California on alert for floods and mudslides as powerful storms hit state with heavy rain, wind

Authorities across California focused Thursday on clearing roads and restoring power following heavy rain and winds that gusted to 101 miles per hour during the latest in a series of storms buffeting the state.

A disaster declaration from Gov. Gavin Newsom remained in effect as the state Office of Emergency Services expanded deployment teams up and down the state — mostly near hills scarred by recent wildfires — in case of dangerous debris flows.

The storms are bringing badly needed rain to a state experiencing historic drought conditions but also testing disaster response and the vast network of dams, levees and canals that provide water to the state and protect it from potentially catastrophic flooding.

At least six deaths have been linked to the storm, including a 2-year-old boy who died Wednesday evening in Sonoma County after a tree fell on a mobile home, said Sonoma County Sheriff’s Department Sgt. Juan Valencia. A 19-year-old woman died in the San Francisco Bay-area city of Fairfield after crashing into a utility pole, according to police.

The bodies of at least two people were found in or near vehicles that were caught in floodwaters when a New Year’s Eve storm closed a major highway in an agricultural area south of Sacramento.

Winds gusted to 50 to 60 mph in the Central Valley, with the strongest gusts hitting Marin County north of San Francisco, said Cynthia Palmer, a National Weather Service meteorologist.

The winds downed trees and knocked out power across large swaths of Northern California, and about 142,000 homes remained without power on Thursday, according to tracking site poweroutage.us.

Twenty-four-hour rainfall averages ranged from under 1 inch to more than 4 inches across the state, with Northern California counties receiving the most precipitation. Rains picked up in Southern California as well, prompting flood warnings.

Heavy rains are expected to continue into next week as multiple systems meteorologists call atmospheric rivers arrive. As long as the rains keep steady, risks of debris flows are relatively low, said Scott Rowe, an NWS lead meteorologist in Sacramento. The risks come from heavy and fast rainfalls that tend to come with thunderstorms, Rowe said.

Steady rains, ideally with some drying breaks in between, also will help refill the state’s low reservoirs and could ultimately ease the state’s deep drought situation.

But so far, they’re coming more quickly than that, Palmer said.

“Our grounds are saturated, we're not getting much if any drying between storms,” Palmer said. “Any rain that falls is going to run off. We are expecting additional potential for flooding across the area.”

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/QLrj2R6
via IFTTT

Read More

Biden's regulators propose banning non-competes

The Federal Trade Commission on Thursday kicked off the process for regulating non-compete clauses in employment agreements, issuing a proposed rule that would largely ban the practice.

Under the proposal, the FTC would still allow employers other legal avenues to protect trade secrets and other sensitive information. However, those non-disclosure agreements cannot be so broadly construed as to functionally serve as non-compete clauses, according to the agency.

“We're not talking about your run-of-the-mill NDA,” Elizabeth Wilkins, the FTC’s director of policy planning, said on a press call Wednesday previewing the action. “We are looking at things where an employer is trying to get around the rule with other words.”

The FTC is also looking to prohibit other types of employment provisions under the rule that have the same effect as a non-compete. That could include requirements to repay training expenses if a worker leaves a company within a certain time period.

The FTC’s proposal would extend to nearly all work arrangements, including unpaid or volunteer positions, apprentices and independent contractors, in addition to regular employees.

The proposal fulfills a key pillar of President Joe Biden’s competition policy agenda from last year. In a sprawling executive order from July 2021 the White House directed the entirety of the federal government to prioritize work involving competition policy and enforcement, particularly in labor markets. That specifically included a rulemaking effort by the FTC on non-compete clauses.

Non-competes are a “widespread and often exploitative practice that suppresses wages, hampers innovation, and blocks entrepreneurs from starting new businesses,” the agency said in a statement.

The FTC estimates that banning the practice could put close to $300 billion back in the pockets of workers each year, as well as boost the career opportunities for about 30 million Americans.

“It is an individual problem for a worker, but it is an aggregate problem for the economy,” FTC Chair Lina Khan told reporters on Wednesday's call.

In written statements, Khan and Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, highlighted not only the effect of non-competes on wages but also on innovation and new business formation.

"This in turn reduces product quality while raising prices," Khan wrote, saying that in the health care sector alone, banning non-competes could lower consumer prices by as much as $150 billion each year.

The FTC commissioners voted 3-1 along partisan lines to issue the proposal, with the agency’s lone Republican commissioner Christine Wilson voting no.

In a written statement, Wilson said her fellow commissioners are departing “from hundreds of years of legal precedent that employs a fact-specific inquiry into whether a non-compete clause is unreasonable,” and instead is proposing a near-blanket ban on the practice. Wilson also questioned whether the agency has the constitutional authority to issue the rules, and said a recent U.S. Supreme Court opinion limiting the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority dooms the FTC’s efforts on non-competes.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce also criticized the proposal, saying the agency lacks authority to issue the rule and that it ignores the benefits of the practice.

“Attempting to ban noncompete clauses in all employment circumstances overturns well-established state laws which have long governed their use and ignores the fact that, when appropriately used, noncompete agreements are an important tool in fostering innovation and preserving competition," Sean Heather, U.S. Chamber of Commerce senior vice president for international regulatory affairs and antitrust, said in a statement.

According to the other three commissioners, in many cases, employers leverage their outsized bargaining power to compel workers into signing these contracts, such as by making them a condition for receiving severance pay or part of an employment agreement.

“For too long, coercive noncompete agreements have unfairly denied millions of working people the freedom to change jobs, negotiate for better pay, and start new businesses," Sarah Miller, who heads up the antimonopoly group American Economic Liberties Project, said in a statement.

Khan said that one reason for the rulemaking was the increased utilization of non-compete agreements across a broader segment of the American workforce in recent decades.

“These are no longer just being used in the boardroom, but are now basically proliferated across the economy,” she said.

The FTC estimates that roughly one-in-five workers are subject to non-competes, Khan said.

In a tweet, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who chair's the Senate Finance Committee, said "non-compete clauses are anti-worker and anti-American, plain and simple. I’m glad the [FTC] is moving to end this practice and level the playing field for American workers."

As a precursor, the FTC on Wednesday announced enforcement actions against two glass companies and a pair of related security firms over their use of non-competes.

States including California, North Dakota and Oklahoma, as well as the District of Columbia have already outlawed the use of non-compete agreements, and other states restrict their use among certain groups of workers.

The process to write and implement a rule can be lengthy, and includes public comments and potential legal challenges. A final rule will likely not be in place until at least 2024. The FTC will open the proposal for two months of public comments and the rule will take effect six months after a final version is published.

The FTC frequently uses its rulemaking authority to enforce its consumer protection mandate, including recently proposed regulations governing privacy and data security practices. The last time the agency issued a competition rule, however, was in 1967, governing “discriminatory Practices in Men's and Boys’ Tailored Clothing Industry.” The rule was never enforced, and rescinded in 1994.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/pbwk3T0
via IFTTT

Read More

GOP debates: Who could take McCarthy's place?

If not Kevin McCarthy, then who?

It’s the all-consuming question that has started openly percolating among the House GOP, as McCarthy’s speaker bid stalls.

So far, though, Justin Amash — a former congressman who switched from Republican to Independent in 2019 and is considered a gadfly among his former colleagues — is all they’re getting, at least publicly. It’s a sign of the uncharted waters House Republicans are currently navigating as they continue to punt the speaker’s race.

“They are not able to choose a speaker right now and I think this can play out in a lot of ways. And it makes sense to be here to offer an option,” said Amash, who roamed the chamber and held court with reporters Wednesday after flying in from Michigan.

But the fact that McCarthy’s bid is in such peril that a former Freedom Caucus member-turned-independent felt emboldened to preen about the Capitol on Wednesday, points to the larger political, and mathematical, gymnastics the conference is facing: If not McCarthy, who else could win near-total support of the Republican conference — and actually wants the job?

As one GOP member summed up the party’s existential dilemma: “Kevin doesn’t have the votes, but no one has more votes than Kevin.”

It’s a question with no clear answer and plenty of opportunity for chaos. While Republicans acknowledge they are privately throwing around names among themselves, there’s a persistent elephant in the room — McCarthy himself — that means they will remain largely hypothetical until the California Republican drops out.

And the GOP leader isn’t looking to remove himself anytime soon.

“I haven’t heard any [names] and I hope there won't be any, because he is it,”said McCarthy ally Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.). “We’re not backing off.”

Ambitious GOP lawmakers who harbor their own gavel dreams know making a move now would be viewed as knifing McCarthy and alienating his allies. And with no “consensus” pick waiting in the wings, any speaker hopeful would need to solve the same Rubik’s cube of vote-counting that’s proved elusive to McCarthy so far.

Members admit that with McCarthy still in the running, it is tough to get a clear idea of another possibility, one who could match his fundraising prowess among other skills.

"There's a number of names that have been floating about but we can't actually get to that as long as Kevin says he's going to keep running indefinitely,” Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), one of the Freedom Caucus members opposing McCarthy thus far, told Fox News’ Laura Ingraham when asked if he’d prefer the House GOP’s No. 2, Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.).

If McCarthy does drop out, Scalise is the most obvious fall-back option. He has been adamant that he’s backing the California Republican, but he’s also in a tricky position. While he is likely the second most popular member in the conference — one who has also had his eye on the gavel in the past — he can’t have any fingerprints on the effort to take down McCarthy, or he’ll earn fierce and swift backlash from the Californian’s allies. So, he’s been laying low.

Some argue he has more conservative bonafides than McCarthy, who is still viewed skeptically by the right as a legislative chameleon despite his efforts to tie himself closely to former President Donald Trump. But others question if Scalise would be all that different in the eyes of the conservative hardliners opposing McCarthy.

Asked if a potential speaker Scalise could resolve the standoff, Jordan told reporters: "No one is talking about that."

As the GOP leader’s allies and his defectors sat down together on Wednesday evening, many of the conservatives were openly predicting that the California Republican would be forced out. Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), for instance, cryptically told reporters, “I think there's gonna be a resolution” by the time the House resumed at 8 p.m. He predicted they’d have an entirely different candidate.

Those comments helped accelerate an already-active rumor mill in GOP circles. In one call among Republican lobbyists on Wednesday, for instance, several people raised the idea that some GOP members who have publicly supported McCarthy are secretly waiting for him to drop out to rally behind Scalise — a concept that McCarthy supporters have scoffed at as ridiculous.

Another fast-moving rumor among members is that Scalise and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) could potentially reach a deal, in which one takes the speaker's gavel and the other becomes majority leader. But, again, others denied any possibility it was true.

That increasingly active whisper network points to the current highly volatile nature of the GOP, which may end another day of speaker votes without a resolution.

Rep. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.), too, dismissed the idea that any other members had been floated for the House’s top post, declaring some members’ motto: “Only Kevin.” But as for the path forward, he said he had no idea: “I’m out of answers. Seriously. That’s the kind of situation we’re in right now.”

While some of the McCarthy opposition is personal, his detractors aren’t yet ready to bear hug Scalise as an alternative. Some are privately questioning how backing the Lousianian, particularly if he makes them the same offer on the rules that McCarthy has, wouldn’t just be rearranging deck chairs.

One McCarthy opponent told POLITICO, on condition of anonymity, that they would be willing to have conversations with Scalise but whoever came next would have to back “structural reforms” that conservatives are pushing for. If such demands include allowing one member to force a vote on deposing a speaker then that candidate, too, would be hobbling their speakership before it even began.

And some of McCarthy’s strongest backers are warning that they don’t view Scalise as the alternative if conservatives force the GOP leader out of the race.

Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), who stressed that he was all for McCarthy as long as he’s in the race, said he viewed backing Scalise as a Plan B as letting “a small group hold us hostage.”

“I love Steve,” Bacon said. “[But] I just don’t want to cave to these guys who are holding us hostage. …They’re just looking for a scalp on Kevin.”

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) added that he believes no other Republicans besides McCarthy could get the votes needed to win the speaker’s gavel. That, in his mind, includes Scalise.

If McCarthy drops out, Fitzpatrick said the conference will have to look beyond its current roster.

“It would set a terrible precedent in our conference if you put all that work in, accomplish the mission [to gain the House majority] and then get jettisoned at the 11th hour,” Fitzpatrick said.

A bipartisan group of centrists members have had nascent conversations about trying to cut a deal that would elect a more moderate Republican, likely in exchange for cutting a power-sharing deal with Democrats.

In a boost to those long-shot hopes, retired Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) opened the door on Wednesday, telling Michigan reporters that it was an “intriguing proposal.”

But even centrists acknowledge their threats are unlikely, and one McCarthy’s opponents consider a bluff. And Democrats insist their members are a long way from backing McCarthy or his allies — if they ever will.

Instead, conservatives are floating their own names as they cycle through their wish list. Their dream is Jordan, a McCarthy enemy-turned-ally and conservative hero, as speaker. But Jordan has been publicly adamant for months that he does not want to be speaker and he helped nominate McCarthy this week. Plus, the moderate wing and institutionalists are already shutting that idea down.

On Wednesday, they publicly shifted their public support behind Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.), who previously made an unsuccessful bid for conference chair. But McCarthy’s detractors say Donalds isn’t likely to be their final pick. And they are already floating other potential names, most notably Republican Study Committee Chair Kevin Hern (R-Okla.), as they look to offer other alternatives.

“I don’t think anything is final until we reach 218,” said Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.), one of McCarthy’s original opponents. “Time is on our side.”

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/CEAceWQ
via IFTTT

Read More

Kennedy passes on Louisiana gubernatorial bid

Republican Sen. John Kennedy told supporters Wednesday he will forgo this year’s Louisiana governor race and stay in the U.S. Senate.

Fresh off winning a second term as senator, Kennedy said that he decided after deliberating that “at this juncture, I just think I can help my state and my country more in the Senate.”

“I have passed more bills as the lead author than any first-term senator in Louisiana's history, but, to be an effective senator, killing bad ideas is just as important as advancing good ones. I'm going to be very busy doing both,” Kennedy said in the message.

Kennedy’s decision marks the second Republican senator to pass on the race, which is a top Republican pick-up opportunity as Gov. John Bel Edwards, a Democrat, is term-limited. Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) also considered the race but decided to stay in the Senate, citing his new role as top Republican on the Senate’s Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

Kennedy is generally more conservative than Cassidy and known for his clever quips on Capitol Hill, whereas Cassidy voted to convict Donald Trump in his impeachment trial and emerged as a key Republican negotiator in the Senate. Kennedy is a bit of a thorn in the side of GOP leaders, never holding back if he’s feeling frustrated with his party’s strategy.

Kennedy would have been a formidable entrant. He just won re-election by more than 40 percentage points, avoiding a runoff.

He also previously looked at the 2019 governors race, which Edwards won. Former Sen. David Vitter, who previously held Kennedy’s seat, lost to Edwards in 2015 and retired from the Senate.

Now with an open seat, Attorney General Jeff Landry is the top declared GOP candidate in the race, though more candidates may be on the way. Republicans are bullish about their chances to flip the otherwise red-leaning state, with the anti-abortion Edwards leaving office.

Louisiana is one of three states that is holding an election for governor in 2023, along with Kentucky and Mississippi.

Zach Montellaro contributed to this report.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/FaoP3yS
via IFTTT

Read More

Kat Cammack draws boos over Dem booze accusations

But with the chamber unable to adopt rules, there was little to be done about the remark.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/fEI6m3w
via IFTTT

Read More

Biden: 'My intention' is to visit the southern border

President Joe Biden intends to visit the southern U.S. border, he said Wednesday, following months of insistence from his political opponents that he make the trip.

“That’s my intention,” Biden said, responding to a question from reporters about whether he’d go to the border. “We’re working out the details now.”

The president is scheduled to visit Mexico City next week for a summit with other North American leaders. The news of Biden’s border visit was first reported by The Wall Street Journal.

Republicans have long insisted that Biden see the border with Mexico firsthand — one of many criticisms they’ve maintained over the administration’s border policy. GOP leaders, including Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), have held press conferences criticizing Biden from the border itself, highlighting what they’ve labeled as an immigration crisis.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre in November called McCarthy’s border visit a “political stunt.”

The Biden administration faced additional scrutiny for its immigration policies last month under the expected expiration of Title 42, a mechanism used by the Biden and Trump administrations to prevent the entry of millions of migrants under Covid-era rules. Critics have argued the federal government is not prepared for the influx of migrants expected when Title 42 is lifted, as authorities will no longer be able to turn migrants away without an asylum hearing.

The Supreme Court ruled in December that Title 42 can stay in place for now, with oral arguments in the case expected in February or March.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/DKoPwJe
via IFTTT

Read More

McCarthy’s political operation spent millions on lawmakers now opposing his speaker dreams

Money can buy a lot of things. The speakership of the House may not be one of them.

In the 2022 election cycle alone, political groups affiliated with Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) spent over $1 million supporting Republican representatives who have now voted against him for speaker, according to a review of federal campaign finance records.

Of the 20 Republicans who voted for someone other than McCarthy — leaving the House in deadlock — 14 received a total of $120,000 in contributions from McCarthy’s leadership PAC, the Majority Committee, the filings show. That includes Reps. Dan Bishop (N.C.), Michael Cloud (Texas), Andrew Clyde (Ga.), Byron Donalds (Fla.), Bob Good (Va.), Andy Harris (Md.), Ralph Norman (S.C.), Scott Perry (Pa.) and Matt Rosendale (Mont.), along with incoming freshmen Anna Paulina Luna (Fla.), Josh Brecheen (Okla.), Andy Ogles (Tenn.), Eli Crane (Ariz.) and Keith Self (Texas).

The donations were among hundreds McCarthy spread around to the Republican conference and GOP challengers as he sought to help Republicans win the House majority in 2021 and 2022. Most candidates received the maximum $10,000 — $5,000 each for the primary and the general election — although a few only got support for the general election.

Reps. Andy Biggs (Ariz.), Lauren Boebert (Colo.), Matt Gaetz (Fla.), Paul Gosar (Ariz.), Mary Miller (Ill.) and Chip Roy (Texas) did not receive any contributions from McCarthy’s PAC in the last election cycle, although some have benefited from the political operation in the past. Most of the incumbents — with the exception of Boebert, whose contest went to an automatic recount due to its surprisingly close margin — faced easy paths to reelection in the midterms.

“This is not personal,” Roy said on the House floor on Tuesday.

In addition to McCarthy’s leadership PAC, the McCarthy-aligned House GOP super PAC, Congressional Leadership Fund, also threw its support behind some of the lawmakers who are now spoiling his speaker bid. Crane received $10,000 in contributions from CLF during both the primary and general election. Harris and Self each received $5,000 during their primary and general elections, respectively.

CLF didn’t just donate to Crane, however. The super PAC also spent over $900,000 on ads in support of him as he challenged incumbent Democratic Rep. Tom O’Halleran in Arizona’s 2nd District. Crane, a political newcomer backed by former President Donald Trump, went on to beat O’Halleran, who was one of the most vulnerable House Democrats in 2022 due to redistricting, by about 8 points.

One TV spot touted that Crane would “stand up to [President Joe] Biden and stop the spending.”

First, though, Crane is standing up to McCarthy.

As the main House Republican super PAC, CLF has spent heavily in previous elections bolstering other Republicans who are now playing the role of anti-McCarthy rebels. In 2020, the super PAC poured over $1.5 million into Perry’s race in Pennsylvania, targeting Democratic opponent Eugene DePasquale. It also spent $1.8 million opposing Democrat Cameron Webb, who was Good’s opponent in central Virginia. Perry won his election by 12 points, but it was a closer race for Good, who won by 5 points.

“Our job is not to coronate the biggest fundraiser or rubber stamp, the status quo, or keep on going along to get along,” Boebert said on the floor Wednesday, as she nominated Donalds during the fifth round of voting.

It’s unclear how many rounds of votes it will take to elect a speaker, given Republicans’ small majority and the relative lack of movement among those GOP lawmakers opposing McCarthy. During the first two rounds of voting on Tuesday, 19 lawmakers refused to back the GOP leader. That number grew to 20 by the third vote. The House then adjourned.

The fourth round of voting Wednesday saw all of the same lawmakers voting against McCarthy — plus Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.), who previously voted for McCarthy, voting present. She received $10,000 from the Majority Committee during the 2022 primary and general elections. And in 2020, when she held a key battleground district, CLF spent over $1 million on the race.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/9cVQ3bW
via IFTTT

Read More