News

(WASHINGTON) — While national Democrats, including President Joe Biden, struggle with Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema’s positions in an evenly-divided Senate, progressives at home are launching campaigns to pressure the state’s senior senator, threatening a primary challenger in 2024.

But Arizona is far from a blue state, and some argue that Sinema’s opposition to parts of the Biden agenda are in line with what she campaigned on being: an independent, moderate voice to represent the often-quirky political leanings of Arizonans.

The former Green Party activist, who once criticized a presidential candidate for attempting to get Republican support, is now a moderate thorn in the president’s side.

Progressives are expressing frustration with Sinema, who they say is working against an already moderate president and making Democratic priorities more difficult to enact. And activists are ramping up the pressure on her with crowdfunding campaigns and protests, even following her into a bathroom while she was home in Arizona last week, an action widely condemned by leaders on both sides of the aisle.

Sinema also faced protesters at the airport last weekend, asking her why she is opposing Biden’s agenda in the Senate. On her flight, she was approached by a DACA recipient, who asked for a commitment from her to support a pathway to citizenship. Protestors say they have a difficult time getting meetings with Sinema, so they are turning to the airwaves and larger fundraising campaigns to up the pressure.

Common Defense, an organization run by progressive veterans, is placing a seven-figure ad buy to target Sinema and pressure her to help pass Biden’s “Build Back Better” agenda.

“I do feel like she’s failing to deliver with us when part of her campaign was about lowering prescription drug costs, and that’s something that the Build Back Better Act does. And she has come out against it, and again, no real good reason why,” Naveed Shah of Common Defense told ABC News.

The opposition to Sinema did not begin with infrastructure. At least two new political action committees have launched in response to Sinema’s positions since Biden came into office, both seeking to bankroll a primary challenger if Sinema doesn’t change her mind on the filibuster.

Kai Newkirk, a progressive organizer who helped elect Sinema in 2018, is a part of the effort to pressure Sinema to fall in line with Biden’s agenda in the Senate by using one of the new political action committees to send a clear message: Move out of the way so Biden’s agenda can pass, or else Democrats will look elsewhere for a 2024 Senate nominee. He and other activists started a conditional crowd-sourcing campaign to fund a primary challenger to Sinema, which raised $100,000 in a week.

Arizona Democrats recently threatened a vote of no confidence if Sinema continued to stand in the way of filibuster reform that would help ensure passage of Biden’s agenda, an issue they single out as the biggest blockade to Democratic success in Washington.

“We are at a point where we need federal action and there is nothing happening there,” state Sen. Martín Quezada told a progressive news outlet. “I was expecting the Kyrsten Sinema that I had seen in the legislature. I was always impressed by her intelligence, her aggressiveness and her commitment to values that we supported. That’s what I was hoping we would get, but she hasn’t done that. She’s been the exact opposite of what we thought we were electing.”

Some of the dissatisfaction with Sinema comes from a lack of clarity on what exactly she wants. She initially ran for the state House in the 2000s as an independent and pushed for progressive agendas. As her political career developed and she gained larger constituencies, she’s continued to move to the center. Now, in the Senate majority for the first time, she’s been in and out of meetings with the White House and, along with West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, is one of two Democrats blocking movement on Biden’s infrastructure package.

Even her colleagues are unclear on what exactly she and Manchin are angling for.

“Now it’s time, I would say for both senators, make your mark and close the deal,” Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois said last week. “What is it that you want? What is your final goal? It’s time to stop talking around it and speak directly to it.”

Aside from her lack of support on some aspects of Biden’s agenda, some Democrats argue her actions could harm freshman Sen. Mark Kelly, a Democrat, when he is up for reelection next year.

“I think the risk is that it’s going to be harder to reelect Kelly, for Democrats to keep their majorities in general, because we haven’t been able to deliver on what we were elected to do, if Sinema keeps doing what she is now,” Newkirk said. “You have to keep your promises, and make a difference in voters’ lives for them to put you back in office.

Groups that organized for her argue it is difficult to get a meeting with her or her office, and that when they do, they’re often met with nonanswers.

“She’s not explaining what she’s doing or where she really stands to her constituents. And it’s absurd and insulting….feeling that she doesn’t even have to explain to the people who elected her — that she’s there to represent — where she stands on these specific issues,” Newkirk said.

But all of that may not matter. While Arizona opted for Democrats at the top of their ballot in 2020 — in both the presidential and Senate races — only former President Bill Clinton and President Joe Biden have broken Arizona’s tendency to vote red for its presidential nominees. Biden only won the state by .3%, a reminder that some Democrats’ fantasy of a deep-blue Arizona could still be far off.

Samara Klar, an associate professor at the University of Arizona’s school of government and public policy, said that despite the fact that many Democrats are angry with Sinema, Arizona voters historically love a candidate who is willing to stick with their convictions, even if they aren’t popular within their own party at the time.

“Sinema and Mark Kelly both ran and won on this centrism thing. That’s who they are, they’re not going to be typical partisan politicians,” she said.

“Even among the Democrats, we tend to see a little more right-leaning issue positions and preferences for centrism and moderate candidates than what we tend to see nationally. In fact, I would say Kyrsten Sinema largely was elected thanks to that,” she added.

Sinema, who only won her 2018 election by just under three points, would still, however, need to win a Democratic primary, Newkirk argues.

“If she runs as an independent, she’s not some institution like John McCain. The votes are not there. She has to win the Democratic primary, and if she continues on this path, she’s not going to be able to, but she continues to dig in her heels,” Newkirk said.

Sinema has often said she sees Sen. John McCain as an inspiration, and is sometimes branded as a politician cut from the same cloth. But Chuck Coughlin, a GOP strategist in Arizona who has watched Sinema’s rise into national politics, told ABC News that those comparisons fall short.

“People knew who John McCain was — it’s not something that needed to be defined by anybody else,” Coughlin said. “And she does not have those types of depth of roots in the public consciousness. She’s being defined right now. This is a moment in her life that will define her going forward.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Snapchat is looking to help America’s youth become potential Washington, D.C., power players with its latest feature, Run for Office Mini.

The new, in-app feature helps Snapchat users navigate which offices they can run for in their local areas based on which issues they are most passionate about, Snap, the company behind Snapchat, said in a blog post announcing the feature.

Snapchat reaches 90% of 13- to 24-year-olds in the United States, according to the company.

Run for Office Mini uses data from BallotReady, which is described as providing “personalized, nonpartisan information to voters in all 50 states” on its website.

Narissa Ayoub, a 24-year-old law student at the University of Detroit Mercy and a legal intern with dreams to run for office one day, said she appreciates how the feature makes the process of looking into running for office more accessible.

“Having all the information there, in one place, and for it to be so easy and accessible, I think it will create a huge difference,” Ayoub said. “I think people don’t know exactly what [they] can run for, so it doesn’t have to be these big deal offices like mayor or state legislature or governor. There are things in your hometown that are open like precinct delegate, or city clerk or school board.”

Through the feature, Snapchat users can type in their ZIP code and select the issues that mean the most to them, such as education, civil rights and more. The app then narrow down the political offices that overlap with those issues and provides users with information about those offices, including who currently holds that seat, their background, age requirement to run for that seat and the upcoming election date for the position.

Snapchat users can sign up for a training session with several organizations it has partnered with including Run for Something, Run GenZ, LGBTQ Victory, New American Leaders and more, Snap said.

“Being the candidate yourself is something that’s super intimidating,” Ayoub said. “I think that this new Snapchat feature … to give people those tools that they need to run for office is absolutely invaluable.”

Amanda Litman, co-founder of Run for Something, which recruits and supports young candidates running for office, tweeted that the organization saw a record number of young people sign up for their training program to run for office.

This isn’t the first time the social media giant has worked to help youth get involved in the political process. With support from Turbovote and Ballot Ready, Snap helped more than 1.2 million Snapchat users register to vote; more than half were first-time voters, according to Snap.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot will “swiftly consider” holding one-time Trump White House adviser Steve Bannon, and potentially others, in contempt of Congress for ignoring committee subpoenas, committee chairman Bennie Thompson vice-chair Liz Cheney said Friday.

The move came after Bannon formally advised the committee that he would be unable to comply with their requests, citing former President Donald Trump’s intention to invoke executive privilege. In a letter obtained by ABC News, Bannon’s lawyers said that until the matter is settled in court, they will not comply with the committee’s subpoena.

The committee last month issued subpoenas to Bannon and other top Trump aides Mark Meadows, Kash Patel and Dan Scavino, as part of its probe into the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. An additional 11 subpoenas were issued last week to organizers of the pro-Trump rally that preceded the attack.

Meadows, a former White House chief of staff, and Patel, an ex-Pentagon official, are “engaging” with the committee, officials said. The committee had no update on the status of Scavino.

“While Mr. Meadows and Mr. Patel are, so far, engaging with the Select Committee, Mr. Bannon has indicated that he will try to hide behind vague references to privileges of the former President,” Thompson and Cheney said in a joint statement. “The Select Committee fully expects all of these witnesses to comply with our demands for both documents and deposition testimony.”

Sources confirm to ABC News that Trump’s lawyer sent a letter to several of those subpoenaed informing them that the former president wants the subpoenas ignored and that he plans to claim executive privilege. In the letter, Trump suggested he would be willing to take the matter to court to block their cooperation.

However in an interview earlier this week with right-wing commentator John Solomon, Trump suggested that he would have no problem with his confidants participating in the probe.

“I’m mixed, because we did nothing wrong,” Trump said. “So I’m sort of saying, ‘Why are we hiring lawyers to do this?’ I’d like to just have everybody go in and say what you have to say. We did nothing wrong.”

Committee officials said that those who ignore the subpoenas could be held in contempt.

“Though the Select Committee welcomes good-faith engagement with witnesses seeking to cooperate with our investigation, we will not allow any witness to defy a lawful subpoena or attempt to run out the clock, and we will swiftly consider advancing a criminal contempt of Congress referral,” the statement said.

Any motion of contempt would be passed along for the full House to consider. If passed, the matter would then be referred to the Justice Department for potential prosecution.

Democrats considered holding Bannon in contempt of a House Intelligence Committee subpoena in 2018, but ultimately declined to do so. The full House voted to hold former Attorney General Bill Barr and former Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in contempt of Congress in 2019 for ignoring House Oversight Committee subpoenas for records related to the 2020 census, but the Trump Justice Department ignored the requests.

Trump is also seeking to block the Jan. 6 committee from accessing selected documents held by the National Archives, which maintains control of White House records, including West Wing communications and visitor logs. On Friday he sent a letter to the agency asserting executive privilege over a tranche of documents that he said contain privileged presidential communications.

White House counsel Dara Remus said in an earlier letter to the agency that the White House “has determined that an assertion of executive privilege is not in the best interests of the United States,” but that they would “respond accordingly” if Trump asserts executive privilege over only a subset of the documents.

As of Friday, the committee has issued a total of 17 subpoenas, with most going to Trump associates and individuals linked to the rallies in Washington on the day of the Capitol riot.

The committee plans to schedule in-person depositions with cooperating witnesses in the coming weeks.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Senate narrowly averted fiscal calamity Thursday evening in a late-evening vote to raise the federal borrowing limit, but the short-term solution has set the stage for a fierce political showdown in December.

While no Republicans voted to raise the debt ceiling, 11 Republicans voted with Democrats to break a Republican filibuster so that the measure could advance.

The kicked-can deal comes a little more than a week before Oct. 18 — the date Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen pegged as when the U.S. may no longer be able to cover its debts.

But the short-term solution is still not yet totally secured. The House is expected to return to Washington from its recess on Tuesday to approve the measure, where it is expected to pass on party lines before heading to President Joe Biden’s desk.

When the $480 billion debt hike is exhausted, the political gamesmanship from both parties that made a short-term solution difficult to achieve will likely be on heightened display, as lawmakers aim to deal with the lapse of their short-term extension of federal government funding at the same time.

In the weeks leading up to Thursday’s vote, Senate leadership was locked in a political staring contest over which party ought to bear responsibility for raising the limit.

Republicans for months said that Democrats would need to act on their own to raise the debt limit because they have total control of Washington and are planning to pass a multi-trillion social and economic package with zero input from Republicans. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said repeatedly that Democrats should have to hike the debt limit because of the high cost of Biden’s proposed agenda.

But Democrats have argued raising the debt limit is a bipartisan responsibility, in part because it covers spending that already took place under the Trump administration with unified GOP support.

Republicans blocked an earlier effort by Democrats to suspend the limit partially because they want Democrats to be forced to raise the limit by a specific dollar amount using a fast-track budget process budget tool called reconciliation. It would allow the majority to break a filibuster to pass certain legislation, but use of this arcane process is cumbersome, could take weeks and opens up Democrats to a series of potentially politically painful votes.

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer rejected the reconciliation option, arguing it would take too much time.

The stalemate was temporarily broken on Thursday when 11 Republicans, including McConnell, joined all Senate Democrats in casting a procedural vote to break a filibuster on the debt limit. Ten GOP votes were necessary to clear the way for a second, simple majority vote to raise the debt limit by $480 billion. No Republicans voted with Democrats in a subsequent vote on the debt hike.

McConnell offered the deal to allow Democrats additional time to use reconciliation to pass a more permanent debt limit fix without GOP support.

“This will moot Democrats’ excuses about the time crunch they created and give the unified Democratic government more than enough time to pass standalone debt limit legislation through reconciliation,” McConnell said in a statement Wednesday.

But Democrats have said they’re no more prepared to use reconciliation in December than they were this month.

“There’s not going to be reconciliation,” Senate Budget Committee Chairman Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., told reporters emphatically on Wednesday.

Following Thursday’s vote, Schumer took to the floor to lambast Republicans for holding the debt limit hostage, further committing that Democrats would not budge on reconciliation.

“Let me say that again. Today’s vote is proof positive that the debt limit can be addressed without going through the reconciliation process, just as Democrats have been saying for months,” Schumer said on the floor. “The solution is for Republicans to either join us in raising the debt limit or stay out of the way and let Democrats address the debt limit ourselves.”

Some Republicans, and a visibly frustrated Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., were miffed by Schumer’s victory lap.

“I was not in the chamber when he spoke, so I didn’t hear it first hand,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said Thursday evening. “But I heard from others there was a fair amount of frustration.”

Republican Whip Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., said he told Schumer personally he was frustrated with his tone, calling it “out of line” and an “incredibly partisan speech after we had just helped him solve a problem.”

Many rank-and-file Republicans were also frustrated with McConnell for even offering Democrats a way to kick the can down the road on dealing with the debt limit.

“I believe it was a mistake to offer this deal. Two days ago Republicans were unified, we were all on the same page, we were all standing together and making clear that Democrats had complete authority to raise the debt ceiling, and to take responsibility for the trillions of debt that they are irresponsibly adding to this country,” Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said. “We were winning that fight and Schumer was on the verge of surrender. And unfortunately, the deal that was put on the table was a lifeline for Schumer. And I disagree with that decision.”

Discontent with the deal was on full display Thursday, as McConnell stood on the floor and counted his Republican “yes” votes to ensure the necessary 10 votes to proceed would be cast.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., gave a dramatic thumbs down at his turn — just steps away from McConnell.

McConnell had arrived on the floor moments after the vote began — a rare, early appearance for the leader who usually waits until later in the vote series to cast his. But this time clearly wanted his presence known. Rather than giving a thumbs up on his vote, he gave a bellowing and affirmative “aye” and stood in the well with other “yes” voters as they amassed, leaning over the center table as votes rolled in.

Rankling in the lower ranks of the GOP all but assures there won’t be a similar compromise coming in December when the parties will almost certainly find themselves in a similar stare down.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki called the Senate’s action Thursday “welcome steps forward” on the debt limit but reiterated the Democratic view that it should be a “shared responsibility” to raise the limit in December.

“We cannot allow partisan politics to hold our economy hostage, and we can’t allow the routine process of paying our bills to turn into a confidence-shaking political showdown every two years or every two months,” Psaki said.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.