Park!

 

5 Takeaways From The Elections Now That They Are Finally Over

With the resolution of an incredibly close House race in California (Democrat Adam Gray unseated incumbent Republican John Duarte), we now know the major results of the 2024 balloting a month after Election Day. It’s a good time to set aside Republican spin claiming a massive landslide victory and Democratic rationalizations about this or that mistake changing everything, and just look at the numbers and the story they tell. As we will discuss, total GOP control of the federal government probably won’t last more than two years, and there are no particular signs of an electoral realignment down ballot. Republican triumphalism and Democratic despair are equally unmerited from the perspective of the election itself.

Trump’s win looks pretty normal

Looking just at the presidential results, the more you look at the numbers the clearer it is that Trump made solid but unspectacular gains compared to his showing in 2020. There is no way his victory over Kamala Harris can be credibly called a “landslide.” He did not win a national popular-vote majority (though he came close with 49.79 percent, according to the most complete results we have). His margin over Harris was 1.5 percent, which is smaller than the margin by which the victor won in every presidential election since 1968 (setting aside the two elections, in 2000 and 2016, when the popular vote loser won the Electoral College).

The popular vote win did, of course, show a marked improvement by Trump from his 4.5 percent deficit against Joe Biden in 2020, and from his 2.1 percent deficit against Hillary Clinton in 2016. The 2024 “swing” to Trump was not, the most recent election analyses confirm, principally a matter of odd turnout patterns afflicting Democrats who were unhappy with their party over this or that issue but disliked Trump as much or more; Democrats lost vote share to Trump, not to “none of the above.”

Trump won the Electoral College by a more decisive 312 to 226 margin, but that’s basically the same margin he won in 2016 and that Biden won in 2020. More to the point, a two-point swing to Harris in just three states, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, would have given her an Electoral College majority and the presidency.

Every bit of information we have reinforces the impression that recent inflation and pessimistic assessments of the economy were the killer issues for Harris. They were overwhelmingly the top concerns of swing voters, who also exhibited extraordinarily positive retroactive impressions of Trump’s performance on the economy during his first term. You can argue that her campaign failed to galvanize negative swing-voter feelings about Trump’s character and extremist associations, or that the vice-president might have somehow more sharply distinguished herself from the deeply unpopular president to whom she was lashed.

Republican Senate gains were mostly a reflection of a favorable landscape

Throughout the 2024 election cycle, no matter what was going on in the presidential race, the odds of Democrats hanging on to control of the Senate were consistently low, thanks to an unforgiving landscape. Democrats were defending eight vulnerable seats, three of them in states (Montana, Ohio, and West Virginia) sure to be carried handily by Trump. There were only three theoretically vulnerable Republicans; all of them were in safely red states (Florida, Nebraska, and Texas) and had big money advantages over their challengers.

In the end, Democrats predictably lost Senate races in deep-red Montana, Ohio, and West Virginia, and went 4-1 (winning in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin while losing in Pennsylvania) in the other five competitive races, all in states carried by Trump at the presidential level. Upsets did not materialize in Florida, Nebraska, or Texas. While the national Republican trend helped, it’s safe to say the landscape mattered most in producing the 53-47 majority Senate Republicans now enjoy.

House Democrats did well, and will be able to cause real problems for Mike Johnson

Despite the adverse presidential and Senate results, House Democrats gained one net seat (two if the 2022 elections are the baseline) in 2024 balloting. Democrats won 40 of the 69 districts rated “most competitive” by the New York Times, and split the 22 races rated as toss-ups by the Cook Political Report right down the middle. They flipped three seats each in California and New York, mitigating to some extent the story line of Democratic crisis in deep-blue states.

The results means the narrow margin of control that caused a lot of problems for House Republicans during the last two years will be continued if not intensified, with Speaker Mike Johnson being able to lose just two votes on any pure party-line balloting in the House. There’s an even more perilous short-term situation as House members resign to accept positions in the Trump administration (two special elections for open GOP seats have already been scheduled for April 1 in Florida). Assuming Democrats stay united, there will be a powerful temptation among various House Republican factions to shake down Johnson prior to crucial votes, or even to break ranks entirely in anticipation of difficult midterm elections.

State results showed no major gains for either party

Whatever national wave Republicans could boast based on their presidential performance didn’t really extend to the state level. Neither party made a net gain in governorships, though Democrats did decisively win the most-discussed contest, in North Carolina. Among state legislatures, Republicans achieved no net gain in chambers controlled (though they did bust up Democratic trifectas in Michigan and Minnesota) and wound up with the same percentage of legislators overall that they had going into the election.

The most fiercely competitive state ballot measures involved abortion policy, with abortion-rights supporters winning seven (in Arizona, Colorado, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, and New York), and their opponents winning three (in Florida, Nebraska, and South Dakota, though the Florida abortion-rights measure did win a majority but failed to reach a super-majority threshold). Though the Florida outcome was a bitter disappointment for the largely Democratic pro-choice forces, their overall record in 2024 remained positive.

Looking ahead, neither party is a clear favorite

Though a lot of currently unknown factors will determine the shape and intensity of the 2026 midterm elections, the odds are very good that Democrats will have at least one trophy in plain view: control of the House. In 20 of the last 22 midterm elections, the president’s party has lost a minimum of four net House seats, and an average of 32. Last time he was in office, Trump’s party lost 40 net House seats. From what we know of the new Republican regime’s plans for the next two years, it seems very likely that it will cash in a lot of political capital to achieve highly controversial policy goals, which almost always means a short-term loss of popularity. A lot of House Republicans are going to be walking planks on high-profile votes in 2025 that could be fatal in 2026.

On the other hand, Republicans would have to really screw up to lose control of the Senate in 2026; they will again benefit from a favorable landscape. While they must defend 22 seats, 21 are in states Trump carried on November 5; the other is held by Maine veteran Susan Collins, who regularly overperforms her national party. Fully 20 of the seats at risk are in states Trump carried by at least 11 percent in 2024. It will be a really hard nut to crack, particularly since Democrats will have to defend vulnerable senators of their own in Georgia (Jon Ossoff) and Michigan (Gary Peters). Since Republicans control the White House and the vice-president’s tie-breaking vote, Democrats would have to flip four seats to regain control. The 2028 landscape is significantly less slanted toward Republicans, but if they enter it with their current three-seat cushion (or more, depending on what happens in 2026), a flip will still be a tall order.

How about the big prize, the presidency, which presumably Donald Trump will be giving up in 2028? The good news for Democrats going forward is that in 2028 the Biden administration will be an increasingly distant memory, and Republicans will without question be held accountable for economic discontent, which is very likely to continue or even intensify. The GOP gains among Democratic “base” constituencies (especially Latinos and young voters) that received so much attention this year are most easily explained by short-term reaction to deeply negative economic perceptions rather than some fundamental alienation from the Democratic Party that we can take for granted going forward.

Even without factoring in the possibility that the new Republican regime in Washington will overreach and become quickly unpopular (which will almost definitely be the case if the massive cuts in non-defense federal spending the GOP is contemplating are enacted), there’s no particular reason to assume that J.D. Vance or some other MAGA inheritor will begin the 2028 presidential cycle as a favorite against a Democratic nominee who (this time!) will be chosen by an open primary process.

There’s no clear evidence of a Republican realignment

Every time either party wins a high-stakes election, particularly if it results in a governing trifecta, there’s talk in the air of realignment, of a shifting of tectonic plates that changes the position of the major parties for a generation. We heard it from Republicans in 2004, just before a precipitous decline in George W. Bush’s popularity that cost the GOP control of Congress in 2006 and the White House in 2008. We heard it from Democrats in 2008, just before they lost the House in a calamitous 2010 midterm with the Senate following suit in 2014. In 2020 Democrats told themselves the defeat of Trump (followed by his much-condemned refusal to accept it) meant the MAGA infection of the GOP was at a definitive end.

These realignment dreams were all illusions, and there’s no clear evidence today’s are any different. Do Trump’s gains among the fast-growing Latino population mean Democrats are doomed in future presidential elections? Bush’s very similar gains in the same demographic group (and also, lest we forget, among Black voters) sure didn’t stick. Does the GOP’s 2024 progress among young voters guarantee a glorious future? Probably not, since they’re still losing among the under-30 voters, aside from the fact that a slightly new cohort arrives every year, now featuring first-time voters whose crucial experience will be with the reign of overwhelmingly Christian conservative Republicans who may disappoint their economic aspirations and foreign-policy views just as much as Biden did.

There’s also virtually no chance that future elections will feature an octogenarian Democratic incumbent who takes his sweet time giving way to a vice-presidential successor who struggles to come up with a “change” message, even as her opponent survived two assassination attempts. The weird stuff about 2024, including its weird presidential winner, will probably be more noteworthy to historians than any long-term trend it signaled. So the smart expectation going forward is continued partisan polarization and highly contested elections, not some red apocalypse.

 

 

 

found in New Yorker Intelligencer Mag by Ed Kilgore Dec 5, 24- https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/2024-election-5-takeaways.html

Bernie Sanders remark on Instagram re: 2024 election

It should come as no great surprise that a Democratic Party which has abandoned working class people would find that the working class has abandoned them.

While the Democratic leadership defends the status quo, the American people are angry and want change.

And they’re right.

Link: https://www.instagram.com/p/DCC3TFUBbkO/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

“While I concede this election, I will not concede the fight…”  VP Harris,  Nov. 6, 2024

A new way forward…

Vice President Harris and Governor Walz are fighting for a New Way Forward that protects our fundamental freedoms, strengthens our democracy, and ensures every person has the opportunity to not just get by, but to get ahead. As a prosecutor, Attorney General, Senator, and now Vice President of the United States, Kamala Harris always stood up for the people against predators, scammers, and powerful interests. She promises to be a president for all Americans, a president who unites us around our highest aspirations, and a president who always fights for the American people. From the courthouse to the White House, that has been her life’s work.

 

NPR: What to watch for in the post-Labor Day campaign sprint

Harris Picks Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as Running Mate

Updated Aug. 6, 2024 5:44 pm ET


Vice President Kamala Harris has named Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate. WSJ’s Ken Thomas explains what Walz brings to the Democrats’ election showdown with Donald Trump and JD Vance. Photo: Photo: Jim Vondruska/Getty Images

The vice president talked to President Biden on the phone before announcing Walz as her pick, said Emilie Simons, a White House spokeswoman. Biden also spoke to Walz and congratulated him, later praising him as a “powerful voice for working people.”

Walz wasn’t widely known outside of Minnesota before his name appeared on Harris shortlists. But he gained some Democratic fans outside his state in recent weeks for television interviews that hit at former President Donald Trump and his running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, without being overly nasty. He called the pair “weird,” a word that went viral among Democrats.

Harris bypassed Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, another finalist for the job who was viewed as a more conventional pick because he had the potential to help deliver a key battleground state. Shapiro was expected to attend the Philadelphia rally alongside Harris and Walz.

Advertisement

Shapiro’s selection might have also angered some progressives because he has supported private-school vouchers and is a vocal supporter of Israel at a time when some activists on the left have condemned the Biden administration’s handling of the war in Gaza. One person close to the process also said the public lobbying conducted by many of Shapiro’s allies was a frustration to Harris’s team.

Shapiro said in a statement Tuesday he was grateful for having been considered and that Walz was an “exceptionally strong addition to the ticket.”

Pat Haney, 72, a school superintendent from Philadelphia, said she is excited about Walz’s selection in part because it allows for Shapiro to remain her home state’s governor. Pointing to Walz’s military and education background, she said she thinks he “can be helpful in swing states and the Midwest.”

Sheike Ward, 33, a Philadelphia resident who works in healthcare and is a member of SEIU, said she looked into the records of all of the finalists and saw Walz as the most pro-union. She also liked his background in teaching. “Anybody that’s been a teacher is most likely going to be a caring person,” she said.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz speaking in July with a man whose family business was destroyed as a result of a damaged dam and related flooding. Photo: Casey Ek/The Free Press/Associated Press

A person close to the process said Walz was picked for his executive experience and record on issues that Democrats want to work on nationally, such as the child tax credit, paid leave, abortion and gun control. The person also said his background as a veteran, hunter and onetime coach would be appealing in Midwestern states, and that he is viewed as a strong messenger to counter Trump and Vance. He also has a good personal rapport with Harris.

Trump’s campaign in a statement suggested the selection represented a doubling down on progressivism. Aides to his campaign said they think Walz will be easier to define as a liberal and attach to the broader theme of Harris being out of step with many Americans, while not making it harder for Trump to win a battleground state.

“It’s no surprise that San Francisco Liberal Kamala Harris wants West Coast wannabe Tim Walz as her running-mate,” the statement said. “Walz has spent his governorship trying to reshape Minnesota in the image of the Golden State.”

Advertisement

Vance, who is scheduled this week to make stops in many of the places Harris and Walz plan to go, told reporters traveling on his campaign plane that he left Walz a message after the announcement.

What’s News

The Wall Street Journal Whats NewsWho Is Tim Walz, Kamala Harris’ Pick for Vice President?

“I just said, look, ‘Congratulations, look forward to a robust conversation. And enjoy the ride,’” he said. “Maybe he’ll call me back, maybe he won’t.”

Democrats on Capitol Hill hailed the choice. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) said Walz was “a great asset” for Harris. Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) said: “To characterize him as left is so unreal.…He’s right down the middle.”

Republicans attacked Walz, with Rep. Tom Emmer (R., Minn.) saying his state’s governor is an “empty suit who has worked to turn Minnesota into Harris’ home state of California.”

At 60 years old, Walz is slightly older than Harris (she turns 60 in October). He was viewed by some Minnesotans as a moderate Democrat when first elected governor in 2018. He had grown up in small-town Nebraska and enlisted in the Army National Guard at 17. He was elected to Congress from one of the state’s more conservative districts and once earned the National Rifle Association’s endorsement.

Advertisement

But he has governed more to the left than some initially expected. Walz supported universal free school meals for students, voting rights for the formerly incarcerated, driver’s licenses for migrants who crossed the border illegally and recreational marijuana. He signed a law that made abortion a “fundamental right.”

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz signed a bill in 2023 to allow driver’s licenses for state residents regardless of their immigration status. Photo: Elizabeth Flores/Star Tribune/Associated Press

To win in November, Harris likely needs to do the reverse of what Walz did. She is distancing herself from some of the more progressive parts of her record—some dating from her 2020 Democratic presidential primary campaign—in a gradual move to the middle, even as Trump works to brand her a “San Francisco liberal.”

Minnesota Republicans have suggested Walz was slow to call out the National Guard to address rioting that started after the Minneapolis police murder of George Floyd in 2020.

The rioting resulted in significant damage, including a police precinct being set on fire. Walz deployed hundreds of National Guard troops three days after Floyd’s murder as looting and arson spread. City and state officials have blamed each other for the response. After-action assessments found a breakdown in communication between government officials, the Minneapolis-based Star Tribune newspaper has reported.

Advertisement

Walz appears as comfortable in front of voters wearing a flannel shirt and baseball cap as he is in a suit and tie, giving him a naturalness that has served him well on the campaign trail.

After graduating in 1989 with a social-science degree from Chadron State College in Nebraska, Walz spent a year teaching in China before returning to full-time status at the National Guard and then a teaching career. He eventually landed about 80 miles southwest of Minneapolis in Mankato, Minn., where he taught social studies and raised two children with his wife, Gwen Walz.

He also continued in the National Guard, where he specialized in field artillery and did a tour overseas, although he never saw combat. After 24 years in the National Guard, he rose to the rank of command sergeant major before running for Congress in 2006.

House Speaker John Boehner administering the House oath to Rep. Tim Walz during a mock swearing-in ceremony in 2011. Photo: Jacquelyn Martin/AP

In his early 40s, Walz entered politics and managed to unseat a six-term Republican congressman in a mostly rural southern Minnesota district. His humor, polished by years of trying to keep high-schoolers’ attention, has been a strength throughout his political career.

After 12 years in Congress, Walz ran for governor as someone willing to compromise with Republicans. He won by 11.4 percentage points in 2018, almost four points higher than his 2022 re-election victory.

Minnesota became something of a laboratory in 2023 for many of the Democratic Party’s policy goals, once Walz had a legislature fully controlled by Democrats. Besides establishing the goal of a carbon-free electrical grid by 2040, the state also passed paid family and medical leave, sick leave, transgender-rights protections, a tax credit aimed at low-income parents, and a $1 billion investment in affordable housing.

Advertisement

“If you need a reminder that elections have consequences, check out what’s happening in Minnesota,” former President Barack Obama wrote on social media last year.

Walz might have some historical trends going his way. Minnesota has already been home to two vice presidents, Hubert H. Humphrey and Walter Mondale, enough to rank in the top 10 states. Also, roughly a third of all past vice presidents have been governors, according to the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers University.

Vivian Salama, Alex Leary and Lindsay Wise contributed to this article.

Write to John McCormick at mccormick.john@wsj.com, Tarini Parti at tarini.parti@wsj.com and Catherine Lucey at catherine.lucey@wsj.com

Letters: If Joe Biden steps down, so should Donald Trump

from Chicago Tribune Editorial Page  July 3rd, 2024

I, like millions of other Americans and people from around the world, watched the cringe-worthy presidential debate. Neither candidate inspires confidence in the United States as a world leader. What I find most interesting is Sunday’s editorial (“As America sank into the couch, Biden and Trump combined for a depressing farce. Enough,.” June 30) presenting valid reasons for President Joe Biden to step aside for another candidate. This was reinforced by Clarence Page’s column (who almost always sides with the Democratic Party) making the same endorsement (“The sad reality? Biden needs to make way for another Democratic nominee”).

During the debate, former President Donald Trump said that Biden was the only reason he was running and that he would rather be doing anything else, but he was compelled for the sake of the nation to run again. Biden said he is running to protect democracy and protect the nation from the influence of Trump and his MAGA followers. I agree with the editorial board; Biden should step aside. I will go further and say that the Republican Party should hold Trump to his word and have him step down as well, should Biden choose not to run.

The question on everyone’s mind is: Who should run? I would like to see a matchup between either former Gov. Nikki Haley, R-S.C., or Gov. Kim Reynolds, R-Iowa, and either Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, D-Michigan, or U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Illinois. In my opinion, a presidential race between either of these Republicans and either of these Democrats would be beneficial for the country, as well as our standing in the world.

— Scott P. Lauder, Webster, Wisconsin

It’s a win-win for media

Regarding the editorial: I understand what the Tribune Editorial Board says about the “debate,” but it’s what the board isn’t saying that leads me to write.

The only reason we have to suffer presidential debating this early is because the nominations are already a foregone conclusion. If the editorial board can declare Joe Biden unfit for office on the basis of a head cold, then how can it completely elide the far more salient evidence of unfitness on the part of Donald Trump, namely that he is a convicted criminal? But Trump will drop dead before he drops out. Considering what’s at stake in this election — the continuation of our democracy — Biden would hardly be inclined to quit the race also.

For the Tribune Editorial Board and the rest of the mainstream media, it’s a win-win. If Biden does follow the editorial board’s advice and quit, the board can unfurl its hardy “Democrats in disarray” boilerplate once more. If Biden denies the board that pleasure, then it can go back to hammering the age question all the way up to November, even afterward, if Biden wins.

But if worse comes to worst and Trump wins, I guess the board could tell us what democracy looks like in the rearview mirror.

— Jeffrey Hobbs, Springfield

Nullifying voters’ choice

The Tribune Editorial Board seems to be in favor of Joe Biden stepping aside and not continuing his campaign. My question to this assumption is: How is this not considered voter suppression? Millions of voters have cast their votes for Biden to be the Democratic nominee for president. Now, it’s being suggested that Biden should step aside and allow the party to come up with a better nominee — someone the American voter did not choose to represent their vital interests in democracy.

Is this the new game we are having shoved down our throats? Put a candidate up, see if he has no chance, then replace him with a hand-picked candidate?

Sounds like “democracy” to me.

— John Caponi, Darien

More suited as a ringmaster

Much has been said about President Joe Biden’s so-called weak performance during the debate, but the key word here is “performance.” He is not a performer, but an elder statesman who knows how to lead our country, work with allies, make hard decisions, listen to advisers, respond to citizens’ needs, put forth an agenda, work with those across the aisle, etc.

Biden’s opponent is a performer, a man concerned about himself, a person full of bluster with no regard for the country at all. If one were truly listening to Donald Trump’s claims, one would notice that facts were missing from his remarks. Instead, he relied on hyperbole and untruths. Yes, he has a strong voice, unlike Biden, who is soft-spoken, but this hardly makes Biden weak. Unfortunately, Trump seems to equate a loud mouth with intelligence.

I hope the voters will eventually realize that Trump is more suited as a ringmaster than a president, for he will lead us into a three-ring circus, just as he did during his first presidency. If that happens, “Send in the clowns”!

— Carol Van Durme, Chicago

FACT SHEET: President Biden Announces New Actions to Secure the Border

Biden taking action as Congressional Republicans put partisan politics ahead of national security, twice voting against toughest reforms in decades

Since his first day in office, President Biden has called on Congress to secure our border and address our broken immigration system. Over the past three years, while Congress has failed to act, the President has acted to secure our border. His Administration has deployed the most agents and officers ever to address the situation at the Southern border, seized record levels of illicit fentanyl at our ports of entry, and brought together world leaders on a framework to deal with changing migration patterns that are impacting the entire Western Hemisphere.

Earlier this year, the President and his team reached a historic bipartisan agreement with Senate Democrats and Republicans to deliver the most consequential reforms of America’s immigration laws in decades. This agreement would have added critical border and immigration personnel, invested in technology to catch illegal fentanyl, delivered sweeping reforms to the asylum system, and provided emergency authority for the President to shut down the border when the system is overwhelmed. But Republicans in Congress chose to put partisan politics ahead of our national security, twice voting against the toughest and fairest set of reforms in decades.

President Biden believes we must secure our border. That is why today, he announced executive actions to bar migrants who cross our Southern border unlawfully from receiving asylum. These actions will be in effect when high levels of encounters at the Southern Border exceed our ability to deliver timely consequences, as is the case today. They will make it easier for immigration officers to remove those without a lawful basis to remain and reduce the burden on our Border Patrol agents.

But we must be clear: this cannot achieve the same results as Congressional action, and it does not provide the critical personnel and funding needed to further secure our Southern border. Congress still must act.

The Biden-Harris Administration’s executive actions will:  

Bar Migrants Who Cross the Southern Border Unlawfully From Receiving Asylum

  • President Biden issued a proclamation under Immigration and Nationality Act sections 212(f) and 215(a) suspending entry of noncitizens who cross the Southern border into the United States unlawfully. This proclamation is accompanied by an interim final rule from the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security that restricts asylum for those noncitizens.
  • These actions will be in effect when the Southern border is overwhelmed, and they will make it easier for immigration officers to quickly remove individuals who do not have a legal basis to remain in the United States.
  • These actions are not permanent. They will be discontinued when the number of migrants who cross the border between ports of entry is low enough for America’s system to safely and effectively manage border operations. These actions also include similar humanitarian exceptions to those included in the bipartisan border agreement announced in the Senate, including those for unaccompanied children and victims of trafficking.

Recent Actions to secure our border and address our broken immigration system:

Strengthening the Asylum Screening Process

  • The Department of Homeland Security published a proposed rule to ensure that migrants who pose a public safety or national security risk are removed as quickly in the process as possible rather than remaining in prolonged, costly detention prior to removal. This proposed rule will enhance security and deliver more timely consequences for those who do not have a legal basis to remain in the United States.

Announced new actions to more quickly resolve immigration cases

  • The Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security launched a Recent Arrivals docket to more quickly resolve a portion of immigration cases for migrants who attempt to cross between ports of entry at the Southern border in violation of our immigration laws.
  • Through this process, the Department of Justice will be able to hear these cases more quickly and the Department of Homeland Security will be able to more quickly remove individuals who do not have a legal basis to remain in the United States and grant protection to those with valid claims.
  • The bipartisan border agreement would have created and supported an even more efficient framework for issuing final decisions to all asylum seekers. This new process to reform our overwhelmed immigration system can only be created and funded by Congress.

Revoked visas of CEOs and government officials who profit from migrants coming to the U.S. unlawfully

  • The Department of State imposed visa restrictions on executives of several Colombian transportation companies who profit from smuggling migrants by sea. This action cracks down on companies that help facilitate unlawful entry into the United States, and sends a clear message that no one should profit from the exploitation of vulnerable migrants.
  • The State Department also imposed visa restrictions on over 250 members of the Nicaraguan government, non-governmental actors, and their immediate family members for their roles in supporting the Ortega-Murillo regime, which is selling transit visas to migrants from within and beyond the Western Hemisphere who ultimately make their way to the Southern border.
  • Previously, the State Department revoked visas of executives of charter airlines for similar actions.

Expanded Efforts to Dismantle Human Smuggling and Support Immigration Prosecutions

  • The Departments of State and Justice launched an “Anti-Smuggling Rewards” initiative designed to dismantle the leadership of human smuggling organizations that bring migrants through Central America and across the Southern U.S. border. The initiative will offer financial rewards for information leading to the identification, location, arrest, or conviction of those most responsible for significant human smuggling activities in the region.
  • The Department of Justice will seek new and increased penalties against human smugglers to properly account for the severity of their criminal conduct and the human misery that it causes.
  • The Department of Justice is also partnering with the Department of Homeland Security to direct additional prosecutors and support staff to increase immigration-related prosecutions in crucial border U.S. Attorney’s Offices. Efforts include deploying additional DHS Special Assistant United States Attorneys to different U.S. Attorneys’ offices, assigning support staff to critical U.S. Attorneys’ offices, including DOJ Attorneys to serve details in U.S. Attorneys’ Offices in several border districts, and partnering with federal agencies to identify additional resources to target these crimes.

Enhancing Immigration Enforcement

  • The Department of Homeland Security has surged agents to the Southern border and is referring a record number of people into expedited removal.
  • The Department of Homeland Security is operating more repatriation flights per week than ever before. Over the past year, DHS has removed or returned more than 750,000 people, more than in every fiscal year since 2010.
  • Working closely with partners throughout the region, the Biden-Harris Administration is identifying and collaborating on enforcement efforts designed to stop irregular migration before migrants reach our Southern border, expand investment and integration opportunities in the region to support those who may otherwise seek to migrate, and increase lawful pathways for migrants as an alternative to irregular migration.

Seizing Fentanyl at our Border

  • Border officials have seized more fentanyl at ports of entry in the last two years than the past five years combined, and the President has added 40 drug detection machines across points of entry to disrupt the fentanyl smuggling into the Homeland. The bipartisan border agreement would fund the installation of 100 additional cutting-edge inspection machines to help detect fentanyl at our Southern border ports of entry.
  • In close partnership with the Government of Mexico, the Department of Justice has extradited Nestor Isidro Perez Salaz, known as “El Nini,” from Mexico to the United States to face prosecution for his role in illicit fentanyl trafficking and human rights abuses. This is one of many examples of joint efforts with Mexico to tackle the fentanyl and synthetic drug epidemic that is killing so many people in our countries and globally, and to hold the drug trafficking organizations to account.

NYT: Biden Is Not the First U.S. President to Cut Off Weapons to Israel May 10, 2024 In The News By Peter Baker

The president was livid. He had just been shown pictures of civilians killed by Israeli shelling, including a small baby with an arm blown off. He ordered aides to get the Israeli prime minister on the phone and then dressed him down sharply.

The president was Ronald Reagan, the year was 1982, and the battlefield was Lebanon, where Israelis were attacking Palestinian fighters. The conversation Mr. Reagan had with Prime Minister Menachem Begin

that day, Aug. 12, would be one of the few times aides ever heard the usually mild-mannered president so exercised.

“It is a holocaust,” Mr. Reagan told Mr. Begin angrily.

Mr. Begin, whose parents and brother were killed by the Nazis, snapped back, “Mr. President, I know all about a holocaust.”

Nonetheless, Mr. Reagan retorted, it had to stop. Mr. Begin heeded the demand. Twenty minutes later, he called back and told the president that he had ordered a halt to the shelling. “I didn’t know I had that kind of power,” Mr. Reagan marveled to aides afterward.

It would not be the only time he would use it to rein in Israel. In fact, Mr. Reagan used the power of American arms several times to influence Israeli war policy, at different points ordering warplanes and cluster munitions to be delayed or withheld. His actions take on new meaning four decades later, as President Biden delays a shipment of bombs

and threatens to withhold other offensive weapons from Israel if it attacks Rafah, in southern Gaza.

Even as Republicans rail against Mr. Biden, accusing him of abandoning an ally in the middle of a war, supporters of the president’s decision pointed to the Reagan precedent. If it was reasonable for the Republican presidential icon to limit arms to impose his will on Israel, they argue, it should be acceptable for the current Democratic president to do the same.

But what the Reagan comparison really underscores is how much the politics of Israel have evolved in the United States since the 1980s. For decades, presidents and prime ministers have quarreled without permanently damaging the robust relationship between the two countries.

Dwight D. Eisenhower threatened economic sanctions and an aid cutoff to force Israel to withdraw from the Sinai Peninsula after it invaded Egypt in 1956. Gerald R. Ford warned that he would re-evaluate the entire relationship in 1975 over what he considered Israel’s recalcitrance during peace talks with Egypt. George H.W. Bush postponed $10 billion in loan guarantees in 1991 in a dispute over settlements in the West Bank.

In Mr. Reagan’s day, Democrats were thought to be the party that was more supportive of Israel, a perception he wanted to change. By Mr. Reagan’s own account, “they’ve never had a better friend of Israel in the White House.” And yet it was a friendship that was tested again and again.

In June 1981, less than five months after Mr. Reagan took office, Israel used U.S.-made F-16 warplanes to bomb the Osirak nuclear plant in Iraq

, a surprise attack that outraged many in Washington. Defense Secretary Caspar W. Weinberger, considered a friend of the Arabs, urged Mr. Reagan to halt the arms flow to Israel. Secretary of State Alexander M. Haig Jr., considered a friend of Israel, argued against it.

In the end, Mr. Reagan agreed to vote to condemn Israel at the United Nations Security Council and to delay the delivery of four F-16s due that summer — what Patrick Tyler, in “A World of Trouble,

” his history of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, characterized as “a minimal rebuke.”

But just weeks later, an Israeli airstrike killed an estimated 300 civilians in Palestinian neighborhoods of Beirut, prompting Mr. Reagan to hold back another 10 F-16s and two F-15 jet fighters

. Still, the standoff did not last long. By August, he lifted the freeze

Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982 forced another confrontation. Mr. Reagan halted the shipment of cluster-type artillery shells

out of concern that such munitions were being used against civilians in violation of agreements. Around the same time, he delayed the delivery of 75 F-16 warplanes without explanation until March 1983, when he announced that he would not release the jets until Israel withdrew forces from Lebanon.

The move caused no wave of criticism like that seen in Washington this week. “Maybe it was a necessary signal to Israel,” Mr. Reagan wrote mildly in his diary that night in describing his decision. In the days that followed, stories in The New York Times did not include criticism from members of Congress in either party. Not until a week later did William Safire, a conservative columnist for The Times, fault Mr. Reagan’s move as “a tragic flip-flop on Israel ” as he put it.

“Reagan had public support for withholding aid because the bombing of Beirut was witnessed on American television,” recalled Lou Cannon, the Reagan biographer. “As with Gaza, it was horrible.”

Since then, of course, Republicans have repositioned themselves as the party that unquestionably supports Israel while Democrats who bristle at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s long conservative reign have become more divided on the issue. Today, there is none of the tempered deference that Mr. Reagan enjoyed from across the aisle on foreign policy.

The August 1982 bombardment in particular affected Mr. Reagan in a powerful way. Whatever his politics or policy, he reacted viscerally to the pictures he saw.

“Reagan was deeply upset by the bombardment of Beirut,” Richard Murphy, his ambassador to Saudi Arabia, recalled in an oral history by Deborah Hart Strober and Gerald S. Strober. “He made it very plain that he wanted this to come to a stop when the human side was pushed in his face.”

Mr. Reagan did not hold back and was willing to put it all on the line. “I was angry,” he wrote in his diary that last night, describing the tense conversation with Mr. Begin. “I told him it had to stop or our entire future relationship was endangered.” And stop it did, at least temporarily.

EARTHDAY.ORG Proudly Unveils ‘How to Do Earth Day 2024’ Toolkit

Washington, D.C. (March 12, 2024) – Since the very first Earth Day in 1970, millions of people from more than 190 countries worldwide have come together every April 22nd to stand up for the planet and champion a greener, more equitable future for us all. Now in its 54th year, Earth Day serves as a poignant reminder of our collective responsibility to safeguard the environment and our own future.

With less than 50 days until Earth Day, it is important to remember no matter who you are, where you are or what you do, you have the power to bring about real and positive change. To help you do that, EARTHDAY.ORG– the driving force behind Earth Day– proudly presents the  How to Do Earth Day 2024 toolkit.

The ‘How to Do Earth Day 2024’ toolkit provides practical guidance and actionable steps for everyone to participate in the environmental movement, all in accordance with our 2024 theme, Planet vs. Plastics.

Regardless of if you are a parent, student, grandparent, teacher, faith leader, journalist, business owner, politician, someone serving in uniform, or working in manufacturing or retail – whatever it is –  there is ALWAYS something you can do for your planet! For example, here are 5 key ways to get involved this Earth Day:

-Call for an end to the scourge of plastics by signing the Global Plastics Treaty.

-Volunteer to join or host a cleanup, event, or rally– making sure to register all cleanups on The Great Global Cleanup Map and events or rallies on the Earth Day Events Map.

Students- this one’s for you! Join our Campus Coalition and become an activist!

-Reject fast fashion by signing our petition to force change in the fashion industry.

Post and share the Your Art, Our Earth poster competition winners on social media to help spread Earth Day’s message. To view the 5-17 age group winner, click here. To view the 18+ age group winner, click here.

For more detailed information and ways to get involved this Earth Day, be sure to check out the ‘How to Do Earth Day 2024‘ toolkit and visit the official Earth Day 2024 page to stay updated on upcoming events, initiatives, and opportunities to make a difference.

About EARTHDAY.ORG:

EARTHDAY.ORG’s founders created and organized the very first Earth Day on April 22, 1970. Since then, EARTHDAY.ORG has mobilized over 1 billion people annually on Earth Day, and every other day, to protect the planet. EARTHDAY.ORG’s mission is to diversify, educate, and activate the environmental movement worldwide. EARTHDAY.ORG is the world’s largest recruiter to the environmental movement, working with more than 150,000 partners in nearly 192 countries to build environmental democracy. Learn more at EARTHDAY.ORG. It’s not a day, it’s a movement.

2024 Election Analysis from the NY Times

2024 Election: Live Updates (click on link)

https://www.nytimes.com/news-event/2024-election