The Taliban said on Tuesday that they would block Afghans trying to leave the country from traveling to Kabul’s airport and would reject any plans to extend the deadline for American troops to withdraw from Afghanistan by the end of this month.
Speaking at a news conference on Tuesday, Zabihullah Mujahid, a Taliban spokesman, noted that chaos at the airport remained a dangerous problem, and that the way to airport was closed to Afghan citizens to prevent people from joining the crowds.
“The road that ends at the Kabul airport has been blocked. Foreigners can go through it, but Afghans are not allowed take the road,” Mr. Mujahid said, without clarifying how long that policy would be in effect.
He urged the crowds of Afghans thronging the airport in hopes of leaving the country to instead go home, saying that the Taliban would “guarantee their security,” and noted that there was no list of people targeted for reprisals.
Mr. Mujahid also called on the United States “to not encourage Afghan people to flee their country,” adding, “This country needs our doctors, engineers and those who are educated — we need these talents.”
The group had warned on Monday that there would be “consequences” if the American presence continued longer. …
WASHINGTON (AP) — Striking a deal with moderates, House Democratic leaders muscled President Joe Biden’s multitrillion-dollar budget blueprint over a key hurdle Tuesday, ending a risky standoff and putting the party’s domestic infrastructure agenda back on track.
The 220-212 vote was a first step toward drafting Biden’s $3.5 billion rebuilding plan this fall, and the narrow outcome, in the face of stiff Republican opposition, showed the power a few voices have to alter the debate and signaled the challenges ahead still threatening to upend the president’s agenda.
After a turbulent 24 hours that brought House proceedings to a standstill, Speaker Nancy Pelosi told her colleagues before the vote that the legislation represents a federal investment on par with the New Deal and the Great Society. …
Tensions had flared as a band of moderate lawmakers threatened to withhold their votes for the $3.5 trillion plan. They were demanding the House first approve a nearly $1 trillion bipartisan package of other public works projects that’s already passed the Senate.
In brokering the compromise, Pelosi committed to voting on the bipartisan package no later than Sept. 27, an attempt to assure lawmakers it won’t be left on the sidelines. It’s also in keeping with with Pelosi’s insistence that the two bills move together as a more complete collection of Biden’s priorities. Pelosi has set a goal of passing both by Oct. 1.
Easing off the stalemate will shelve, for now, the stark divisions between moderate and progressive lawmakers who make up the Democrats’ so-slim House majority. But as the drama spilled out during what was supposed to be a quick session as lawmakers returned to work for a few days in August, it showcased the party differences that threaten to upend Biden’s ambitious rebuilding agenda. …
NYT: A divided House on Monday approved a $3.5 trillion budget blueprint that would pave the way for a vast expansion of social safety net and climate programs, as Democrats overcame sharp internal rifts to advance a critical piece of President Biden’s ambitious domestic agenda.
Approval of the budget was a milestone in Democrats’ drive to enact their top priorities — including huge investments in education, child care, health care and paid leave, and tax increases on wealthy people and corporations — over Republican opposition.
But it came only after Democratic leaders quelled an internal revolt among moderates, who had balked at passing the plan before the House acted on a $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure package. As the White House mounted a pressure campaign to win their backing, Speaker Nancy Pelosi engineered a plan to tie both measures together with one vote, allowing approval of the budget blueprint with a vote on a measure committing the House to taking up the infrastructure bill by Sept. 27.
The vote was 220-212, along party lines, to advance the budget plan and allow for future votes on both the infrastructure bill and on a voting rights measure that was on track to pass later Tuesday.
While the budget plan, which passed the Senate this month, does not have the force of law, its final approval allows Democrats to move forward with a fast-track process known as reconciliation. …
AP: … Republicans blasted Democrats for pursuing their priorities at a time when they said all focus should be on Afghanistan, as thousands of people including Americans are trying to flee the country as the U.S. withdraws its forces.
“We should be doing nothing else on this floor until every single American is home,” said Rep. Kevin McCarthy, the House minority leader.
Inserting his own wedge into the politics of the situation, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday on Fox News that he was rooting for the House moderates. …
When the economy hits hard times, survey data shows, people are less likely to worry about the environment.
The climate crisis is at high risk of becoming an economic crisis.
That is an increasingly widespread view among leadingeconomicthinkers — that a range of economic and financial problems could result from a warming planet and humanity’s efforts to deal with it. But if you believe that to be true, what should the United States’ economist-in-chief do about it?
That question has taken new urgency as President Biden weighs whether to reappoint Jerome Powell to another term leading the Federal Reserve or choose someone else.
Climate activists and others on the left have argued that Mr. Powell should be replaced by someone with stronger credentials as a climate hawk. Demonstrators backing this cause were planning to protest at an annual Fed symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyo., starting Thursday, but the event was made online-only at the last minute because of a rise in coronavirus cases. Among other things, they want the Fed to use its regulatory powers to throttle the flow of bank lending to carbon-producing industries.
At the same time, some Republicans are assailing the Fed for mere research efforts involving climate. It is clear there would be a huge outcry on the right if a new Fed chair were to take an activist stance in trying to limit the availability of capital in energy-extraction businesses. …
Since 1989, Gallup has polled Americans about whether climate change worried then personally. The net share of people who have expressed concern — those who have said they worry about climate “a fair amount” or “great deal” versus those who have worried “only a little” or “not at all” — offers a sense of how seriously Americans take the threat.
The net share of people worried about climate change reached its peak not in recent years, when the damaging effects have become more visible. The peak was in April 2000, when the share of people worried about the climate was 45 percentage points higher than the share not worried. That was also one of the best months for the U.S. economy in decades, near the peak of the late 1990s boom, with unemployment a mere 3.8 percent.
Reps. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) and Peter Meijer (R-Mich.) got a bipartisan rebuke Wednesday from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) for their 24-hour unauthorized trip to Kabul’s international airport during the massive airlift of foreign nationals and the Afghans who assisted them. The Pentagon wasn’t pleased, either.
“We actually apologized to people for showing up unexpected, and several people said, ‘This is great, because we didn’t have to do anything to prepare for it,'” Moulton toldThe New York Timesin a joint interview with Meijer. And the trip changed their mind about President Biden’s Aug. 31 deadline to withdraw U.S. forces, the two congressmen — both Iraq War veterans — told the Times.
“Almost every veteran in Congress wants to extend the Aug. 31 deadline, including us, and our opinion on that was changed on the ground, because we started the evacuations so late,” Moulton said. “There’s no way we can get everyone out, even by Sept. 11. So we need to have a working relationship with the Taliban after our departure. And the only way to achieve that is to leave by Aug. 31.”
Moulton and Meijer “are clearly not happy with how Biden handled this,” Politicoreports. “But they were chastened enough by the facts on the ground to change their minds about the policy going forward — and they’re now off Team ‘Extend the Deadline.’ …
The Taliban block Afghans’ access to Kabul’s airport and reject any delay of the US withdrawal
House passes $3.5 trillion budget blueprint after deal with moderates
House narrowly passes $3.5 trillion budget blueprint, paving the way to enact Biden’s expansive agenda
NYT: A divided House on Monday approved a $3.5 trillion budget blueprint that would pave the way for a vast expansion of social safety net and climate programs, as Democrats overcame sharp internal rifts to advance a critical piece of President Biden’s ambitious domestic agenda.
Approval of the budget was a milestone in Democrats’ drive to enact their top priorities — including huge investments in education, child care, health care and paid leave, and tax increases on wealthy people and corporations — over Republican opposition.
But it came only after Democratic leaders quelled an internal revolt among moderates, who had balked at passing the plan before the House acted on a $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure package. As the White House mounted a pressure campaign to win their backing, Speaker Nancy Pelosi engineered a plan to tie both measures together with one vote, allowing approval of the budget blueprint with a vote on a measure committing the House to taking up the infrastructure bill by Sept. 27.
The vote was 220-212, along party lines, to advance the budget plan and allow for future votes on both the infrastructure bill and on a voting rights measure that was on track to pass later Tuesday.
While the budget plan, which passed the Senate this month, does not have the force of law, its final approval allows Democrats to move forward with a fast-track process known as reconciliation. …
How Should the Fed Deal With Climate Change?
When the economy hits hard times, survey data shows, people are less likely to worry about the environment.
The climate crisis is at high risk of becoming an economic crisis.
That is an increasingly widespread view among leading economic thinkers — that a range of economic and financial problems could result from a warming planet and humanity’s efforts to deal with it. But if you believe that to be true, what should the United States’ economist-in-chief do about it?
That question has taken new urgency as President Biden weighs whether to reappoint Jerome Powell to another term leading the Federal Reserve or choose someone else.
Climate activists and others on the left have argued that Mr. Powell should be replaced by someone with stronger credentials as a climate hawk. Demonstrators backing this cause were planning to protest at an annual Fed symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyo., starting Thursday, but the event was made online-only at the last minute because of a rise in coronavirus cases. Among other things, they want the Fed to use its regulatory powers to throttle the flow of bank lending to carbon-producing industries.
At the same time, some Republicans are assailing the Fed for mere research efforts involving climate. It is clear there would be a huge outcry on the right if a new Fed chair were to take an activist stance in trying to limit the availability of capital in energy-extraction businesses. …
Since 1989, Gallup has polled Americans about whether climate change worried then personally. The net share of people who have expressed concern — those who have said they worry about climate “a fair amount” or “great deal” versus those who have worried “only a little” or “not at all” — offers a sense of how seriously Americans take the threat.
The net share of people worried about climate change reached its peak not in recent years, when the damaging effects have become more visible. The peak was in April 2000, when the share of people worried about the climate was 45 percentage points higher than the share not worried. That was also one of the best months for the U.S. economy in decades, near the peak of the late 1990s boom, with unemployment a mere 3.8 percent.
2 congressman who snuck to Kabul airport now support Biden’s Aug 31 withdrawal date