Politics

(WASHINGTON) — When President Joe Biden was sworn in six months ago, he inherited several major challenges, including a global pandemic and subsequent economic disruption, a social and racial reckoning across America, and a fractured Washington, reeling from the divisions of the Trump era.

On the campaign trail, Biden promised to bring bipartisanship back to the federal government, calling for unity in order to stem the effects of the coronavirus, rebuild the economy and foster equity and inclusion for all Americans.

“Since taking office, the president has acted to get America back on track by addressing the crises facing this nation, vaccinating America to beat the pandemic, delivering much needed help to American families, making transformative investments to rescue and rebuild our economy, and fundamentally showing that government can deliver for the American people,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Tuesday, marking the anniversary.

While Biden has presided over a growing economy and a retreating pandemic, there is much he hasn’t been able to accomplish, as Washington remains deadlocked without more bipartisan support from Congress for his initiatives– somethings Biden acknowledged during only the second Cabinet meeting of his administration.

“There’s much more to be done and so much more to do. Tackling voting rights, which is an existential threat to democracy right now, the things that are being passed are just beyond the pale. The vice president has been working hard on this issue and going to continue to, we all are, but there’s much more to do. We have to tackle the immigration problem, which we’re working really hard to get done in a humane and serious way. Police reform and crime,” Biden said Tuesday.

Six months into his administration, here’s a look at how successful Biden has been in pursuing some of his major initiatives.

The pandemic and the economy

President Biden oversaw an unprecedented vaccination effort to end the COVID-19 pandemic, distributing more than 200 million shots of the vaccine within his first 100 days in office.

COVID-19 cases and death rates plunged to a record low since the start of the pandemic as the effects of vaccination took hold.

Still, the Biden administration has struggled with vaccine hesitancy, and failed to hit a self-imposed goal to distribute at least one shot to 70% of all adults over 18 by July 4. As of Biden’s 6-month mark, 68.3% of adults over 18 have at least one shot, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data.

“If you’re fully vaccinated, you have a high degree of protection against severe illness, hospitalization and death. If you’re unvaccinated, you are not protected. So please, please get vaccinated. Get vaccinated now,” Biden said Monday, acknowledging that cases and death rates are once again rising in the U.S.

Biden was successful in passing his economic relief package, dubbed the American Rescue Plan. The $1.9 trillion spending package delivered stimulus checks, small business aid, funding for COVID-19 testing and vaccinations, and state and local government relief.

But he failed to deliver on one major campaign promise: to secure bipartisan support for his initiatives. The COVID-19 relief package passed in Congress without a single Republican vote.

“For all of those predictions of doom and gloom six months in, here is where we stand. Record growth. Record job creation. Workers getting hard-earned breaks. Look, we brought this economy back from the brink and we’ve designed our strategy not only to provide for a temporary boost, but to lay the foundation for a long-term boom that brings everyone along,” Biden said Monday in remarks touting his economic achievement and pushing a bipartisan measure to spend $1.2 trillion improving roads, bridges and other “traditional infrastructure.”

But the fate of that is unclear in the both the Senate and House where Democrats have only a narrow majority — as is the future of legislation that would spend $3.5 trillion on “human infrastructure” such as child care that Democrats hope to push through with no Republican votes.

In those same remarks, Biden had to address inflation concerns, as rising prices across the U.S. threaten the economic optimism of reopening after the pandemic.

Immigration

President Biden has struggled to stem the flow of migrants crossing the southern border of the U.S. In June, Customs and Border Patrol apprehended a ten-year record number of migrants.

Biden appointed Vice President Kamala Harris to address the root causes of migration, and Harris has traveled to Guatemala and Mexico in her efforts to encourage potential migrants to stay in their home countries and apply for asylum legally. But with corruption, drug-related violence and extreme weather plaguing many Central and South American countries, her efforts, including offering increased aid to those countries, have not led to a significant shift in migration patterns, as illustrated by the June CBP numbers.

“No matter how much effort we put in on curbing violence, providing disaster relief, on tackling food insecurity — on any of it — we will not make significant progress if corruption in the region persists,” Harris said on May 4.

Biden was successful in overturning many of President Trump’s strict immigration policies. He ended Trump’s so-called “Muslim ban” that prevented people from traveling from several Muslim-majority countries to the United States. Biden also returned deportation priorities to the status quo in the Obama administration, which focused on people who committed crimes other than entering the country illegally.

While Biden has proposed a comprehensive immigration reform plan to Congress, there has been little movement to advance it. In July, a federal judge ruled that the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which shielded young people brought illegally to the U.S. as children from deportation, is unlawful, and disallowed new applications to the program. The case is likely to be heard by the Supreme Court, but in the meantime, the defeat in the courts ramps up pressure on Biden and Congress to achieve a legislative fix for Dreamers.

“Only Congress can ensure a permanent solution by granting a path to citizenship for Dreamers that will provide the certainty and stability that these young people need and deserve,” Biden said in a statement Saturday. “It is my fervent hope that through reconciliation or other means, Congress will finally provide security to all Dreamers, who have lived too long in fear.”

Policing and Guns

One policy area proving elusive for Biden is police reform and gun control, as legislation on the issues have stalled in Congress.

The Biden White House has frequently highlighted its support for the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, and called for it to be passed by the first anniversary of Floyd’s death in May. While the deadline was missed, they have encouraged bipartisan negotiations on Capitol Hill that have yielded little beyond a “framework” and discussions continue.

The administration also decided to forgo Biden’s campaign promise to create a commission within his first 100 days to study the issue of policing, with senior adviser Susan Rice saying the administration decided it would not be the “most effective way” to deliver on its top priority of getting the Floyd bill passed “based on close, respectful consultation with partners in the civil rights community.”

The president has not seen gun control legislation come to his desk from Capitol Hill, even after the House passed a measure that would address loopholes in the background check system. But Biden has taken unilateral action on the issue after several mass shootings during his short tenure in office.

Biden signed six gun-related executive actions on April 8, including directing the Justice Department to issue a proposed rule to regulate the sale of so-called “ghost guns” within 30 days, calling for investments in evidence-based community violence intervention and asking the Justice Department to publish model “red flag” legislation for states within 60 days.

He took additional action in June, allowing communities to spend some of the funding they received as part of his $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill funding to combat gun crime, such as investing in summer jobs programs for youths; hiring more police officers and court personnel; spending on gun-violence enforcement; and paying for more nurses, counselors and social workers.

Other measures include establishing a “zero tolerance” policy for gun dealers who break the law; embedding federal law enforcement officials with local police departments; and hiring more formerly incarcerated people for jobs in the federal government, according to the White House.

Even with his presidential actions, Biden is limited in what he can accomplish on his own, and has fallen short of some of his biggest campaign pledges on the issue, like stopping the importation of assault weapons, and creating a national buyback program for the U.S.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Tom Barrack, a longtime friend of Donald Trump’s who chaired the committee that raised more than $100 million for his inauguration, has been charged with acting as an agent of a foreign government and obstruction of justice.

Federal prosecutors in Brooklyn said Tuesday that in 2016, Barrack illegally sought to use his influence with the new president on behalf of the United Arab Emirates.

In May 2016, according to the indictment, Barrack “took steps to establish himself as the key communications channel for the United Arab Emirates” to the Trump campaign and, that same month, gave a co-defendant a draft copy of an energy speech then-candidate Trump was preparing to deliver. The co-defendant then sent it to a UAE official and solicited feedback.

“Congrats on the great job today,” court records quoted the Emirati official saying in an email to Barrack after Trump delivered the speech. “Everybody here are happy with the results.”

A spokesman for Barrack, 74, told ABC News that “Mr. Barrack has made himself voluntarily available to investigators from the outset. He is not guilty and will be pleading not guilty.”

Barrack was due to make an initial court appearance in California, where he was arrested Tuesday morning.

Prosecutors are seeking to detain Barrack while he awaits trial, calling him “an extremely wealthy and powerful individual with substantial ties to Lebanon, the UAE, and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia” who “poses a serious flight risk.”

Between May 2016 and October 2017, Barrack “repeatedly promoted the United Arab Emirates and its foreign policy interests during media appearances” after soliciting direction from his co-defendant and UAE officials, the indictment said.

“The defendant promoted UAE-favored policy positions in the Campaign, in the Administration, and through the media, at times using specific language provided by UAE leadership,” assistant U.S. Attorney Jacquelyn Kasulis wrote in the court filing. “The defendant never registered as an agent of the UAE, as public disclosure of his agreement to act at the direction of senior UAE officials would have diminished, if not eliminated, the access and influence that the UAE sought and valued.”

The allegations involving Barrack came to light as part of a House Oversight Committee investigation, ABC News reported in July 2019.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The 11 Republicans in the group of senators trying to work out a bipartisan infrastructure deal are sending a letter to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer saying no GOP member will vote “yes” to start debate on any measure Wednesday, according to a senior lawmaker close to the continuing talks over how to pay for the $1.2 trillion package.

Schumer had set the high-stakes vote to try to force progress on a top priority for President Joe Biden, but he needs the Republicans to get past the 60-vote threshold to advance legislation.

“I don’t think any Republican votes yes tomorrow. I don’t think we should, because we’re not ready,” the senior lawmaker said. “My hope is, by the end of the day, we should know a lot more.”

Instead, the GOP negotiators’ letter to Schumer will say that Republicans, who have been warning they won’t vote on advancing a bill that’s not yet written, are prepared to support starting debate on Monday, the senior lawmaker said.

The group, which has been working around the clock, along with White House officials, is “close,” to a deal on how to pay for roads, bridges and other “traditional infrastructure,” according to numerous members involved. They were meeting again Tuesday afternoon — joined by senior Biden aides – to try to finalize a bill.

The White House said it continued to support Schumer’s tactics.

But the bipartisan group of lawmakers won’t get a final agreement by Wednesday, according to multiple negotiators.

At the same time, the senior lawmaker expects the legislation to be finalized by Monday, and that includes the nonpartisan analyses by various agencies breaking down all of the financing options, how much revenue would be produced, and a final price tag.

Republicans, in particular, will be looking to show that the $579 billion in new spending is fully paid for.

As of Tuesday afternoon, it didn’t appear as if Schumer would delay the vote, but he could minimize the impact, should it be headed for failure.

If it is, Schumer could switch his vote to the losing side at the last minute, enabling him as majority leader, under Senate rules, to call up the vote again for reconsideration.

He could do so on Monday, when GOP members of the negotiating group say they’ll be ready to go.

Might a failed vote Wednesday poison the well for GOP negotiators?

No, says the senior lawmaker close to the talks, and Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, a member of the negotiating group.

The Wednesday vote is to start debate on a shell bill because there is no final bill from the negotiators. It would serve as a placeholder should negotiators strike a final deal.

The measure is separate from a much larger bill Biden and Democrats are pushing that would spend $3.5 trillion on so-called “human infrastructure” such as child care.

Democrats plan to push that through the Senate with no Republican votes, using a budget tool called “reconciliation.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A fully vaccinated spokesperson for House Speaker Pelosi tested positive for COVID-19 this week after interacting with several infected Texas Democratic state legislators who traveled to the capital.

“Yesterday, a fully-vaccinated senior spokesperson in the Speaker’s Press Office tested positive for COVID after contact with members of the Texas state legislature last week. This individual has had no contact with the speaker since exposure,” Pelosi spokesperson Drew Hammill told ABC News.

“The entire press office is working remotely today with the exception of individuals who have had no exposure to the individual or have had a recent negative test. Our office will continue to follow the guidance of the Office of Attending Physician closely,” he added.

A fully vaccinated White House official also tested positive for COVID-19 off-campus, the White House disclosed Tuesday. News of both “breakthrough” infections was first reported by Axios.

“I will say that we — according to an agreement we made during the transition to be transparent and make information available, we committed that we would release information proactively if it is commissioned officers. We continue to abide by that commitment,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Tuesday.

At least six of the more than 50 Texas Democrats who fled Austin last week to block dual Republican-backed bills that would revise the state’s voting and election laws in ways voting rights advocates say would make it harder for Texans to cast a ballot have since tested positive for COVID-19 in Washington. The infections prompted a flurry of contact tracing on Capitol Hill and at the White House, where they have met with legislators and senior administration officials, including Vice President Kamala Harris.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., on Tuesday suggested that House leaders could discuss “whether going back to [masks on Capitol Hill] work,” but added that the Office of the Attending Physician, who addresses the medical needs of Congress, “has not suggested” a return to the practice.

In a memo distributed to House offices on Tuesday, Attending Physician Brian Monahan did not announce any changes to House masking policy.

“Vaccinated individuals seeking to further reduce their risk of disease, or further reduce potential risk of transmitting disease to vulnerable household members, may consider additional protective actions such as wearing a well-fitted, medical-grade filtration mask when they are in a crowded or interior location,” he wrote. “Individuals have the personal discretion to wear a mask and future developments in the coronavirus Delta variant local threat may require the resumption of mask wear for all as now seen in several counties in the United States.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — GOP Sen. Rand Paul on Tuesday stepped up his months-long fight with the nation’s top infectious disease expert, Dr. Anthony Fauci, suggesting he lied to Congress about whether the National Institutes of Health funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and triggering an angry shouting match.

At a Senate Health Committee hearing meant to update lawmakers on the country’s COVID-19 response, the Kentucky Republican began by asking Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, if he’s aware that it’s a crime to lie to Congress.

“On May 11, you stated that NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” Paul said. He claimed that gain-of-function research — which could, in theory, enhance the transmissibility of a virus — was performed in the lab and referred to an academic paper by a Chinese scientist, which he then asked to be entered into the record and for a copy to be given to Fauci.

“Dr. Fauci, knowing that it is a crime to lie to Congress, do you wish to retract your statement of May 11, where you claimed at the NIH never funded gain-of-function research and move on?” Paul said, repeating his unsupported accusation.

Fauci flatly rejected Paul’s suggestion.

“Sen. Paul, I have never lied before the Congress. And I do not retract that statement,” he said.

Paul suggested Fauci and the NIH could be partly responsible for the pandemic and the deaths of 4 million people worldwide.

The virology expert explained that the paper Paul referenced does not represent gain-of-function research, and when Paul interrupted, the shouting match ensued.

“Let me finish!” Fauci said, when Paul tried to interject. “Sen. Paul, you do not know what you’re talking about, quite frankly. And I want to say that officially, you do not know what you’re talking about.”

Continuing their ongoing feud, the two argued over the definition of gain-of-function. NIH Director Francis Collins, in a statement earlier this year, warning of misinformation, said, “neither NIH nor NIAID have ever approved any grant that would have supported ‘gain-of-function’ research on coronaviruses that would have increased their transmissibility or lethality for humans.”

But Paul would not be swayed.

“You’re dancing around this because you’re trying to obscure responsibility for four million people dying around them from a pandemic,” Paul said.

At that point, Senate Health Committee Chair Patty Murray, D-Wash., told Paul to let Fauci finish — though the senator continued to interrupt his witness.

“I totally resent the lie that you are now propagating, senator,” Fauci said. “If you look at the viruses that were used in the experiments, that were given in the annual reports, that were published in the literature, it is molecularly impossible–“

Paul interjected, “You are obviously obfuscating the truth,” to which Fauci replied, “I’m not obfuscating the truth — you are.”

“You are implying that what we did was responsible for the deaths of individuals. I totally resent that,” Fauci said.

Paul interrupted, “It could have been.”

“If there is any lying here, senator, it is you,” Fauci shot back, pointing his finger at Paul.

With Paul’s time expired, the lawmaker up next, Sen. Tina Smith, D-N.M., gave Fauci the chance to “counteract these attacks on your integrity that we’ve all just witnessed.”

“I don’t think I have anything further to say,” Fauci said. “This is a pattern that Sen. Paul has been doing now at multiple hearings based on no reality. He keeps talking about gain-of-function. This has been evaluated multiple times by qualified people to not fall under the gain-of-function definition.

“I have not lied before Congress. I have never lied, certainly not before Congress. Case closed,” Fauci said.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A tri-partisan group of senators on Tuesday introduced legislation designed to claw back national security powers, delineated in the Constitution, from the executive branch that the Senate trio says have been flowing away from Congress after decades of inaction by lawmakers.

“The founders envisioned a balance of power between the executive and legislative branches of government on national security matters. But over time, Congress has acquiesced to the growing, often unchecked power of the executive to determine the outline of America’s footprint in the world. More than ever before, presidents are sending men and women into battle without public debate, and making major policy decisions, like massive arms sales, without congressional input,” said Sen. Chris Murphy, a senior member of the Foreign Relations Committee a bill cosponsor, along with Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-VT, and Mike Lee, R-Utah.

The three-pronged National Security Powers Act would place Congress in a more proactive role of having to affirm executive action on more controversial arms sales — particularly of lethal weapons, including air to ground munitions, tanks, and armored vehicles, as opposed to the current method requiring lawmakers to reject a sale with a veto-proof majority; would replace the 1973 War Powers Act with new policy that would require congressional authorization of military operations by a President after just 20 days instead of the current 60; and require that Congress approve a national emergency declaration after 30 days from presidential enactment.

“The president can declare a national emergency and act on that for a 30-day period, but after that, if Congress chooses not to enact a law to approve of the move, (called a joint resolution of approval) — that ability for the president would expire after 30 days,” according to a senior Senate GOP aide briefing reporters on the proposal.

President Donald Trump, in a highly controversial move in 2019, declared a national security emergency on the southern border to build his wall in that space. There was bipartisan support at the time to stop him but not a veto-proof majority. The Murphy-Sanders-Lee legislation would “flip the script” and put Congress in a position to more easily stop such executive action.

What senators also discovered at the time was that some 30 national emergency declarations were still in effect going back decades. The proposed legislation would sunset those declarations without explicit Congressional approval, putting a five-year limit on future moves.

The tri-partisan proposal comes as Washington is moving to rescind a 2002 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) approved ahead of the Iraq war. There is also growing support to rework or possibly end the 2001 AUMF that led to America’s longest war in Afghanistan where U.S. troops have just been sent home. Under the newly-introduced legislation, those AUMF’s would expire, and all future AUMF’s would require an expiration date.

The new legislation, which is sure to spark heated debate among hawks and those who doubt Congress’ authority to rein in executive powers where national security is concerned — despite the Constitution’s delineation that Congress has the sole power to declare war — would more strictly-define “hostilities” as any that require U.S. troops, as opposed to the current unwritten rule that basically requires U.S. service member boots on the ground.

“Presidents of both parties have usurped Congress’s prerogative to determine if, when, and how we go to war. Now America’s global standing, treasure, and brave service members are being lost in conflicts the people’s legislators never debated. In areas where the Constitution grants broad powers to Congress, Congress is ignored. The National Security Powers Act will change that and return these checks and balances to our government,” Lee said.

It is unclear where support lies for the proposal in Congress, particularly among leadership, and Senate aides close to the matter say that there was no consultation with the White House or Administration officials.

Still, the group says the time to act is now.

“Before it’s too late, Congress needs to reclaim its rightful role as co-equal branch on matters of war and national security. The bipartisan National Security Powers Act will make sure that there is a full, open and public debate on all major national security decisions, such as war making, arms sales and emergency declarations,” Murphy said.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden’s top COVID officials are set to testify before Congress on Tuesday as guidance on masks is splintering at the local level — with some cities and medical organizations recommending a return to universal mask wearing, despite federal guidance that vaccinated Americans can go without masks.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, chief White House medical adviser, said Monday that it was “reasonable” for a leading group of pediatricians to push back against federal guidance that vaccinated Americans can go without masks.

“The CDC always leaves open the flexibility at the part of local agencies, local enterprises, local cities and states to make a judgment call based on the situation on the ground. So, I think that the America Academy of Pediatrics — they’re a thoughtful group, they analyze the situation — and if they feel that is the way to go, I think that is a reasonable thing to do,” Fauci said in an interview with CNN after the AAP’s guidance came out.

The group on Monday called for schools to enforce universal masking mandates because so many children won’t be protected by fall and schools have no way of verifying COVID vaccine status yet. The AAP warned that the honor system has failed to keep many people safe in the face of the delta variant.

“AAP recommends universal masking because a significant portion of the student population is not yet eligible for vaccines, and masking is proven to reduce transmission of the virus and to protect those who are not vaccinated,” the AAP wrote in it’s Monday statement. “Many schools will not have a system to monitor vaccine status of students, teachers and staff, and some communities overall have low vaccination uptake where the virus may be circulating more prominently.”

People who are fully vaccinated — a term used to describe a person two weeks after their last shot — are still considered safe from serious illness or death, even if they are exposed to the delta variant. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that 99.5% of hospitalizations are people who weren’t immunized.

Because vaccinated people are considered to be safe, the CDC has said immunized adults and teens can go without a mask, including inside schools.

While CDC Director Rochelle Walensky didn’t directly respond to the AAP’s guidance on Monday, she spoke on a panel that afternoon and urged parents to vaccinate their children — a solution that grants children full protection from the virus but that hasn’t been accepted as eagerly by parents who are nervous to give their kids the vaccine.

“Being vaccinated will allow our kids to safely get back to the things they have missed — in-person school, playing with friends and participating in sports activities,” Walensky said at the panel on Monday.

But Walensky also argued that it could protect kids’ lives.

“Vaccinating our children is more than just a way of getting them safely back at school. It’s a way to save lives,” she said, citing the 489 pediatric deaths from COVID-19 and other risks to children who survive the disease, like longterm symptoms and multisystem inflammatories syndrome, “a rare but serious complication which is affected over 4,000 children in the United States, leading to more than 37 pediatric deaths,” she said.

The public health agency has noted, however, that local officials should still decide to enforce mask mandates if COVID cases climb and vaccination numbers are low. And the CDC said that schools can still embrace universal masking if they can’t verify vaccinations or have large numbers of students too young to qualify.

“In areas where there are low numbers of vaccinated people, where cases are rising, it’s very reasonable for counties to take more mitigation measures,” like the mask rule in Los Angeles, Biden’s surgeon general, Vivek Murthy, told ABC “This Week” co-anchor Martha Raddatz on Sunday.

“And I anticipate that will happen in other parts of the country — and that’s not contradictory to the guidance the CDC issued,” he added.

Fauci, too, noted that guidance will have to be tailored to specific groups, whether that’s Los Angeles or school children, because the CDC’s guidance is broad and relies on data that isn’t always immediately available.

“That is an understandable, human reaction to really want to be more safe rather than sorry. And I believe that is the reason why they’re doing that,” he said, speaking about the American Academy of Pediatrics’ guidance for school children.

But Fauci also acknowledged that it created confusion to have different guidance for various settings.

“That does lead to some sort of confusion sometimes when people see an organization making one recommendation, in general, for the whole country, and then local groups, local enterprises, local organizations, in order to get that extra step of safety, say something different. And you’re right, that does indeed cause a bit of confusion,” he said on CNN Monday.

And it’s this approach — allowing states and local communities to decide and essentially putting Americans on the honor system — that’s in question after COVID cases have risen in nearly every state.

Dr. Jerome Adams, who was surgeon general under President Donald Trump, said he made a mistake early on in the pandemic urging people not to mask up because he feared a shortage of masks for health care workers. Adams said he’s afraid the CDC is making another mistake now by not putting more pressure on everyone to wear a mask.

“Instead of vax it OR mask it, the emerging data suggests CDC should be advising to vax it AND mask it in areas with cases and positivity- until we see numbers going back down again,” Adams tweeted.

“CDC was well intended, but the message was misinterpreted, premature, & wrong. Let’s fix it,” he added.

The Biden administration though is in a tough spot. The CDC had been under extraordinary pressure earlier this year to show skeptical Americans the benefits of vaccination, including being able to go without a mask and not having to quarantine after being exposed.

And so far, number studies have shown that all three vaccines – Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer and Moderna – protect people against all known variants. The vaccines also are shown to provide more durable protection than a natural infection.

Also, any federal mandate for vaccines or masks would no doubt trigger a swift backlash among conservatives.

Responding to the former surgeon general calling on CDC to bring back masks, conservative firebrand Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas tweeted: “No. No. No. Hell no.”

For his part, President Joe Biden has suggested in recent remarks that he’s worried about the science of the vaccinations and masks, only the people who were choosing to ignore it.

“Look, the only pandemic we have is among the unvaccinated,” said Biden Friday.

And in a speech on Monday, he said, “Virtually all hospitalizations and deaths are occurring among unvaccinated Americans. These tragedies are avoidable. … If you’re unvaccinated, you are not protected.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) —The Capitol Police Department has a new chief, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

They confirmed to ABC News that J. Thomas Manger has been selected to be the leader of the department.

Manger has previously served as the police chief in Montgomery County, Maryland, and in Fairfax County, Virginia. He was also the president of the Major City Chiefs of Police Association.

He replaces acting Chief Yogananda Pittman.

Capitol Police referred questions from ABC News to the Capitol Police Board which picks the new chief.

This is a developing news story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(ATLANTA) — For the first time in 20 years, the Senate Rules Committee held a field hearing on Monday, this time in Atlanta to discuss voting rights as Democrats push for federal reform in the wake of sweeping legislation in Georgia — and in GOP-led legislatures across the country — which Democrats argue will make it harder for voters to cast their ballots.

“It is no coincidence that this assault on the freedom to vote is happening just after the 2020 election, when nearly 160 million Americans cast a ballot — more than ever before — in the middle of a pandemic, in an election that the Trump Department of Homeland Security Declared the most secure in history,” Committee Chair Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., said as she opened the hearing.

Witnesses included Sen. Raphael Warnock, D-Ga., and state lawmakers and voters who would be affected by the law — which, in part, adds a voter ID requirement and results in fewer drop boxes available in the Atlanta-area.

Those testifying focused their ire on Senate Bill 202 (SB 202), a Georgia state bill passed in March that shortens the periods between elections and runoffs, bans early voting on holidays, and makes it a crime for someone who is not an election worker to give food or drinks to anyone waiting in line.

Republican Senate Minority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., criticized the hearing in a statement as it kicked off Monday, deeming it all “phony hysteria.”

“This silly stunt is based on the same lie as all the Democrats’ phony hysteria from Georgia to Texas to Washington D.C. and beyond — their efforts to pretend that moderate, mainstream state voting laws with more generous early voting provisions than blue states like New York are some kind of evil assault on our democracy,” the GOP leader said.

But Warnock testified Georgia was “ground zero” for GOP efforts to suppress the vote.

“What we did in Georgia this last election, in terms of turnout, should have been celebrated, by everyone, regardless of political party. But instead it was attacked by craven politicians, who are more committed to the maintenance of their own power than they are to the strengthening and maintaining of our democracy,” Warnock said.

Citing restrictions in Georgia’s new law, particularly how it would prohibit non-poll workers from handing out water and would let people challenge others’ votes, Warnock called for federal voting right protections and emphasized the urgency of those efforts: “We Americans live in a great house that democracy built. Right now, that house is on fire.”

Georgia State Rep. Billy Mitchell also argued SB 202 was moved overly quickly through the Georgia legislature to the governor’s desk.

No Republicans were present at the hearing, but Republicans from Georgia — including Gov. Brian Kemp — criticized the event in a call with reporters later on Monday morning.

“Today’s hearing is just the latest attempt by the Democrats to ignore the catastrophe up in Washington, DC and also to really change the narrative that couldn’t get the federal takeover of elections in S1 [the For the People Act voting rights bill] passed through the Senate or the Congress,” Kemp said.

Klobuchar said that Republicans were invited to join; Kemp said that he was in a hearing about crime during the voting hearing, and that he does not believe Klobuchar’s hearing was fair.

The hearing comes as Senate Democrats put pressure on their colleagues across the aisle to move forward in unison on the stalled For the People Act, an expansive package that would transform federal elections, voting and congressional redistricting, which passed the House in March.

A more measured proposal with some Republican support named for the late Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., which would restore pieces of the Voting Rights Act struck down by the Supreme Court in 2013, has also failed to advance through Congress.

Democrats argue lawmakers must act with more urgency on voting legislation also in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court deciding last month to uphold voting restrictions in Arizona that Democrats and voting advocates have called discriminatory on the basis of race.

Monday’s hearing also comes at a busy time in Washington.

Both chambers of Congress were back in session Monday as Democrats in the Texas State Legislature took harbor in the capital for a second week in order to prevent Republicans in Austin from taking up the proposals in a special legislative session. While they had planned to push voting rights legislation on the hill, five members have tested positive for COVID-19.

And just days after Congressional Black Caucus Chair Rep. Joyce Beatty was arrested along with other activists in a display of civil disobedience on Capitol Hill, the “Women’s Moral Monday March on Washington” rally, organized by the Women’s March and Poor People Campaign, added their voices with a demonstration in front of the Supreme Court Monday.

The group demanded that Congress take action on issues such as ending the filibuster and expanding voting rights.

Sixteen states have enacted 28 laws that would restrict voting access, out of hundreds that have been introduced throughout the country, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law.

ABC News’ Libby Cathey and Trish Turner contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The House will vote on Thursday to expand and expedite the special visa program for Afghan workers who aided the U.S. military campaign and are trying to leave the country, adding more openings to the program just weeks before the first evacuation flights are scheduled to begin.

The bipartisan Allies Act, introduced by Rep. Jason Crow, D-Colo., would raise the cap on the Special Immigrant Visa program by 8,000, while also removing requirements the authors said could lengthen the application process by several months.

Specifically, it would create a presumption that applicants face threats to their lives in sensitive roles as interpreters, translators or security contractors for the U.S. military, waiving the requirements that they obtain and submit sworn and certified statements.

The House will advance the bill this week as the Pentagon has notified lawmakers that it could temporarily house Afghan visa applicants at Fort Lee, an Army installation in central Virginia, while they complete the application process, aides briefed on the potential plans told ABC News.

Crow, a former Army Ranger who served in Afghanistan, said he owed his life in part to the Afghans who worked alongside U.S. troops as interpreters. His district director in Colorado, Maytham Alshadood, is a successfully resettled Iraqi who worked as an interpreter and translator with the U.S. military before immigrating.

“He’s a perfect success story to the contributions these folks can make, and they’ve already proven themselves to be patriotic Americans and people that have served the country,” he told ABC News. “We owe them a great debt.”

The bill would also expand eligibility for the program to roughly 1,000 Afghans working with nonmilitary organizations that have partnered with the United States, such as the National Democratic Institute and the U.S. Institute for Peace.

“The Taliban is not going to make a distinction between someone who was working for USAID, or a grantee of the U.S. government promoting independent journalism or women’s rights and someone who was a driver or translator,” Rep. Tom Malinowski, D-N.J., another cosponsor of the legislation, told ABC News. “So we shouldn’t make those distinctions, either.”

Earlier this summer, the House passed a similar measure that waived the requirement for applicants to receive a medical examination on the front end of the process, and would allow them to receive an exam as soon as possible once resettled in the United States.

In the Senate, both measures have the support of Republicans and Democrats, who are weighing whether to add the provisions to an emergency spending package funding the Capitol Police, which could clear the chamber before the August recess.

“There are a lot of people in Afghanistan that have been loyal to us,” Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., the ranking member of the Senate Appropriations Committee negotiating with Democrats over the package, said last week. “We cannot leave them behind.”

The White House announced Operation Allies Refuge last week, and said the first flights to evacuate visa applicants would begin in the last week of July.

There are now 20,000 applicants for the program, with roughly 10,000 still required to finish various stages of their applications, according to the State Department.

Approximately 2,500 applicants have been approved through the security vetting process and segments of that group could be transported to military bases in the U.S., under humanitarian parole, to finish their applications, the State Department spokesman said.

Afghans who have not yet completed their applications could be sent to third-party countries around Afghanistan or to U.S. military facilities in the Middle East, Crow said.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.