Biden Acknowledges Constitutional Limits to the Power of the Presidency

spnphotosten128534

If you’re looking for good political news to savor in an era that has little to offer, here’s something: President-elect Joe Biden acknowledges that there are limits to the power of the presidency and its ability to unilaterally enact policy. That hasn’t been a popular view among presidents in over a century, to the point that it’s almost jarring to hear a soon-to-be holder of the office admit that he has no authority to make people jump on command.

There’s no guarantee that Biden won’t succumb, just like so many of his predecessors, to the temptation to stretch presidential power. But let’s enjoy the moment while we can.

In a recording acquired by The Intercept of a Zoom meeting with civil rights figures held on December 8, attendees can be heard repeatedly calling on Biden to use the power of the presidency to achieve a host of goals, including police reform and investigations of potential threats to democracy. Biden got an earful about the things the prominent people with whom he was meeting wanted him to do through executive orders. (Audio excerpts can be heard at the December 10 edition of the Deconstructed podcast.)

He didn’t encourage them with his response:

There’s some things that I’m going to be able to do by executive order and I’m not going to hesitate to do it, but what I’m not going to do is … I am not going to violate the Constitution. Executive authority that my progressive friends talk about is way beyond the bounds.

Biden went on to add:

There is a Constitution. It’s our only hope. Our only hope and the way to deal with it is, where I have executive authority, I will use it to undo every single damn thing this guy has done by executive authority. But I’m not going to exercise executive authority where it’s a question, where I can come along and say, ‘I can do away with assault weapons.’ There’s no executive authority to do away that. And no one has fought harder to get rid of assault weapons than me, me, but you can’t do it by executive order.

Outgoing President Donald Trump has a very different take on executive authority. “When somebody is the President of the United States, the authority is total, and that’s the way it’s got to be,” Trump told reporters at the White House last April.

“It’s total? Your authority is total?” he was asked in disbelief.

“It’s total,” Trump answered. “It’s total.”

The current president is far from the first to think he’s an elected monarch. The Clinton White House added a new phrase to the political lexicon with its enthusiasm for bypassing Congress to take unilateral action.

“With some of his closest advisers deeply pessimistic about the chances of getting major legislation passed during the rest of the year, Mr. Clinton plans to issue a series of executive orders to demonstrate that he can still be effective,” The New York Times reported in 1998. “‘Stroke of the pen,’ Paul Begala, an aide to Mr. Clinton, said in summarizing the approach. ‘Law of the land. Kind of cool.'”

Bill Clinton also didn’t invent that view of the office. Whether explicitly or behind the scenes, the same attitude has prevailed among presidents at least since the era of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, who both rejected earlier conceptions of a restrained chief executive.

“The constitutional presidency, as the Framers conceived it, was designed to stand against the popular will as often as not, with the president wielding the veto power to restrain Congress when it transgressed its constitutional bounds,” wrote Gene Healy in his 2008 book The Cult of the Presidency. “In contrast, the modern president considers himself the tribune of the people, promising transformative action and demanding the power to carry it out.”

So, it’s refreshing to hear Biden reject the idea that his authority is total and that he can accomplish anything he wants with a stroke of the pen.

But voicing ideals is one thing; sticking with them is entirely another. As the recording of Biden’s meeting with civil rights leaders demonstrates, presidents are under a lot of pressure to act like kings, whatever they may think of their own legitimate authority. It takes a lot of backbone to stand against allies who helped you win office and who care more about results than about constitutional niceties.

“Today, we’re far more open than our grandparents were to the idea that the president may be a crook or a clown; yet, we still expect the ‘commander in chief’ to heal the sick, save us from hurricanes, and provide balm for our itchy souls,” Healy noted in his book.

Some progressives are taking Biden’s comments not as encouraging evidence that he wants to rein-in the imperial presidency, but as a sign that more arm-twisting is in order.

“As this tape shows, as receptive as Biden might be to the arguments activists are making, he won’t get there on his own,” Paul Waldman wrote for The Washington Post. “They’re going to have to keep pushing him.”

That’s the sort of take, from across the political spectrum, that has encouraged presidents of both major parties to expand the power of their office. The newly enriched presidency is then handed on to successors who do the same—logically resulting at some point in the future, it would appear, in an elected god-king with unlimited authority.

Maybe Joe Biden will be the first president in over a century to abide by constitutional limits on the power of the office and to resist calls to act like a monarch. That’s asking a lot of a mere mortal—especially one who has spent decades pursuing the White House—but his initial instincts appear to be good.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3mObzZw
via IFTTT

White House Christmas Ornaments

WHornaments

This season, grab ’em by the tinsel with a beautiful White House Christmas ornament. Nothing brings out the holiday cheer like purchasing a useless bauble of feckless bureaucracy for your Christmas tree or holiday botanical object.

Written by Austin Bragg, Meredith Bragg, and Andrew Heaton; performed by Heaton; produced by Meredith and Austin Bragg.

Music: Wish Background Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3aDbSEc
via IFTTT

Dominion Security Director Files Lawsuits Against Trump, Conservative Media

Dominion Security Director Files Lawsuits Against Trump, Conservative Media

Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

A security director at Dominion Voting Systems, the company charged by many of playing a role in ‘rigging’ the US election via voting machines, is suing the Trump campaign and several conservative news outlets.

Eric Coomer has filed suit, claiming he has received death threats stemming from the accusations that Dominion helped sway the election in Joe Biden’s favour.

The defamation suit identifies the Trump campaign, as well as Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, and the conservative news organisations Gateway Pundit, Newsmax, and One America News Network (OANN).

The suit also personally targets conservative talking heads Michelle Malkin and Joseph Oltmann.

Mr Coomer has been identified as the individual referred to by Oltmann as “Eric from Dominion” in statements made to OAN and other conservative outlets regarding alleged bragging to Antifa activists about making sure Trump wasn’t going to get re-elected:

The lawsuit states that Mr Coomer has been made “the face of false claims” in relation to Dominion’s alleged influence over the election.

The suit further states that photos of Coomer, as well as his home address and personal family details have been made public by some pro-Trump websites.

Mr Coomer has stated that “I’ve worked in international elections in all sorts of post-conflict countries where election violence is real and people are getting killed over it. And I feel that we’re on the verge of that.”

In an op-ed posted by the Denver Post, Coomer declared that he has “no connection to the Antifa movement” and “did not ‘rig,’ or influence the election.” 

The lawsuit comes on the heels of a similar threat of legal action by voting machine company Smartmatic, which has issued legal notices to Fox News, OAN and Newsmax, accusing the networks of a “campaign [that] was designed to defame Smartmatic and undermine a legitimately conducted elections.”

The legal notice is also said to have specifically named Fox News hosts Lou Dobbs, Jesse Watters, and Maria Bartiromo, and indicates that Smartmatic could pursue legal action against them personally.

Both Fox News, via Lu Dobbs, and Newsmax have since aired segments that critics say constitute ‘walk backs’ on previous allegations:

Dominion itself has not yet issued any legal notices to media outlets. It has, however, sent a letter to Sidney Powell, demanding she retract some “wild and reckless” allegations she has made about them.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/23/2020 – 10:15

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2KLVl5U Tyler Durden

New Home Sales Puke In November

New Home Sales Puke In November

New home sales collapsed in November, plunging by 11% MoM, its second biggest monthly drop since 2015 (..

Source: Bloomberg

Sending the new home sales SAAR reeling back to 841k (drastically below the 995k expected)…

The median selling price rose 2.2% from a year earlier to $335,300, with 17% of new homes sold in Nov. cost more than $500,000, up from 14% prior month.

All of which helps explain the plunge in homebuilder sentiment.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/23/2020 – 10:06

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3nLzev4 Tyler Durden

Lindsey Graham Says Trump Will Sign Spending Bill if It Takes Aim at Section 230

admphotostwo728766

Republicans keep trying to turn everything into a fight over Section 230. With President Donald Trump threatening to veto both a defense spending measure and an omnibus bill to fund government programs, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R–S.C.) is suggesting this could change if Democrats throw an anti-Section 230 clause into the mix.

Section 230—a federal communications law that helps protect free speech and free enterprise online—has become a scapegoat for bipartisan ire at big tech companies and all sorts of conservative gripes about social media.

After failed attempts to diminish Section 230 by executive order, Trump said last week he wouldn’t sign a bill to fund the military unless it randomly contained a section targeting Section 230. Now, Trump could be conditioning support for any government funding bill on that same deal.

The omnibus bill—which includes a COVID-19 relief package—passed the House and Senate on Monday. But Trump says he won’t sign, calling it “a disgrace” and “wasteful,” while also demanding that payments to individuals be raised from $600 to $2,000.

The latter amount was what Democrats originally pushed for, and Democratic leaders in Congress have leapt on Trump’s mandate to make individual stimulus checks bigger.

Trump’s concern for upping individual stimulus checks seems to be tied up in his ambitions of overturning the 2020 election results.

In his Tuesday video, Trump said he’s “asking Congress to immediately get rid of the wasteful and unnecessary items from this legislation, and to send me a suitable bill, or else the next administration will have to deliver a covid relief package, and maybe that administration will be me.”

The video “landed like a sonic boom in Washington. His own aides were stunned,” says The Washington Post. “Congressional aides were stunned. Stock market futures quickly slumped on the prospect that the economic aid could be in doubt. And the implications for what happens next could be severe. If he refuses to sign the bill, the government will shut down on Dec. 29. The $900 billion in emergency economic aid will be frozen, and the race for the two Senate seats in Georgia could also be upended.”

Trump’s issue seems to be with the whole omnibus spending bill, though he keeps erroneously referring to that as the COVID-19 relief package. The latter is part of the former—a $900 billion chunk of $2.3 trillion in spending.

It’s the larger bill—which covers everything needed to keep the government running through the next year and more—that contains items like $1 billion for the creation of two new Smithsonian museums and $10 million for “gender programs” in Pakistan.

“To be sure, the president’s broadsides against a spending deal that includes lots of money for ‘lobbyists, foreign countries, and special interests’ is certainly welcome, and, frankly, on target,” writes Reason‘s Christian Britschgi. “The trouble is that the conditions Trump outlined for supporting relief legislation would make the bill much worse.”

Adding a Section 230 overhaul to those conditions would only compound the damage more. Abolishing or weakening it would be bad for internet users and companies at any time, and especially during the pandemic when tech platforms and tools have become even more vital. There’s no way legislators should be tucking such a monumental measure into an omnibus spending bill plus COVID-19 relief package as some sort of presidential extortion plan.


FREE MINDS

For the second time this month, a Columbus, Ohio, police officer has fatally shot an unarmed black man. The man’s name has not been released. Officers were wearing body cameras but did not have them turned on.

“If you’re not going to turn on your body-worn camera, you cannot serve and protect the people of Columbus,” Mayor Andrew Ginther said at a press conference. “I have asked Chief [Thomas] Quinlan to remove the officer involved of duty and turn in his badge and gun.”

Earlier this month, “law enforcement fatally shot 23-year-old Black man Casey Goodson as he entered his grandmother’s home,” notes NBC News. “The investigation into his death, which drew national headlines, is ongoing.



FREE MARKETS

Even big chain stores in New York City are taking a pandemic hit, with one in seven shutting down this past year. From the New York Post:

Some 1,132 chain stores — including 70 Duane Reades, 54 Starbucks and 22 Papyruses — have waved the white flag over the past 12 months, according to the Center for an Urban Future’s annual “State of the Chains” report, set to be ­released Wednesday.

The 14.2 percent decline shatters all previous records reported by the nonprofit agency since it began tracking the data 13 years ago. Last year, just 3.7 percent of all chain outlets closed, up from 0.3 percent in 2018.


QUICK HITS

• The pandemic has brought out a new sexual puritanism, suggests New York Times op-ed writer Megan Nolan.

• Mike Solana offers some unconventional wisdom on why tech companies are leaving Silicon Valley.

Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom “has plenty of speechifying, but no sermonizing; it’s more interested in exploring different worldviews, the way they clash and conflict sometimes come together, than in asserting its own,” writes Reason‘s Peter Suderman.

• “People should be able to engage with the counselor who can best meet their needs wherever they live and continue seeing that counselor if they move across the country,” suggests Elizabeth Brokamp, a therapist challenging D.C. occupational licensing laws. “I hope my case can start removing senseless boundaries to teletherapy.”

• The spending bill is decriminalizing dressing up like Smokey the Bear.

• “About 40 migrant women who were held at a Georgia detention center have filed a class-action lawsuit alleging they were subjected to medical abuse through nonconsensual or unnecessary procedures while in the facility,” reports NBC News. “The complaint, filed late Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, also claims women at the Irwin County Detention Center were retaliated against for speaking out against Dr. Mahendra Amin, of Ocilla, Georgia, who has been accused of the medical abuse.”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3mJeMJX
via IFTTT

Biden Acknowledges Constitutional Limits to the Power of the Presidency

spnphotosten128534

If you’re looking for good political news to savor in an era that has little to offer, here’s something: President-elect Joe Biden acknowledges that there are limits to the power of the presidency and its ability to unilaterally enact policy. That hasn’t been a popular view among presidents in over a century, to the point that it’s almost jarring to hear a soon-to-be holder of the office admit that he has no authority to make people jump on command.

There’s no guarantee that Biden won’t succumb, just like so many of his predecessors, to the temptation to stretch presidential power. But let’s enjoy the moment while we can.

In a recording acquired by The Intercept of a Zoom meeting with civil rights figures held on December 8, attendees can be heard repeatedly calling on Biden to use the power of the presidency to achieve a host of goals, including police reform and investigations of potential threats to democracy. Biden got an earful about the things the prominent people with whom he was meeting wanted him to do through executive orders. (Audio excerpts can be heard at the December 10 edition of the Deconstructed podcast.)

He didn’t encourage them with his response:

There’s some things that I’m going to be able to do by executive order and I’m not going to hesitate to do it, but what I’m not going to do is … I am not going to violate the Constitution. Executive authority that my progressive friends talk about is way beyond the bounds.

Biden went on to add:

There is a Constitution. It’s our only hope. Our only hope and the way to deal with it is, where I have executive authority, I will use it to undo every single damn thing this guy has done by executive authority. But I’m not going to exercise executive authority where it’s a question, where I can come along and say, ‘I can do away with assault weapons.’ There’s no executive authority to do away that. And no one has fought harder to get rid of assault weapons than me, me, but you can’t do it by executive order.

Outgoing President Donald Trump has a very different take on executive authority. “When somebody is the President of the United States, the authority is total, and that’s the way it’s got to be,” Trump told reporters at the White House last April.

“It’s total? Your authority is total?” he was asked in disbelief.

“It’s total,” Trump answered. “It’s total.”

The current president is far from the first to think he’s an elected monarch. The Clinton White House added a new phrase to the political lexicon with its enthusiasm for bypassing Congress to take unilateral action.

“With some of his closest advisers deeply pessimistic about the chances of getting major legislation passed during the rest of the year, Mr. Clinton plans to issue a series of executive orders to demonstrate that he can still be effective,” The New York Times reported in 1998. “‘Stroke of the pen,’ Paul Begala, an aide to Mr. Clinton, said in summarizing the approach. ‘Law of the land. Kind of cool.'”

Bill Clinton also didn’t invent that view of the office. Whether explicitly or behind the scenes, the same attitude has prevailed among presidents at least since the era of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, who both rejected earlier conceptions of a restrained chief executive.

“The constitutional presidency, as the Framers conceived it, was designed to stand against the popular will as often as not, with the president wielding the veto power to restrain Congress when it transgressed its constitutional bounds,” wrote Gene Healy in his 2008 book The Cult of the Presidency. “In contrast, the modern president considers himself the tribune of the people, promising transformative action and demanding the power to carry it out.”

So, it’s refreshing to hear Biden reject the idea that his authority is total and that he can accomplish anything he wants with a stroke of the pen.

But voicing ideals is one thing; sticking with them is entirely another. As the recording of Biden’s meeting with civil rights leaders demonstrates, presidents are under a lot of pressure to act like kings, whatever they may think of their own legitimate authority. It takes a lot of backbone to stand against allies who helped you win office and who care more about results than about constitutional niceties.

“Today, we’re far more open than our grandparents were to the idea that the president may be a crook or a clown; yet, we still expect the ‘commander in chief’ to heal the sick, save us from hurricanes, and provide balm for our itchy souls,” Healy noted in his book.

Some progressives are taking Biden’s comments not as encouraging evidence that he wants to rein-in the imperial presidency, but as a sign that more arm-twisting is in order.

“As this tape shows, as receptive as Biden might be to the arguments activists are making, he won’t get there on his own,” Paul Waldman wrote for The Washington Post. “They’re going to have to keep pushing him.”

That’s the sort of take, from across the political spectrum, that has encouraged presidents of both major parties to expand the power of their office. The newly enriched presidency is then handed on to successors who do the same—logically resulting at some point in the future, it would appear, in an elected god-king with unlimited authority.

Maybe Joe Biden will be the first president in over a century to abide by constitutional limits on the power of the office and to resist calls to act like a monarch. That’s asking a lot of a mere mortal—especially one who has spent decades pursuing the White House—but his initial instincts appear to be good.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3mObzZw
via IFTTT

Apple’s Entrance Into EVs Creates “A New Tesla Bear Case”, Morgan Stanley Warns

Apple’s Entrance Into EVs Creates “A New Tesla Bear Case”, Morgan Stanley Warns

Just hours after Elon Musk took to Twitter to reveal to the world that Tim Cook wouldn’t take his phone calls when he was looking for a bailout, Morgan Stanley has now come out and admitted that Apple’s entrance into the self-driving market creates “a new Tesla bear case”. 

Tesla uber-bull Adam Jonas wrote in a note on Tuesday: “Apple’s potential entry into autos represents perhaps the most credible/formidable bear case for Tesla’s stock that investors have had to consider for some time.”

If “Apple were to really throw its weight around,” legacy automakers could have a hard time competing, Jonas said, according to Bloomberg.

And in true sell-side fashion – despite this “formidable” new bear case – Jonas, who has a history of “predicting” Tesla price targets within multiple-hundred-dollar ranges, maintained his $540 price target on the company (reminder, this is a $2700 pre-split price target). 

Jonas also highlighted suppliers that may win from Apple’s entrance into the industry, including Lidar suppliers Luminar Technologies Inc. and Velodyne Lidar Inc.

Recall, we also noted yesterday what other analysts on the street were saying about Apple’s entrance into the market. “Apple has ingredients to be successful in future auto industry: access to capital and talent, proven hardware design and a rich ecosystem to leverage service revenue,” Jonas had said on Monday, prior to yesterday’s note.

Tesla’s stock has looked stuck and stagnant this week after its inclusion into the S&P 500 and after we noted that Apple was throwing its hat into the self-driving car business on Monday. In addition to designing self-driving vehicles, Reuters also reported that Apple’s cars could “include its own breakthrough battery technology”.

Apple’s development project, called “Project Titan” was rumored to have been shelved after first starting in 2014. However, former Tesla executive Doug Field returned back to Apple in 2018 to work on the project before laying off 190 people from the team in 2019. But since then, “Apple has progressed enough that it now aims to build a vehicle for consumers”, Reuters noted.

The saga took another twist on Wednesday when Musk revealed on Twitter he had sought out help from Apple and that Tim Cook wouldn’t take a meeting with him. As we said yesterday, in case anybody was left wondering about whether or not Apple planned to become a Tesla competitor or not, it seems as though that narrative has been sewn. 

Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/23/2020 – 09:55

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/38yMjl1 Tyler Durden

Small Caps Jump, Nasdaq Dumped As Bonds, Dollar Slump At Open

Small Caps Jump, Nasdaq Dumped As Bonds, Dollar Slump At Open

The cash market open has triggered panic-selling in bonds and the dollar (GBP impact) and a dramatic divergence in the US equity markets.

Small Caps are ripping out of the gate but Nasdaq is getting puked…

This pushed small caps to their best relative to big tech since March…

The dollar is tumbling (as cable strengthens)…

And bonds are being dumped…

Did we start year-end window-dressing or is liquidity so low that algos can push every market around with some call buying?

Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/23/2020 – 09:38

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2WIGWKm Tyler Durden

Is Christmas Canceled?

Is Christmas Canceled?

By Stefan Koopman, Senior Market Economist at Rabobank

For months’ on end, lawmakers in the US have been struggling to find common ground and reach a compromise on a new Covid-19 relief package. Eventually they found each other at an estimated USD 900bn, which is closer to what the Senate Republicans preferred. See also this piece from Philip Marey for his insights into this deal.  

The deal had been reached minutes before midnight and is attached to the regular spending bill that should fund government operations through next September. Even though it all seemed to be going fine and yet another partial shutdown was averted, President Trump decided in one of his ‘signature moves’ to upset the applecart at the very last moment and, among other things, to suddenly call for higher stimulus payments (USD 2,000 rather than the agreed USD 600) for individuals. Whilst he did not outright say that he would veto the current stimulus bill, which the House and the Senate could in turn override with supermajority votes, there is a risk of a so-called pocket veto. If this bill isn’t on the President’s desk by the end of the day, he could effectively veto it by keeping it in his ‘pocket’ for the next ten days. The President is given this exact ten day window, Sundays excluded, to either sign or veto a bill, but the current Congressional session will end on January 3. After that date, the President simply cannot return the bill to Congress. The upshot is that a decision not to sign the bill would then be a pocket veto and Congress does not have the opportunity to override. This would mean that the much-needed stimulus checks won’t go out in the days after Christmas. Sorry not sorry?

Since the UK-France border closure began on Sunday, nearly 3,000 lorries have been stuck in southern England and it is likely to take days for this situation to be resolved. However, yesterday afternoon the European Commission recommended that critical trade and passenger transport links between the UK and continental Europe should be reopened as soon as possible. Only a few hours later, France followed these recommendations and agreed to end the suspension, yet allowing passage only if the EU citizens stuck in the UK are able to show a negative Covid-19 test. (Note here that Britons could be barred from EU entry on January 1 2021, when the UK becomes a “third country” to the EU, unless their travel is deemed essential).

It is indeed tempting to make the connection with Brexit. Could we regard the Commission’s intervention as an olive branch towards the United Kingdom, which is legally still being treated as an EU member state, or is it a jab towards France, which continues to push for tougher EU negotiating positions on all things Brexit (and may found this situation a little too convenient… sorry not sorry?). The dynamics are the same: France and the UK are at loggerheads over Covid and Brexit, and the European Commission mediates. It once again shows that ‘sovereignty’ is more than the capacity to write your own laws. It is also about being able to manage interdependencies in ways that work out well. From a geographical point of view, the UK will always remain highly dependent on European coastal states in terms of its transport links and its access to international markets. This week’s events have reminded us how delicate this balance is.

So, is there going to be Brexit deal? We still think there is one to be done here, as it is in the best interests of both parties in these negotiations. In fact, if you forget about all the self-assigned deadlines, you would even be inclined to think that the entire process went according to script. Already in February this year, just weeks after ‘Brexit day’, the two negotiating mandates showed that there were some pretty big gaps on level playing field, deal governance, and fisheries. It was expected that one or more political interventions would be needed to bridge these gaps. It was also clear that, at least in relative terms, fisheries would be the strongest card in the UK’s deck. So, here we are, in the final stage of the negotiations, and Prime Minister Johnson is directly calling on President Von der Leyen to mediate between the UK and the EU’s coastal states and to talk fish.-

The hope is that this drawn-out process comes to an end sooner than later and that there’ll be a deal before Christmas eve. In that case there should be just enough time left to get the legal and procedural work in order to allow for provisional application of the new treaty from January 1 onwards. Otherwise the EU and the UK would be really getting in uncharted territories. But if no-deal is the end result, it won’t be because of the process. It will be because of fishy politics.

Back to the US, where the estimate of third quarter GDP was revised up a little bit to 33.4% from 33.1% annualized, which is a relatively minor revision at these growth rates. There were no significant changes ‘under the hood’ either. The consumer confidence numbers were more interesting. The widely held axiom is that there can be no robust economic recovery unless the pandemic is brought under control; and yesterday’s confidence figures were fully in line with this thesis. The Conference Board’s measure declined sharply to 88.6 in December from a downwardly revised 92.9 in November. This was far below the consensus expectation and provided a sombre preview of the Christmas shopping season. It is also another clear signal that rising virus cases, hospitalizations and deaths across the Northern Hemisphere, which aren’t likely to abate anytime soon, will weigh on consumer sentiment until a widespread rollout of the vaccines allows governments to set the reopening of the economy in motion.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/23/2020 – 09:35

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3aEv98i Tyler Durden

Lindsey Graham Says Trump Will Sign Spending Bill if It Takes Aim at Section 230

admphotostwo728766

Republicans keep trying to turn everything into a fight over Section 230. With President Donald Trump threatening to veto both a defense spending measure and an omnibus bill to fund government programs, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R–S.C.) is suggesting this could change if Democrats throw an anti-Section 230 clause into the mix.

Section 230—a federal communications law that helps protect free speech and free enterprise online—has become a scapegoat for bipartisan ire at big tech companies and all sorts of conservative gripes about social media.

After failed attempts to diminish Section 230 by executive order, Trump said last week he wouldn’t sign a bill to fund the military unless it randomly contained a section targeting Section 230. Now, Trump could be conditioning support for any government funding bill on that same deal.

The omnibus bill—which includes a COVID-19 relief package—passed the House and Senate on Monday. But Trump says he won’t sign, calling it “a disgrace” and “wasteful,” while also demanding that payments to individuals be raised from $600 to $2,000.

The latter amount was what Democrats originally pushed for, and Democratic leaders in Congress have leapt on Trump’s mandate to make individual stimulus checks bigger.

Trump’s concern for upping individual stimulus checks seems to be tied up in his ambitions of overturning the 2020 election results.

In his Tuesday video, Trump said he’s “asking Congress to immediately get rid of the wasteful and unnecessary items from this legislation, and to send me a suitable bill, or else the next administration will have to deliver a covid relief package, and maybe that administration will be me.”

The video “landed like a sonic boom in Washington. His own aides were stunned,” says The Washington Post. “Congressional aides were stunned. Stock market futures quickly slumped on the prospect that the economic aid could be in doubt. And the implications for what happens next could be severe. If he refuses to sign the bill, the government will shut down on Dec. 29. The $900 billion in emergency economic aid will be frozen, and the race for the two Senate seats in Georgia could also be upended.”

Trump’s issue seems to be with the whole omnibus spending bill, though he keeps erroneously referring to that as the COVID-19 relief package. The latter is part of the former—a $900 billion chunk of $2.3 trillion in spending.

It’s the larger bill—which covers everything needed to keep the government running through the next year and more—that contains items like $1 billion for the creation of two new Smithsonian museums and $10 million for “gender programs” in Pakistan.

“To be sure, the president’s broadsides against a spending deal that includes lots of money for ‘lobbyists, foreign countries, and special interests’ is certainly welcome, and, frankly, on target,” writes Reason‘s Christian Britschgi. “The trouble is that the conditions Trump outlined for supporting relief legislation would make the bill much worse.”

Adding a Section 230 overhaul to those conditions would only compound the damage more. Abolishing or weakening it would be bad for internet users and companies at any time, and especially during the pandemic when tech platforms and tools have become even more vital. There’s no way legislators should be tucking such a monumental measure into an omnibus spending bill plus COVID-19 relief package as some sort of presidential extortion plan.


FREE MINDS

For the second time this month, a Columbus, Ohio, police officer has fatally shot an unarmed black man. The man’s name has not been released. Officers were wearing body cameras but did not have them turned on.

“If you’re not going to turn on your body-worn camera, you cannot serve and protect the people of Columbus,” Mayor Andrew Ginther said at a press conference. “I have asked Chief [Thomas] Quinlan to remove the officer involved of duty and turn in his badge and gun.”

Earlier this month, “law enforcement fatally shot 23-year-old Black man Casey Goodson as he entered his grandmother’s home,” notes NBC News. “The investigation into his death, which drew national headlines, is ongoing.



FREE MARKETS

Even big chain stores in New York City are taking a pandemic hit, with one in seven shutting down this past year. From the New York Post:

Some 1,132 chain stores — including 70 Duane Reades, 54 Starbucks and 22 Papyruses — have waved the white flag over the past 12 months, according to the Center for an Urban Future’s annual “State of the Chains” report, set to be ­released Wednesday.

The 14.2 percent decline shatters all previous records reported by the nonprofit agency since it began tracking the data 13 years ago. Last year, just 3.7 percent of all chain outlets closed, up from 0.3 percent in 2018.


QUICK HITS

• The pandemic has brought out a new sexual puritanism, suggests New York Times op-ed writer Megan Nolan.

• Mike Solana offers some unconventional wisdom on why tech companies are leaving Silicon Valley.

Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom “has plenty of speechifying, but no sermonizing; it’s more interested in exploring different worldviews, the way they clash and conflict sometimes come together, than in asserting its own,” writes Reason‘s Peter Suderman.

• “People should be able to engage with the counselor who can best meet their needs wherever they live and continue seeing that counselor if they move across the country,” suggests Elizabeth Brokamp, a therapist challenging D.C. occupational licensing laws. “I hope my case can start removing senseless boundaries to teletherapy.”

• The spending bill is decriminalizing dressing up like Smokey the Bear.

• “About 40 migrant women who were held at a Georgia detention center have filed a class-action lawsuit alleging they were subjected to medical abuse through nonconsensual or unnecessary procedures while in the facility,” reports NBC News. “The complaint, filed late Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, also claims women at the Irwin County Detention Center were retaliated against for speaking out against Dr. Mahendra Amin, of Ocilla, Georgia, who has been accused of the medical abuse.”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3mJeMJX
via IFTTT