A group of 35 Republican senators has introduced a bill to block the Joe Biden administration from reopening the US consulate in Jerusalem.

US mulls opening Jerusalem consulate, GOP leaders bring bill to stop reopening embassy

The United States backed Taiwan’s inclusion in the United Nations system amid China's continued efforts to limit the island's international participation.

US backs Taiwan's attempt to expand UN participation, seeks bigger role

US media reports say Pakistan and America are set to sign a deal for using Pakistani airspace. Why is Joe Biden trusting Pakistan again after their betrayal in Afghanistan? What's in it for Islamabad? Palki Sharma tells you.

Gravitas: Will Pakistan let America use their airspace?

President Biden has a chance to overhaul the stale culture of central banking.

President Biden will soon have an opportunity to appoint two new members of the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors and renew or replace the chair and vice-chair. These officials regulate many of our financial institutions. They play a central role in keeping prices in check and employment stable — no small order, especially amid the turbulent Covid-era economy.

With these appointments, Mr Biden can do more than pick someone who follows ethics rules to the letter — a problem that has plagued the Fed and Jerome Powell, the current chair. Mr Biden can reshape the way we think about who should safeguard the national and global economies.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/bidens-popularity-drops-more-than-that-of-any-other-us-leader-since-end-of-wwii-poll-423840">Biden’s popularity drops more than that of any other US leader since end of WWII: Poll</a>

Tradition dictates that the ideal governor is impartial and not beholden to the big banks or captured by special interests. This sort of high technocrat lives and thinks in the language of high finance — a classic smart person.

For the most part, the smart people have been white men like Ben Bernanke and Alan Greenspan, pulled from an exclusive club of graduate institutions like the University of Chicago, Harvard and Columbia. Their tight circle includes men like Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase, and James Gorman, chief executive of Morgan Stanley. In their minds, they do not represent an interest group. They do not have a culture or a political point of view. They are above the fray. The result: an exclusive class of central bankers blind to its own limitations.

As I have found in my work, those who breach the code of this exclusive club risk being ostracized. Referencing heterodox economic theories like modern monetary theory, feminist economics or environmental economic theory is verboten. Even suggesting that central bankers consult with ordinary investors in the real economy simply isn’t done.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/biden-meets-with-manchin-and-schumer-as-democrats-race-to-finish-social-policy-bill-423960">Biden meets with Manchin and Schumer as Democrats race to finish social policy bill</a>

One of the key lessons of the great financial crisis of 2008 was that such groupthink breeds disaster. Central bankers did not take seriously economic theories that predicted the financial crisis. Market participants and regulators, working from the same pool of limited information and shared assumptions, failed to heed the signs of a potential crash, including investors taking on astronomical risk they understood poorly, problems in the underlying “real economy” upon which credit markets were based and the undercapitalization of banks.

The smart guys missed the warnings then. With an opportunity to remake the culture of central banking, Mr Biden should look beyond their tight-knit circle.

There’s a parallel here to the aftermath of the financial crisis that led to the Great Depression. Back then, brilliant generalists like James Landis, a young professor of law who had no experience in finance, were drafted by New Deal Democrats to help Congress create new securities legislation. Mr Landis, with his broader perspective from outside the tight world of New York markets, dared to reimagine the relationship between government and markets altogether. He proposed then-unthinkable rules that are now foundational for our financial markets, such as civil and criminal liability for the directors of financial companies involved in fraud, as well as new institutions like the Securities and Exchange Commission, which he ultimately led. This is the sort of independent streak the country needs from the Fed’s next Board of Governors.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/men-are-caregivers-too-in-bidens-plan-423142">Men are caregivers, too, in Biden’s plan</a>

In addition, the Fed’s next leaders must be flexible and forward-thinking. Should the Fed join the digital currency parade or try to stop it? How do financial markets affect climate change? Considering such questions means grappling with ideas across a range of disciplines, from social and behavioural science to environmental engineering to international relations, not just economics.

These jobs also demand humility. In my research, I saw how the Bank of Japan fostered a sense of curiosity in its central bankers by sending its novices into rural parts of the country for a year to talk with shop owners and street vendors. They could see, up close, that the real economy lies out there — not in the inner sanctum of high finance.

With calls for green and socially responsible investing in the United States, citizens’ groups are also demanding that monetary policy aligns with larger national and social priorities. So the next Fed officials should embrace a robust vision of financial citizenship — one that embraces the idea that since central bank actions have social and political consequences, the public deserves to have a voice.

Also read |&nbsp;​​​​​​​<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/joe-biden-delays-release-of-files-on-jfk-assassination-423286">Joe Biden delays release of files on JFK assassination</a>

One way to do this is to seek out individuals whose life experience and training give them a different perspective on how the economy works and who matters most. Mr Biden could appoint a tech industry veteran, or a leader of the green finance movement. Diversity — of race, religion, national origin, gender, socioeconomic and educational backgrounds — is also critical to challenge groupthink.

Americans do, of course, need expertise in financial economics and an understanding of the financial sector on the Fed’s board and in its chair. But a mix of conventional and unconventional perspectives would lend wisdom to the monetary policies that govern our collective financial future.

In recent days, much of the debate around Mr Powell’s reappointment has been about ethics. But while that’s obviously important, we should also focus on breaking out of the narrow mould of Fed leadership.

Watch&nbsp;|&nbsp;US President Joe Biden expects petrol prices to fall in 2022

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-president-joe-biden-expects-petrol-prices-to-fall-in-2022-422907/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Given that the chair must be chosen from the board of governors, we are most likely set for more of the same at the top: a distinguished insider with a narrowly focused résumé, who, whether he or she realizes it or not, sees things more from the perspective of the big financial players than ordinary citizens.

So for Mr Biden, the priority must be to lay the groundwork for the future. That means filling the board seats with people inclined toward unconventional thinking. In so doing, he can open the door to a new kind of Fed chair in the future.

President Biden has a chance to overhaul the stale culture of central banking. President Biden will soon have an opportunity to appoint two new members of the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors and renew or replace the chair and vice-chair.

President Biden has a chance to overhaul the stale culture of central banking. President Biden will soon have an opportunity to appoint two new members of the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors and renew or replace the chair and vice-chair. These officials regulate many of our financial institutions. They play a central role in keeping prices in check and employment stable — no small order, especially amid the turbulent Covid-era economy. With these appointments, Mr Biden can do more than pick someone who follows ethics rules to the letter — a problem that has plagued the Fed and Jerome Powell, the current chair. Mr Biden can reshape the way we think about who should safeguard the national and global economies. Also read | Biden’s popularity drops more than that of any other US leader since end of WWII: Poll Tradition dictates that the ideal governor is impartial and not beholden to the big banks or captured by special interests. This sort of high technocrat lives and thinks in the language of high finance — a classic smart person. For the most part, the smart people have been white men like Ben Bernanke and Alan Greenspan, pulled from an exclusive club of graduate institutions like the University of Chicago, Harvard and Columbia. Their tight circle includes men like Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase, and James Gorman, chief executive of Morgan Stanley. In their minds, they do not represent an interest group. They do not have a culture or a political point of view. They are above the fray. The result: an exclusive class of central bankers blind to its own limitations. As I have found in my work, those who breach the code of this exclusive club risk being ostracized. Referencing heterodox economic theories like modern monetary theory, feminist economics or environmental economic theory is verboten. Even suggesting that central bankers consult with ordinary investors in the real economy simply isn’t done. Also read | Biden meets with Manchin and Schumer as Democrats race to finish social policy bill One of the key lessons of the great financial crisis of 2008 was that such groupthink breeds disaster. Central bankers did not take seriously economic theories that predicted the financial crisis. Market participants and regulators, working from the same pool of limited information and shared assumptions, failed to heed the signs of a potential crash, including investors taking on astronomical risk they understood poorly, problems in the underlying “real economy” upon which credit markets were based and the undercapitalization of banks. The smart guys missed the warnings then. With an opportunity to remake the culture of central banking, Mr Biden should look beyond their tight-knit circle. There’s a parallel here to the aftermath of the financial crisis that led to the Great Depression. Back then, brilliant generalists like James Landis, a young professor of law who had no experience in finance, were drafted by New Deal Democrats to help Congress create new securities legislation. Mr Landis, with his broader perspective from outside the tight world of New York markets, dared to reimagine the relationship between government and markets altogether. He proposed then-unthinkable rules that are now foundational for our financial markets, such as civil and criminal liability for the directors of financial companies involved in fraud, as well as new institutions like the Securities and Exchange Commission, which he ultimately led. This is the sort of independent streak the country needs from the Fed’s next Board of Governors. Also read | Men are caregivers, too, in Biden’s plan In addition, the Fed’s next leaders must be flexible and forward-thinking. Should the Fed join the digital currency parade or try to stop it? How do financial markets affect climate change? Considering such questions means grappling with ideas across a range of disciplines, from social and behavioural science to environmental engineering to international relations, not just economics. These jobs also demand humility. In my research, I saw how the Bank of Japan fostered a sense of curiosity in its central bankers by sending its novices into rural parts of the country for a year to talk with shop owners and street vendors. They could see, up close, that the real economy lies out there — not in the inner sanctum of high finance. With calls for green and socially responsible investing in the United States, citizens’ groups are also demanding that monetary policy aligns with larger national and social priorities. So the next Fed officials should embrace a robust vision of financial citizenship — one that embraces the idea that since central bank actions have social and political consequences, the public deserves to have a voice. Also read | Joe Biden delays release of files on JFK assassination One way to do this is to seek out individuals whose life experience and training give them a different perspective on how the economy works and who matters most. Mr Biden could appoint a tech industry veteran, or a leader of the green finance movement. Diversity — of race, religion, national origin, gender, socioeconomic and educational backgrounds — is also critical to challenge groupthink. Americans do, of course, need expertise in financial economics and an understanding of the financial sector on the Fed’s board and in its chair. But a mix of conventional and unconventional perspectives would lend wisdom to the monetary policies that govern our collective financial future. In recent days, much of the debate around Mr Powell’s reappointment has been about ethics. But while that’s obviously important, we should also focus on breaking out of the narrow mould of Fed leadership. Watch | US President Joe Biden expects petrol prices to fall in 2022 Given that the chair must be chosen from the board of governors, we are most likely set for more of the same at the top: a distinguished insider with a narrowly focused résumé, who, whether he or she realizes it or not, sees things more from the perspective of the big financial players than ordinary citizens. So for Mr Biden, the priority must be to lay the groundwork for the future. That means filling the board seats with people inclined toward unconventional thinking. In so doing, he can open the door to a new kind of Fed chair in the future.

Biden needs to diversify the fed’s leadership

Fall was meant to mark the beginning of the end of the labour shortage that has held back the nation’s economic recovery. Expanded unemployment benefits were ending. Schools were reopening, freeing up many caregivers. Surely, economists and business owners reasoned, a flood of workers would follow.

Instead, the labour force shrank in September. There are 5 million fewer people working than before the pandemic began and 3 million fewer even looking for work.

The slow return of workers is causing headaches for the Biden administration, which was counting on a strong economic rebound to give momentum to its political agenda. Forecasters were largely blindsided by the problem and do not know how long it will last.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/silent-crisis-looms-as-us-to-end-covid-aid-for-millions-of-jobless-410825">'Silent crisis' looms as US to end Covid aid for millions of jobless</a>

Conservatives have blamed generous unemployment benefits for keeping people at home, but evidence from states that ended the payments early suggests that any impact was small. Progressives say companies could find workers if they paid more, but the shortages are not limited to low-wage industries.

Instead, economists point to a complex, overlapping web of factors, many of which could be slow to reverse.

The health crisis is still making it hard or dangerous for some people to work, while savings built up during the pandemic have made it easier for others to turn down jobs they do not want. Psychology may also play a role: Surveys suggest that the pandemic led many to rethink their priorities, while the glut of open jobs — more than 10 million in August — may be motivating some to hold out for a better offer.

The net result is that, arguably for the first time in decades, workers up and down the income ladder have leverage. And they are using it to demand not just higher pay but also flexible hours, more generous benefits and better working conditions. A record 4.3 million people quit their jobs in August, in some cases midshift to take a better-paying position down the street.

“It’s like the whole country is in some kind of union renegotiation,” said Betsey Stevenson, a University of Michigan economist who was an adviser to President Barack Obama. “I don’t know who’s going to win in this bargaining that’s going on right now, but right now it seems like workers have the upper hand.”

Rachel Eager spent last fall at home, taking the last class for her bachelor’s degree over Zoom while waiting to be recalled to her job at a New York City after-school program. That call never came.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/a-21-billion-pandemic-lifeline-for-undocumented-workers-runs-out-422140" hreflang="en">A $2.1 billion pandemic lifeline for undocumented workers runs out</a>

So Eager, 25, is looking for work. She has applied for dozens of jobs and had a handful of interviews, so far without luck. But she is taking her time. Eager said she is still worried about catching <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/coronavirus">COVID-19</a>; she would prefer to work remotely, and if she does end up taking an in-person job, she wants it to be worth the risk. And she does not want another job with low pay, little flexibility and no benefits.

“Many, many people are realizing that the way things were pre-pandemic were not sustainable and not benefiting them,” she said.

She has been applying for jobs in data analysis, nonprofit management and other fields that would offer better pay, benefits and a sense of purpose.

Eager, who is vaccinated, said that she had always been careful with money and that she built savings this year by staying home and socking away unemployment benefits and other aid.

“My financial situation is OK, and I think that is 99% of the reason that I can be choosy about my job prospects,” she said.

Americans have saved trillions of dollars since the pandemic began. Much of that wealth is concentrated among high earners, who mostly kept their jobs, reduced spending on dining and vacations, and benefited from a soaring stock market. But many lower-income Americans, too, were able to set aside money thanks to the government’s multitrillion-dollar response to the pandemic, which included not only direct cash assistance but also increased food aid, forbearance on mortgages and student loans, and an eviction moratorium.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-unemployment-claims-at-lowest-level-since-pandemic-began-373396">US unemployment claims at lowest level since pandemic began</a>

Economists said the extra savings alone are not necessarily keeping people out of the labor force. But the cushion is letting people be more picky about the jobs they take, when many have good reasons to be picky.

In addition to health concerns, child care issues remain a factor. Most schools have resumed in-person classes, but parents in many districts have had to grapple with quarantines or temporary returns to remote learning. And many parents of younger children are struggling to find day care, in part because that industry is dealing with its own staffing crisis.

Liz Kelly-Campanale left her job as a winemaker last year to care for her two children in Portland, Oregon. She thought about going back to work when schools resumed in-person instruction this fall. But the delta variant upended those plans.

“If you have an exposure, all of a sudden your kids are out of school for 10 days,” she said. “For people who have jobs where they can work from home, it’s maybe a little more feasible, but I can’t really drive a forklift around the house.”

Economists worry that if the pandemic leads many people to opt out of the workforce, it could have long-term consequences for economic growth. Rising labor force participation, particularly among women, was a major driver of the strong gains in income and production after World War II. Many economists argue that the reversal of that trend in recent decades has hurt economic growth.

In the shorter term, many economists think that more people will return to work as pandemic-related issues recede and as people deplete their savings.

“Eventually those savings, especially for lower-income people, they’re going to run out,” said Pablo Villanueva, an economist at UBS. “A lot of people are going to be increasingly unable to stay out of work even if they have some fear of COVID.”

Some businesses seem determined to wait them out. Wages have risen, but many employers appear reluctant to make other changes to attract workers, like flexible schedules and better benefits. That may be partly because, for all their complaints about a labor shortage, many companies are finding that they can get by with fewer workers, in some instances by asking customers to accept long waits or reduced service.

“They’re making a lot of profits in part because they’re saving on labor costs, and the question is, how long can that go on?” said Julia Pollak, chief economist for the employment site ZipRecruiter.

Eventually, she said, customers may get tired of busing their own tables or sitting on hold for hours, and employers may be forced to give in to workers’ demands.

Fall was meant to mark the beginning of the end of the labour shortage that has held back the nation’s economic recovery. Expanded unemployment benefits were ending.

Fall was meant to mark the beginning of the end of the labour shortage that has held back the nation’s economic recovery. Expanded unemployment benefits were ending. Schools were reopening, freeing up many caregivers. Surely, economists and business owners reasoned, a flood of workers would follow. Instead, the labour force shrank in September. There are 5 million fewer people working than before the pandemic began and 3 million fewer even looking for work. The slow return of workers is causing headaches for the Biden administration, which was counting on a strong economic rebound to give momentum to its political agenda. Forecasters were largely blindsided by the problem and do not know how long it will last. Also read | 'Silent crisis' looms as US to end Covid aid for millions of jobless Conservatives have blamed generous unemployment benefits for keeping people at home, but evidence from states that ended the payments early suggests that any impact was small. Progressives say companies could find workers if they paid more, but the shortages are not limited to low-wage industries. Instead, economists point to a complex, overlapping web of factors, many of which could be slow to reverse. The health crisis is still making it hard or dangerous for some people to work, while savings built up during the pandemic have made it easier for others to turn down jobs they do not want. Psychology may also play a role: Surveys suggest that the pandemic led many to rethink their priorities, while the glut of open jobs — more than 10 million in August — may be motivating some to hold out for a better offer. The net result is that, arguably for the first time in decades, workers up and down the income ladder have leverage. And they are using it to demand not just higher pay but also flexible hours, more generous benefits and better working conditions. A record 4.3 million people quit their jobs in August, in some cases midshift to take a better-paying position down the street. “It’s like the whole country is in some kind of union renegotiation,” said Betsey Stevenson, a University of Michigan economist who was an adviser to President Barack Obama. “I don’t know who’s going to win in this bargaining that’s going on right now, but right now it seems like workers have the upper hand.” Rachel Eager spent last fall at home, taking the last class for her bachelor’s degree over Zoom while waiting to be recalled to her job at a New York City after-school program. That call never came. Also read | A $2.1 billion pandemic lifeline for undocumented workers runs out So Eager, 25, is looking for work. She has applied for dozens of jobs and had a handful of interviews, so far without luck. But she is taking her time. Eager said she is still worried about catching COVID-19; she would prefer to work remotely, and if she does end up taking an in-person job, she wants it to be worth the risk. And she does not want another job with low pay, little flexibility and no benefits. “Many, many people are realizing that the way things were pre-pandemic were not sustainable and not benefiting them,” she said. She has been applying for jobs in data analysis, nonprofit management and other fields that would offer better pay, benefits and a sense of purpose. Eager, who is vaccinated, said that she had always been careful with money and that she built savings this year by staying home and socking away unemployment benefits and other aid. “My financial situation is OK, and I think that is 99% of the reason that I can be choosy about my job prospects,” she said. Americans have saved trillions of dollars since the pandemic began. Much of that wealth is concentrated among high earners, who mostly kept their jobs, reduced spending on dining and vacations, and benefited from a soaring stock market. But many lower-income Americans, too, were able to set aside money thanks to the government’s multitrillion-dollar response to the pandemic, which included not only direct cash assistance but also increased food aid, forbearance on mortgages and student loans, and an eviction moratorium. Also read | US unemployment claims at lowest level since pandemic began Economists said the extra savings alone are not necessarily keeping people out of the labor force. But the cushion is letting people be more picky about the jobs they take, when many have good reasons to be picky. In addition to health concerns, child care issues remain a factor. Most schools have resumed in-person classes, but parents in many districts have had to grapple with quarantines or temporary returns to remote learning. And many parents of younger children are struggling to find day care, in part because that industry is dealing with its own staffing crisis. Liz Kelly-Campanale left her job as a winemaker last year to care for her two children in Portland, Oregon. She thought about going back to work when schools resumed in-person instruction this fall. But the delta variant upended those plans. “If you have an exposure, all of a sudden your kids are out of school for 10 days,” she said. “For people who have jobs where they can work from home, it’s maybe a little more feasible, but I can’t really drive a forklift around the house.” Economists worry that if the pandemic leads many people to opt out of the workforce, it could have long-term consequences for economic growth. Rising labor force participation, particularly among women, was a major driver of the strong gains in income and production after World War II. Many economists argue that the reversal of that trend in recent decades has hurt economic growth. In the shorter term, many economists think that more people will return to work as pandemic-related issues recede and as people deplete their savings. “Eventually those savings, especially for lower-income people, they’re going to run out,” said Pablo Villanueva, an economist at UBS. “A lot of people are going to be increasingly unable to stay out of work even if they have some fear of COVID.” Some businesses seem determined to wait them out. Wages have risen, but many employers appear reluctant to make other changes to attract workers, like flexible schedules and better benefits. That may be partly because, for all their complaints about a labor shortage, many companies are finding that they can get by with fewer workers, in some instances by asking customers to accept long waits or reduced service. “They’re making a lot of profits in part because they’re saving on labor costs, and the question is, how long can that go on?” said Julia Pollak, chief economist for the employment site ZipRecruiter. Eventually, she said, customers may get tired of busing their own tables or sitting on hold for hours, and employers may be forced to give in to workers’ demands.

The economic rebound is still waiting for workers

The Troika plus meeting in Moscow on the Afghanistan situation will have two noteworthy absentees- the United States and Afghanistan. Washington has cited logistical issues for not being able to attend the meet.

Troika Plus Meet: India to attend meet; US welcomes move, pulls out for 'logistical reasons'

The Troika plus meeting in Moscow on the Afghanistan situation will have two noteworthy absentees- the United States and Afghanistan.

Troika plus meeting in Moscow today, United States can't confirm participation

There was a tense faceoff between warships from the United States and Russia. The incident occurred during Russian-Chinese wargames in the Sea of Japan. Listen in to what Fred Weir, Russian affairs expert has to say.

Russian affairs expert Fred Weir shares his views on UK-Russia warship faceoff

The most powerful part of President Joe Biden’s climate agenda — a program to rapidly replace the nation’s coal- and gas-fired power plants with wind, solar and nuclear energy — will likely be dropped from the massive budget bill pending in Congress, according to congressional staffers and lobbyists familiar with the matter.

Sen. Joe Manchin, a Democrat from coal-rich West Virginia whose vote is crucial to passage of the bill, has told the White House that he strongly opposes the clean electricity program, according to three of those people. As a result, White House staffers are now rewriting the legislation without that climate provision and are trying to cobble together a mix of other policies that could also cut emissions.

A White House spokesperson, Vedant Patel, declined to comment on the specifics of the bill, saying, “The White House is laser focused on advancing the president’s climate goals and positioning the United States to meet its emission targets in a way that grows domestic industries and good jobs.”

A spokesperson for Manchin, Sam Runyon, wrote in an email, “Sen. Manchin has clearly expressed his concerns about using taxpayer dollars to pay private companies to do things they’re already doing. He continues to support efforts to combat climate change while protecting American energy independence and ensuring our energy reliability.”

West Virginia’s other senator, Republican Shelley Moore Capito, said she was “vehemently opposed” to the clean electricity program because it is “designed to ultimately eliminate coal and natural gas from our electricity mix, and would be absolutely devastating for my state.”

The $150 billion clean electricity program was the muscle behind Biden’s ambitious climate agenda. It would reward utilities that switched from burning fossil fuels to renewable energy sources and penalize those that did not.

Experts have said that over the next decade the policy would dramatically reduce the greenhouse gases that are heating the planet and that it would be the strongest climate change policy ever enacted by the United States.

“This is absolutely the most important climate policy in the package,” said Leah Stokes, an expert on climate policy, who has been advising Senate Democrats on how to craft the program. “We fundamentally need it to meet our climate goals. That’s just the reality. And now we can’t. So this is pretty sad.”

The setback also means President Joe Biden will have a weakened hand when he travels to Glasgow, Scotland, in two weeks for a major United Nations climate change summit. He had hoped to point to the clean electricity program as evidence that the United States, which is historically the largest emitter of planet-warming pollution, was serious about changing course and leading a global effort to fight climate change. Biden has vowed that the United States will cut its emissions 50% from 2005 levels by 2030.

The rest of the world remains deeply wary of the United States’ commitment to tackling global warming after four years in which former President Donald Trump openly mocked the science of climate change and enacted policies that encouraged more drilling and burning of fossil fuels.

“This will create a huge problem for the White House in Glasgow,” said David G. Victor, co-director of the Deep Decarbonization Initiative at the University of California, San Diego.“ If you see the president coming in and saying all the right things with all the right aspirations and then one of the earliest tests of whether he can deliver falls apart, it creates the question of whether you can believe him.”

Democrats had hoped to include the clean electricity program in their sweeping budget bill that would also expand the social safety net, which they plan to muscle through using a fast-track process known as reconciliation that would allow them to pass it without any Republican votes. The party is still trying to figure out how to pass the budget bill along with a bipartisan $1 trillion infrastructure bill.

For weeks, Democratic leaders have vowed that the clean electricity program was a nonnegotiable part of the legislation. Progressive Democrats held rallies chanting “No climate, no deal!”

Biden had hoped enactment of the legislation would clean up the electricity sector, which produces about one-quarter of the country’s greenhouse gases. He wanted a program with impacts that would last well after he leaves office, regardless of who occupies the White House.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said at an event in San Francisco on Friday morning that she was still pushing for the strongest possible climate change provisions in the bill.

“What we’re here today about is specifically about the climate piece," Pelosi said. "This is our moment. We cannot – we don’t have any more time to wait."

Democratic presidents have tried but failed to enact climate change legislation since the Clinton administration. During a year of record and deadly droughts, wildfires, storms and floods that scientists say are worsened by climate change, Democrats had hoped to finally garner enough political support to enact a strong climate law, even as scientific reports say that the window is rapidly closing to avoid the most devastating impacts of a warming planet.

A major scientific report released in August concluded that countries must immediately shift away from burning fossil fuels in order to avoid a future of severe drought, intense heat waves, water shortages, devastating storms, rising seas and ecosystem collapse. To avert catastrophe, scientists say nations must keep the average global temperature from increasing 1.5 Celsius above preindustrial levels. But as countries continue to pump carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, the average global temperature has already risen by about 1.1 degrees Celsius.

Even as Pelosi vowed in San Francisco to protect those climate provisions, at least four people in Washington close to the negotiations called the clean electricity program “dead.”

Sen. Tina Smith, D-Minn., the chief author of the program, said that while dropping it might win Manchin’s vote on the budget bill, it could cost hers — and those of other Democrats focused on the environment.

“We must have strong climate action in the Build Back Better budget," she said. "I’m open to all approaches, but as I’ve said, I will not support a budget deal that does not get us where we need to go on climate action. There are 50 Democratic senators, and it’s going to take every one of our votes to get this budget passed.”

Manchin, who has personal financial ties to the coal industry, had initially intended to write the details of the program as the chair of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Manchin was considering a clean electricity program that would reward utilities for switching from coal to natural gas, which is less polluting but still emits carbon dioxide and can leak methane, another greenhouse gas. Manchin’s home state, West Virginia, is one of the nation’s top producers of coal and gas.

But in recent days, Manchin indicated to the administration that he was now completely opposed to a clean energy program, people familiar with the discussions said.

As a result, White House staffers are scrambling to calculate the impact on emissions from other climate measures in the bill, including tax incentives for renewable energy producers and tax credits for consumers who purchase electric vehicles. Unlike a clean energy program, tax incentives tend to expire after a set period of time, and do not have the market-shifting power of a more durable strategy.

Those other programs include about $300 billion to extend existing tax credits for utilities, commercial businesses and homeowners that use or generate electricity from zero-carbon sources such as wind and solar and $32 billion in tax credits for individuals who purchase electric vehicles. It could also include $13.5 billion for electric car charging stations and $9 billion to update the electric grid, making it more conducive to transmitting wind and solar power, and $17.5 billion to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from federal buildings and vehicles.

But, analysts say, while those spending programs will help make it easier and cheaper for the U.S. economy to transition to a lower-emissions future, they are unlikely to lead to the same kind of rapid reduction in emissions that the clean electricity program would have.

“To clean up the electricity system as rapidly as possible, you need an incentive to add clean energy and a penalty that is a disincentive for dirty sources of energy,” Victor said. “A carrot and stick. These tax incentives are carrots. But there’s no more stick.”

It is also possible that Democrats may try to push through the clean electricity program as a stand-alone bill — but the timeline for doing so is narrowing, with the 2022 midterm elections approaching.

The most powerful part of President Joe Biden’s climate agenda — a program to rapidly replace the nation’s coal- and gas-fired power plants with wind, solar and nuclear energy — will likely be dropped from the massive budget bill pending in Congress, according to congressional staffers and lobbyists familiar with the matter.

The most powerful part of President Joe Biden’s climate agenda — a program to rapidly replace the nation’s coal- and gas-fired power plants with wind, solar and nuclear energy — will likely be dropped from the massive budget bill pending in Congress, according to congressional staffers and lobbyists familiar with the matter. Sen. Joe Manchin, a Democrat from coal-rich West Virginia whose vote is crucial to passage of the bill, has told the White House that he strongly opposes the clean electricity program, according to three of those people. As a result, White House staffers are now rewriting the legislation without that climate provision and are trying to cobble together a mix of other policies that could also cut emissions. A White House spokesperson, Vedant Patel, declined to comment on the specifics of the bill, saying, “The White House is laser focused on advancing the president’s climate goals and positioning the United States to meet its emission targets in a way that grows domestic industries and good jobs.” A spokesperson for Manchin, Sam Runyon, wrote in an email, “Sen. Manchin has clearly expressed his concerns about using taxpayer dollars to pay private companies to do things they’re already doing. He continues to support efforts to combat climate change while protecting American energy independence and ensuring our energy reliability.” West Virginia’s other senator, Republican Shelley Moore Capito, said she was “vehemently opposed” to the clean electricity program because it is “designed to ultimately eliminate coal and natural gas from our electricity mix, and would be absolutely devastating for my state.” The $150 billion clean electricity program was the muscle behind Biden’s ambitious climate agenda. It would reward utilities that switched from burning fossil fuels to renewable energy sources and penalize those that did not. Experts have said that over the next decade the policy would dramatically reduce the greenhouse gases that are heating the planet and that it would be the strongest climate change policy ever enacted by the United States. “This is absolutely the most important climate policy in the package,” said Leah Stokes, an expert on climate policy, who has been advising Senate Democrats on how to craft the program. “We fundamentally need it to meet our climate goals. That’s just the reality. And now we can’t. So this is pretty sad.” The setback also means President Joe Biden will have a weakened hand when he travels to Glasgow, Scotland, in two weeks for a major United Nations climate change summit. He had hoped to point to the clean electricity program as evidence that the United States, which is historically the largest emitter of planet-warming pollution, was serious about changing course and leading a global effort to fight climate change. Biden has vowed that the United States will cut its emissions 50% from 2005 levels by 2030. The rest of the world remains deeply wary of the United States’ commitment to tackling global warming after four years in which former President Donald Trump openly mocked the science of climate change and enacted policies that encouraged more drilling and burning of fossil fuels. “This will create a huge problem for the White House in Glasgow,” said David G. Victor, co-director of the Deep Decarbonization Initiative at the University of California, San Diego.“ If you see the president coming in and saying all the right things with all the right aspirations and then one of the earliest tests of whether he can deliver falls apart, it creates the question of whether you can believe him.” Democrats had hoped to include the clean electricity program in their sweeping budget bill that would also expand the social safety net, which they plan to muscle through using a fast-track process known as reconciliation that would allow them to pass it without any Republican votes. The party is still trying to figure out how to pass the budget bill along with a bipartisan $1 trillion infrastructure bill. For weeks, Democratic leaders have vowed that the clean electricity program was a nonnegotiable part of the legislation. Progressive Democrats held rallies chanting “No climate, no deal!” Biden had hoped enactment of the legislation would clean up the electricity sector, which produces about one-quarter of the country’s greenhouse gases. He wanted a program with impacts that would last well after he leaves office, regardless of who occupies the White House. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said at an event in San Francisco on Friday morning that she was still pushing for the strongest possible climate change provisions in the bill. “What we’re here today about is specifically about the climate piece," Pelosi said. "This is our moment. We cannot – we don’t have any more time to wait." Democratic presidents have tried but failed to enact climate change legislation since the Clinton administration. During a year of record and deadly droughts, wildfires, storms and floods that scientists say are worsened by climate change, Democrats had hoped to finally garner enough political support to enact a strong climate law, even as scientific reports say that the window is rapidly closing to avoid the most devastating impacts of a warming planet. A major scientific report released in August concluded that countries must immediately shift away from burning fossil fuels in order to avoid a future of severe drought, intense heat waves, water shortages, devastating storms, rising seas and ecosystem collapse. To avert catastrophe, scientists say nations must keep the average global temperature from increasing 1.5 Celsius above preindustrial levels. But as countries continue to pump carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, the average global temperature has already risen by about 1.1 degrees Celsius. Even as Pelosi vowed in San Francisco to protect those climate provisions, at least four people in Washington close to the negotiations called the clean electricity program “dead.” Sen. Tina Smith, D-Minn., the chief author of the program, said that while dropping it might win Manchin’s vote on the budget bill, it could cost hers — and those of other Democrats focused on the environment. “We must have strong climate action in the Build Back Better budget," she said. "I’m open to all approaches, but as I’ve said, I will not support a budget deal that does not get us where we need to go on climate action. There are 50 Democratic senators, and it’s going to take every one of our votes to get this budget passed.” Manchin, who has personal financial ties to the coal industry, had initially intended to write the details of the program as the chair of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Manchin was considering a clean electricity program that would reward utilities for switching from coal to natural gas, which is less polluting but still emits carbon dioxide and can leak methane, another greenhouse gas. Manchin’s home state, West Virginia, is one of the nation’s top producers of coal and gas. But in recent days, Manchin indicated to the administration that he was now completely opposed to a clean energy program, people familiar with the discussions said. As a result, White House staffers are scrambling to calculate the impact on emissions from other climate measures in the bill, including tax incentives for renewable energy producers and tax credits for consumers who purchase electric vehicles. Unlike a clean energy program, tax incentives tend to expire after a set period of time, and do not have the market-shifting power of a more durable strategy. Those other programs include about $300 billion to extend existing tax credits for utilities, commercial businesses and homeowners that use or generate electricity from zero-carbon sources such as wind and solar and $32 billion in tax credits for individuals who purchase electric vehicles. It could also include $13.5 billion for electric car charging stations and $9 billion to update the electric grid, making it more conducive to transmitting wind and solar power, and $17.5 billion to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from federal buildings and vehicles. But, analysts say, while those spending programs will help make it easier and cheaper for the U.S. economy to transition to a lower-emissions future, they are unlikely to lead to the same kind of rapid reduction in emissions that the clean electricity program would have. “To clean up the electricity system as rapidly as possible, you need an incentive to add clean energy and a penalty that is a disincentive for dirty sources of energy,” Victor said. “A carrot and stick. These tax incentives are carrots. But there’s no more stick.” It is also possible that Democrats may try to push through the clean electricity program as a stand-alone bill — but the timeline for doing so is narrowing, with the 2022 midterm elections approaching.

Key to Biden’s climate agenda likely to be cut because of Manchin opposition

The United States is all set to lift restrictions for its overseas visitors. It will reopen its land borders with Canada and Mexico to non-essential workers who are fully vaccinated against covid-19.

United States to lift travel restrictions on overseas visitors

The United States has offered to pay unspecified condolence payments to the family of 10 civilians who were killed in a U.S. drone attack in Afghanistan in August during the final days before American troops withdrew from the country.

Afghanistan: US Offers compensation to families of civilians who were killed in a U.S. drone attack

There was a tense faceoff between warships from the United States and Russia. The incident occurred during Russian-Chinese wargames in the Sea of Japan.

Russia warned US Navy destroyer amid standoff in the Sea of Japan

United States is working to expand relations between Israel and other Arab nations and they wish to do it via Abraham Accords, and hope to restoring ties that can be leveraged to advance progress on the Israeli and Palestinian conflict. Susan Tehrani brings you more details on the common objectives of the trilateral meet.

Antony Blinken hosts trilateral meeting with Israel and Arab nations, Iran tops the agenda

Following a meeting in Washington with his Israeli and United Arab Emirates counterparts, Secretary of State Antony Blinken laid out a tougher U.S. Stance toward Tehran's new government. Washington has said that it is ready to consider "all options" if Iran is unwilling to return to the 2015 nuclear deal.

Israeli foreign minister warn Iran against nuclear weapons

The United States will lift restrictions at its land borders with Canada and Mexico for fully vaccinated foreign nationals in early November.

Covid News: United States to lift land border restrictions with Canada & Mexico

United States is working to expand relations between Israel and other Arab nations and they wish to do it via Abraham Accords, and hope to restoring ties that can be leveraged to advance progress on the Israeli and Palestinian conflict.

United States work to expand ties between Israel and Arab nations

A US Senate Commerce Committee chairperson Maria Cantwell has called on Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to preserve all documents related to a testimony from company's whistleblower.

'Testimony raises significant concerns,' US Senator sends letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg

In the space of just three blocks, hundreds of people packed in.

They clutched jars of honey, cartons of fresh peas and bouquets of flowers. Bags slung on shoulders bulged with ripe peaches, eggplants and cherries.

Other than a few masked faces, the bustling Clement Street Farmers Market on a recent Sunday felt like a relic of prepandemic times.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/merck-seeks-us-fdas-authorisation-for-covid-19-pill-420024" hreflang="en">Merck seeks US FDA's authorisation for COVID-19 pill</a>

The market has run without interruption through every surge of the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/coronavirus">coronavirus</a>, and the restaurants and shops on Clement Street, the main artery of the Richmond District in the northwest corner of San Francisco, have been spared the financial ruin seen across other big cities over the past 19 months.

Few, if any, businesses on the street have permanently closed, according to Morgan Mapes, the president of the Clement Street Merchants Association. Unlike downtown San Francisco, which is now largely desolate, this commercial strip never relied on business from tourists or office workers.

“We’re in a sweet spot,” Mapes said. “We cater to our neighbors and our residents.”

The self-contained nature of Clement Street offers not only an explanation for how it survived the pandemic, but also a window into how cities may change in the next few years. The megacity where people commute for hours to work, play and shop may soon be on the wane.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/old-fake-news-sputnik-refutes-claims-russia-stole-oxford-vaccine-blueprint-419855" hreflang="en">'Old fake news': Sputnik refutes claims Russia stole Oxford vaccine blueprint</a>

Before I go on, here’s some background on Clement Street: It runs eastward for 2 1/2 miles from the northwest corner of the peninsula, and much of its length is lined with shops.

Clement Street is often thought of as San Francisco’s second Chinatown; maybe you’ve gone there for dim sum or soup dumplings. It is also where you’ll find the beloved Green Apple Books, the ever-popular Burma Superstar restaurant and Schubert’s Bakery, which is more than a century old.

Just before the pandemic, in January 2020, I stayed on Clement Street during a trip to San Francisco, because lodgings are more affordable in the quieter (and extra foggy) part of the city. I remember loving that I never had to leave the street to find food, go to the movies or meet friends at a bar.

I’ve recently learned that there’s a name for this convenience: the 15-minute city. The concept, which the mayor of Paris featured in her 2020 reelection campaign, envisions neighborhoods as complete social ecosystems, with offices, grocery stores, parks and doctors offices within a short walk or bike ride of every resident.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/womens-mental-health-deteriorated-more-in-covid-pandemic-study-419561" hreflang="en">Women's mental health deteriorated more in Covid pandemic: Study</a>

Mapes believes this structure was vital to Clement Street’s success during the pandemic. Even during lockdowns, people living in the area continued to buy groceries and other goods from nearby shops.

“I don’t really leave the neighborhood for much,” said Mapes, who owns a vintage clothing store on Clement. “You have everything here.”

When I recently returned to Clement Street, the area appeared mostly untouched by the pandemic.

There was more outdoor seating on the sidewalks, but the restaurants were as crowded as ever. Customers filtered in and out of boutique shops. A neighborhood cafe where I had noticed a group of men playing cards in the mornings still seemed to be serving as a town square.

Though the “15-minute city” idea predates the coronavirus, it has gained traction during the pandemic as people spent more time in their communities and came to dread resuming their long commutes.

“The pandemic has caused us to think about how to move differently, to consume differently, to live differently,” Carlos Moreno, a Sorbonne professor and driving force behind the idea, told the BBC. “We are discovering that by working differently we have more spare time, to have more time to be with our families or friends. We are discovering and appreciating our neighborhoods much more.”

Moreno believes that cities will never go back to the way they once were, and that that’s a good thing. There will be more emphasis on walking and biking, he says, and more mixing of residential and commercial spaces as services move closer to where people live.

Proponents of the 15-minute city think it will make us happier, too, as we get to know our neighbors instead of rushing from one thing to the next.

This sense of community was already on display on Clement Street. After visiting the farmers’ market on that recent Sunday, I met Mapes at her store as she closed up for the evening.

While we sat inside, a man parked his bicycle in front of the shop. He began dusting and washing the windows of the storefront, a service he apparently wanted to provide for free.

In the space of just three blocks, hundreds of people packed in. They clutched jars of honey, cartons of fresh peas and bouquets of flowers. Bags slung on shoulders bulged with ripe peaches, eggplants and cherries.

In the space of just three blocks, hundreds of people packed in. They clutched jars of honey, cartons of fresh peas and bouquets of flowers. Bags slung on shoulders bulged with ripe peaches, eggplants and cherries. Other than a few masked faces, the bustling Clement Street Farmers Market on a recent Sunday felt like a relic of prepandemic times. Also read | Merck seeks US FDA's authorisation for COVID-19 pill The market has run without interruption through every surge of the coronavirus, and the restaurants and shops on Clement Street, the main artery of the Richmond District in the northwest corner of San Francisco, have been spared the financial ruin seen across other big cities over the past 19 months. Few, if any, businesses on the street have permanently closed, according to Morgan Mapes, the president of the Clement Street Merchants Association. Unlike downtown San Francisco, which is now largely desolate, this commercial strip never relied on business from tourists or office workers. “We’re in a sweet spot,” Mapes said. “We cater to our neighbors and our residents.” The self-contained nature of Clement Street offers not only an explanation for how it survived the pandemic, but also a window into how cities may change in the next few years. The megacity where people commute for hours to work, play and shop may soon be on the wane. Also read | 'Old fake news': Sputnik refutes claims Russia stole Oxford vaccine blueprint Before I go on, here’s some background on Clement Street: It runs eastward for 2 1/2 miles from the northwest corner of the peninsula, and much of its length is lined with shops. Clement Street is often thought of as San Francisco’s second Chinatown; maybe you’ve gone there for dim sum or soup dumplings. It is also where you’ll find the beloved Green Apple Books, the ever-popular Burma Superstar restaurant and Schubert’s Bakery, which is more than a century old. Just before the pandemic, in January 2020, I stayed on Clement Street during a trip to San Francisco, because lodgings are more affordable in the quieter (and extra foggy) part of the city. I remember loving that I never had to leave the street to find food, go to the movies or meet friends at a bar. I’ve recently learned that there’s a name for this convenience: the 15-minute city. The concept, which the mayor of Paris featured in her 2020 reelection campaign, envisions neighborhoods as complete social ecosystems, with offices, grocery stores, parks and doctors offices within a short walk or bike ride of every resident. Also read | Women's mental health deteriorated more in Covid pandemic: Study Mapes believes this structure was vital to Clement Street’s success during the pandemic. Even during lockdowns, people living in the area continued to buy groceries and other goods from nearby shops. “I don’t really leave the neighborhood for much,” said Mapes, who owns a vintage clothing store on Clement. “You have everything here.” When I recently returned to Clement Street, the area appeared mostly untouched by the pandemic. There was more outdoor seating on the sidewalks, but the restaurants were as crowded as ever. Customers filtered in and out of boutique shops. A neighborhood cafe where I had noticed a group of men playing cards in the mornings still seemed to be serving as a town square. Though the “15-minute city” idea predates the coronavirus, it has gained traction during the pandemic as people spent more time in their communities and came to dread resuming their long commutes. “The pandemic has caused us to think about how to move differently, to consume differently, to live differently,” Carlos Moreno, a Sorbonne professor and driving force behind the idea, told the BBC. “We are discovering that by working differently we have more spare time, to have more time to be with our families or friends. We are discovering and appreciating our neighborhoods much more.” Moreno believes that cities will never go back to the way they once were, and that that’s a good thing. There will be more emphasis on walking and biking, he says, and more mixing of residential and commercial spaces as services move closer to where people live. Proponents of the 15-minute city think it will make us happier, too, as we get to know our neighbors instead of rushing from one thing to the next. This sense of community was already on display on Clement Street. After visiting the farmers’ market on that recent Sunday, I met Mapes at her store as she closed up for the evening. While we sat inside, a man parked his bicycle in front of the shop. He began dusting and washing the windows of the storefront, a service he apparently wanted to provide for free.

How one San Francisco street survived the pandemic

The United States and Britain have issued a security alert for Kabul. U.S & UK have warned their citizens to avoid hotels in the Afghan capital. The warning comes days after dozens were killed at a mosque in an attack claimed by the Islamic State.

United States, Britain issue security alert for Kabul

With all the subtlety of a bullhorn, former President Donald Trump has been hinting that he plans to run for office again in 2024.

And Republicans are so far treating him with the deference they displayed while he was in the White House as they wait to see if he makes his move.

On Saturday afternoon, Trump heads to Iowa for a rally at the state fairgrounds, a perennial stop on the presidential campaign circuit. Joining him will be several of the state’s top Republicans, including Gov. Kim Reynolds, Sen. Charles E. Grassley and the chairman of the Iowa Republican Party, Jeff Kaufmann — a testament to the former president’s enduring dominance.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-tells-former-aides-to-defy-subpoenas-from-jan-6-panel-419184">Trump tells former aides to defy subpoenas from Jan. 6 panel</a>

Trump’s unwillingness to cede the spotlight has cast doubt on the political futures of an entire group of Republican politicians who have suggested that they might someday want to run for president. And while they — like the rest of the country — can’t be sure what the notoriously fickle former president might do, some of them are trying to stake their claims as leaders in the party.

That requires a good deal of delicacy on their part. And it got a little awkward this week for two of them.

First there was former Vice President Mike Pence, whose refusal to interfere with the counting of the electoral votes on Jan. 6 deeply angered <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/donald-trump">Trump</a> and helped precipitate the deadly assault on the Capitol that day. Pence gave an interview this week to Sean Hannity of Fox News and sounded at times an awful lot like someone who wants to be president.

Also read |&nbsp;​​​​​​​<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/despite-disagreements-over-january-6-pence-still-close-to-trump-418444">Despite disagreements over January 6, Pence still 'close to' Trump</a>

He attacked President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/joe-biden">Joe Biden</a> for withdrawing US&nbsp;forces from Afghanistan. He also criticized the president’s approach to domestic affairs — for “lecturing the American people about vaccine mandates” and promoting what Pence called a “massive, big-government, socialist bill” before Congress that would widen the social safety net and address problems like climate change.

But when Hannity broached the subject of Pence’s reportedly frayed relationship with Trump, the former vice president tried to deflect by accusing the news media of blowing the events of Jan. 6 out of proportion, referring to it obliquely at one point as “one day in January.”

“They want to use that one day to try and demean the character and intentions of 74 million Americans who believe we could be strong again and prosperous again and supported our administration,” Pence said.

He did not address the fact that numerous rioters at the Capitol called for his execution during the attack, demanding that he be hanged for not carrying out Trump’s wishes. And Hannity didn’t bring it up.

Then there was a speech by Nikki Haley, another former Trump administration official whose relationship with Trump was damaged because she had declared herself “disgusted” with him after Jan. 6 and predicted that he’d “lost any sort of political viability.”

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/now-trump-drops-off-forbes-list-amid-pandemic-downturn-418624">Now, Trump drops off Forbes list amid pandemic downturn</a>

But Haley, who served as governor of South Carolina and ambassador to the United Nations, praised Trump in an appearance at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California. She criticized Trump’s political opponents for accusing him of being compromised by the Russians, and said that Biden’s posture toward Russia was weaker by comparison.

Separately, in an interview with The Wall Street Journal this week, she lauded Trump’s ability to “get strong people elected” and insisted, “I don’t want us to go back to the days before Trump.”

At the moment, that doesn’t seem like an option for Haley or anyone else who wants to have a bright future in the Republican Party. Trump continues to attack Republicans who broke with him after Jan. 6 and supported his impeachment, such as Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming.

His first rally since the day of the Capitol riot was in June outside Cleveland. He endorsed a local Republican who was challenging Rep. Anthony Gonzalez in next year’s primary election. Gonzalez, one of the 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump for his role in inciting the riot, announced last month that he was leaving Congress rather than staying to face his Trump-approved challenger.

Also read |&nbsp;​​​​​​​<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-airs-old-election-grievances-at-campaign-style-rally-394254">Trump airs old election grievances at campaign-style rally</a>

Polls taken over the course of the year have shown that Trump remains the overwhelming favorite for Republican voters, suggesting that he would be difficult to beat in a primary if he did indeed run. Though his popularity suffered somewhat in the immediate aftermath of Jan. 6, most Republicans seem to have moved on. A Pew Research Center poll released Wednesday found that two-thirds of Republicans say Trump should continue to be a major national figure, an increase of 10 percentage points from January. Forty-four percent of Republicans or Republican-leaning voters want him to run again.

The Pew poll also found little tolerance for dissent. Asked whether their party should accept politicians who openly criticize Trump, 63 per cent&nbsp;said no.

With all the subtlety of a bullhorn, former President Donald Trump has been hinting that he plans to run for office again in 2024. And Republicans are so far treating him with the deference they displayed while he was in the White House as they wait to see if he makes his move.

With all the subtlety of a bullhorn, former President Donald Trump has been hinting that he plans to run for office again in 2024. And Republicans are so far treating him with the deference they displayed while he was in the White House as they wait to see if he makes his move. On Saturday afternoon, Trump heads to Iowa for a rally at the state fairgrounds, a perennial stop on the presidential campaign circuit. Joining him will be several of the state’s top Republicans, including Gov. Kim Reynolds, Sen. Charles E. Grassley and the chairman of the Iowa Republican Party, Jeff Kaufmann — a testament to the former president’s enduring dominance. Also read | Trump tells former aides to defy subpoenas from Jan. 6 panel Trump’s unwillingness to cede the spotlight has cast doubt on the political futures of an entire group of Republican politicians who have suggested that they might someday want to run for president. And while they — like the rest of the country — can’t be sure what the notoriously fickle former president might do, some of them are trying to stake their claims as leaders in the party. That requires a good deal of delicacy on their part. And it got a little awkward this week for two of them. First there was former Vice President Mike Pence, whose refusal to interfere with the counting of the electoral votes on Jan. 6 deeply angered Trump and helped precipitate the deadly assault on the Capitol that day. Pence gave an interview this week to Sean Hannity of Fox News and sounded at times an awful lot like someone who wants to be president. Also read | Despite disagreements over January 6, Pence still 'close to' Trump He attacked President Joe Biden for withdrawing US forces from Afghanistan. He also criticized the president’s approach to domestic affairs — for “lecturing the American people about vaccine mandates” and promoting what Pence called a “massive, big-government, socialist bill” before Congress that would widen the social safety net and address problems like climate change. But when Hannity broached the subject of Pence’s reportedly frayed relationship with Trump, the former vice president tried to deflect by accusing the news media of blowing the events of Jan. 6 out of proportion, referring to it obliquely at one point as “one day in January.” “They want to use that one day to try and demean the character and intentions of 74 million Americans who believe we could be strong again and prosperous again and supported our administration,” Pence said. He did not address the fact that numerous rioters at the Capitol called for his execution during the attack, demanding that he be hanged for not carrying out Trump’s wishes. And Hannity didn’t bring it up. Then there was a speech by Nikki Haley, another former Trump administration official whose relationship with Trump was damaged because she had declared herself “disgusted” with him after Jan. 6 and predicted that he’d “lost any sort of political viability.” Also read | Now, Trump drops off Forbes list amid pandemic downturn But Haley, who served as governor of South Carolina and ambassador to the United Nations, praised Trump in an appearance at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California. She criticized Trump’s political opponents for accusing him of being compromised by the Russians, and said that Biden’s posture toward Russia was weaker by comparison. Separately, in an interview with The Wall Street Journal this week, she lauded Trump’s ability to “get strong people elected” and insisted, “I don’t want us to go back to the days before Trump.” At the moment, that doesn’t seem like an option for Haley or anyone else who wants to have a bright future in the Republican Party. Trump continues to attack Republicans who broke with him after Jan. 6 and supported his impeachment, such as Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming. His first rally since the day of the Capitol riot was in June outside Cleveland. He endorsed a local Republican who was challenging Rep. Anthony Gonzalez in next year’s primary election. Gonzalez, one of the 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump for his role in inciting the riot, announced last month that he was leaving Congress rather than staying to face his Trump-approved challenger. Also read | Trump airs old election grievances at campaign-style rally Polls taken over the course of the year have shown that Trump remains the overwhelming favorite for Republican voters, suggesting that he would be difficult to beat in a primary if he did indeed run. Though his popularity suffered somewhat in the immediate aftermath of Jan. 6, most Republicans seem to have moved on. A Pew Research Center poll released Wednesday found that two-thirds of Republicans say Trump should continue to be a major national figure, an increase of 10 percentage points from January. Forty-four percent of Republicans or Republican-leaning voters want him to run again. The Pew poll also found little tolerance for dissent. Asked whether their party should accept politicians who openly criticize Trump, 63 per cent said no.

Trump may run in 2024. So might they. It’s getting awkward.

The Biden administration on Monday reversed a contentious policy set under President Donald Trump that barred organisations that provide abortion referrals from receiving federal family planning money.

The new rule, set to take effect Nov. 8, deals with what is known as the Title X family planning program, which was created in 1970 and subsidizes birth control, breast and cervical cancer screenings and related preventive care for millions of predominantly low-income patients.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/biden-set-to-scrap-ban-on-us-funds-for-abortion-counseling-359954">Biden set to scrap ban on US funds for abortion counseling</a>

“Our nation’s family planning clinics play a critical role in delivering health care, and today more than ever, we are making clear that access to quality family planning care includes accurate information and referrals — based on a patient’s needs and direction,” Xavier Becerra, the Health and Human Services secretary, said in a statement.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/joe-biden">President Joe Biden</a> signalled shortly after taking office that he intended to rescind the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-reinstates-rule-restricting-abortions-around-the-world-11626">Trump-era rule</a>, writing in a memorandum calling for action on women’s health issues that it put “women’s health at risk by making it harder for women to receive complete medical information."

The 2019 rule aggressively targeted organizations that offer abortions, including Planned Parenthood, and was a top priority of social conservatives during Trump’s term as president. Regulations surrounding the 1970 Title X law already banned direct funding of abortion, but organizations such as Planned Parenthood have relied on Title X money to subsidize other women’s health services, such as dispensing birth control and testing for pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.

The rule allowed clinics that received federal funds to offer lists of primary care providers, including those that provide prenatal care, but they could not identify which performed abortions. It also required “physical and financial separation” between family planning and abortion services at places that offered both.

Watch |&nbsp;Rallies held across the US against abortion ban

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/rallies-held-across-the-us-against-abortion-ban-417809/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo">As a result of the Trump rule, Planned Parenthood, which had received roughly $60 million every year through the Title X program, withdrew from it rather than comply. Before 2019, Planned Parenthood health centres each year served roughly 40 per cent&nbsp;of the 4 million people who used the Title X program, the organisation said Monday.</div>

Alexis McGill Johnson, the president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, called the new rule&nbsp;“a major victory for patients, access to sexual and reproductive health care, and health equity.”

“Title X is a critical piece of our social safety net that can, and should, ensure that people with low incomes can access essential health care without forcing providers to withhold referrals for all of the options available to them,” she said in a statement Monday.

Still, McGill Johnson criticized a feature of the Biden administration’s rule, which would allow “objecting individuals and grantees” to not be required to counsel or refer for abortions in the program.

But Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of the anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony List, said in a statement Monday that the Trump rule had respected “the plain statutory language of Title X.”

“Democrats push this agenda at their own political peril,” she said.

More than 20 states filed lawsuits against the Trump administration in hopes of overturning the rule, including California, whose suit was led by Becerra, then the state’s attorney general.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/abortion-wombs-the-political-battleground-417992">Wombs: The political battleground</a>

In the spring of 2019, the Trump administration announced that it would give millions in Title X funds to an anti-abortion nonprofit organization funded by allies of the Catholic Church, the Obria Group. Critics cast the move as a way to defund medical clinics that provide abortions.

Announcing the policy reversal Monday, the Biden administration cited last year’s Family Planning Annual Report, which showed a precipitous drop in the number of clients served by the Title X program. The report estimated that roughly two-thirds of the decrease in family planning patients between 2018 and 2020 could be attributed to the Trump rule.

Six states currently have no Title X services, and seven others have “limited Title X capacity,” the Health and Human Services department said.

Dr Rachel L. Levine, the assistant secretary for health, said the new rule would “allow for the Title X service network to expand in size and capacity to provide quality family planning services to more clients.” Title X grants typically go to clinics run by state and local health departments, as well as to federally qualified health centres, hospital-based sites, and other private nonprofit and community-based health clinics.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/joe-bidens-administration-urges-judge-to-block-texas-anti-abortion-law-417517">Joe Biden's administration urges judge to block Texas anti-abortion law</a>

Monday’s reversal comes as the debate over abortion rights has flared up again on Capitol Hill after the Supreme Court refused last month allowed a Texas law prohibiting most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy to take effect. With other states seeking to enact similar restrictions, and the court, now dominated by conservatives, preparing to take up a case that could overturn the 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, Democrats are making the issue a centrepiece of their campaign strategy for next year’s midterm elections.

The Biden administration on Monday reversed a contentious policy set under President Donald Trump that barred organisations that provide abortion referrals from receiving federal family planning money.

The Biden administration on Monday reversed a contentious policy set under President Donald Trump that barred organisations that provide abortion referrals from receiving federal family planning money. The new rule, set to take effect Nov. 8, deals with what is known as the Title X family planning program, which was created in 1970 and subsidizes birth control, breast and cervical cancer screenings and related preventive care for millions of predominantly low-income patients. Also read | Biden set to scrap ban on US funds for abortion counseling “Our nation’s family planning clinics play a critical role in delivering health care, and today more than ever, we are making clear that access to quality family planning care includes accurate information and referrals — based on a patient’s needs and direction,” Xavier Becerra, the Health and Human Services secretary, said in a statement. President Joe Biden signalled shortly after taking office that he intended to rescind the Trump-era rule, writing in a memorandum calling for action on women’s health issues that it put “women’s health at risk by making it harder for women to receive complete medical information." The 2019 rule aggressively targeted organizations that offer abortions, including Planned Parenthood, and was a top priority of social conservatives during Trump’s term as president. Regulations surrounding the 1970 Title X law already banned direct funding of abortion, but organizations such as Planned Parenthood have relied on Title X money to subsidize other women’s health services, such as dispensing birth control and testing for pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. The rule allowed clinics that received federal funds to offer lists of primary care providers, including those that provide prenatal care, but they could not identify which performed abortions. It also required “physical and financial separation” between family planning and abortion services at places that offered both. Watch | Rallies held across the US against abortion ban As a result of the Trump rule, Planned Parenthood, which had received roughly $60 million every year through the Title X program, withdrew from it rather than comply. Before 2019, Planned Parenthood health centres each year served roughly 40 per cent of the 4 million people who used the Title X program, the organisation said Monday. Alexis McGill Johnson, the president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, called the new rule “a major victory for patients, access to sexual and reproductive health care, and health equity.” “Title X is a critical piece of our social safety net that can, and should, ensure that people with low incomes can access essential health care without forcing providers to withhold referrals for all of the options available to them,” she said in a statement Monday. Still, McGill Johnson criticized a feature of the Biden administration’s rule, which would allow “objecting individuals and grantees” to not be required to counsel or refer for abortions in the program. But Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of the anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony List, said in a statement Monday that the Trump rule had respected “the plain statutory language of Title X.” “Democrats push this agenda at their own political peril,” she said. More than 20 states filed lawsuits against the Trump administration in hopes of overturning the rule, including California, whose suit was led by Becerra, then the state’s attorney general. Also read | Wombs: The political battleground In the spring of 2019, the Trump administration announced that it would give millions in Title X funds to an anti-abortion nonprofit organization funded by allies of the Catholic Church, the Obria Group. Critics cast the move as a way to defund medical clinics that provide abortions. Announcing the policy reversal Monday, the Biden administration cited last year’s Family Planning Annual Report, which showed a precipitous drop in the number of clients served by the Title X program. The report estimated that roughly two-thirds of the decrease in family planning patients between 2018 and 2020 could be attributed to the Trump rule. Six states currently have no Title X services, and seven others have “limited Title X capacity,” the Health and Human Services department said. Dr Rachel L. Levine, the assistant secretary for health, said the new rule would “allow for the Title X service network to expand in size and capacity to provide quality family planning services to more clients.” Title X grants typically go to clinics run by state and local health departments, as well as to federally qualified health centres, hospital-based sites, and other private nonprofit and community-based health clinics. Also read | Joe Biden's administration urges judge to block Texas anti-abortion law Monday’s reversal comes as the debate over abortion rights has flared up again on Capitol Hill after the Supreme Court refused last month allowed a Texas law prohibiting most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy to take effect. With other states seeking to enact similar restrictions, and the court, now dominated by conservatives, preparing to take up a case that could overturn the 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, Democrats are making the issue a centrepiece of their campaign strategy for next year’s midterm elections.

Biden officials end ban on abortion referrals at federally funded clinics

It has been nearly two months since the Taliban takeover of Kabul but the United States and Taliban seem not ready for the negotiations, here's why!

United States & Taliban not ready for negotiations, how relevant is the Doha agreement?

Pakistan's military bases have been in the limelight for sometime now, there were talks about United States planning to use them. However, Pakistan has denied any such activity on its soil. Is Pakistan going back on its words?

Pakistan's U-Turn on use of military bases

Something unexpected is happening at U.S. military bases hosting Afghan evacuees. Nearly 700 of them are simply leaving before receiving U.S. resettlement services, this has raised alarms over immigration advocates concerned about risks to Afghans.

Nearly 700 Afghan evacuees leave military bases in U.S. before resettlement

A top US official called Friday for Pakistan to take action against all extremist groups ahead of a visit to Islamabad, which has sought reconciliation with militants both at home and in Afghanistan.

Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman will meet on October 7-8 with officials in Pakistan, which has long faced US accusations of playing a double game in Afghanistan where the Taliban swept back to power in August.

"We seek a strong partnership with Pakistan on counterterrorism and we expect sustained action against all militant and terrorist groups without distinction," Sherman told reporters.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/will-pakistan-stop-aiding-terrorists-ever-416801">Will Pakistan stop aiding terrorists ever?</a> &nbsp;

"Both of our countries have suffered terribly from the scourge of terrorism and we look forward to cooperative efforts to eliminate all regional and global terrorist threats," she said from Switzerland, her first stop on a trip that will also take her to India and Uzbekistan.

Pakistan points to its efforts against militants and the thousands who have died in attacks at home, but it has also faced criticism for not doing more to curb Islamist radicals that target neighbour and arch-rival India.

Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan, a longtime critic of US military campaigns, said in an interview aired Friday that his government had opened talks with the Pakistani Taliban about laying down their arms.

"Some of the Pakistani Taliban groups actually want to talk to our government for some peace, for some reconciliation," he told Turkey's TRT World television.

He said the discussions were taking place in Afghanistan with sections of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, which has waged years of deadly attacks.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-ponders-ways-to-help-taliban-regime-in-afghanistan-officially-without-international-recognition-416857">Pakistan ponders ways to help Taliban regime in Afghanistan ‘officially’ without international recognition</a>

"I repeat, I do not believe in military solutions," Khan said.

Khan has encouraged the world to engage Afghanistan's Taliban and provide economic support, although he has stopped short of backing recognition -- a step opposed by the United States.

Sherman praised Pakistan's calls for an inclusive government in Afghanistan.

"We look to Pakistan to play a critical role in enabling that outcome," she said.

Pakistan, a Cold War ally of the United States, was one of only three nations to recognize the Taliban's hardline 1996-2001 regime, but quickly backed the US-led war to oust them after the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/us-senators-seek-probe-into-pakistans-role-in-talibans-afghan-victory-416821" hreflang="en">US senators seek probe into Pakistan's role in Taliban’s Afghan victory</a>

US officials say the segments of Pakistan's powerful intelligence service maintained backing for the Taliban, in part due to the former Western-backed Afghan government's close ties with India.

A top US official called Friday for Pakistan to take action against all extremist groups ahead of a visit to Islamabad, which has sought reconciliation with militants both at home and in Afghanistan.

A top US official called Friday for Pakistan to take action against all extremist groups ahead of a visit to Islamabad, which has sought reconciliation with militants both at home and in Afghanistan. Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman will meet on October 7-8 with officials in Pakistan, which has long faced US accusations of playing a double game in Afghanistan where the Taliban swept back to power in August. "We seek a strong partnership with Pakistan on counterterrorism and we expect sustained action against all militant and terrorist groups without distinction," Sherman told reporters. Also read | Will Pakistan stop aiding terrorists ever? "Both of our countries have suffered terribly from the scourge of terrorism and we look forward to cooperative efforts to eliminate all regional and global terrorist threats," she said from Switzerland, her first stop on a trip that will also take her to India and Uzbekistan. Pakistan points to its efforts against militants and the thousands who have died in attacks at home, but it has also faced criticism for not doing more to curb Islamist radicals that target neighbour and arch-rival India. Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan, a longtime critic of US military campaigns, said in an interview aired Friday that his government had opened talks with the Pakistani Taliban about laying down their arms. "Some of the Pakistani Taliban groups actually want to talk to our government for some peace, for some reconciliation," he told Turkey's TRT World television. He said the discussions were taking place in Afghanistan with sections of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, which has waged years of deadly attacks. Also read | Pakistan ponders ways to help Taliban regime in Afghanistan ‘officially’ without international recognition "I repeat, I do not believe in military solutions," Khan said. Khan has encouraged the world to engage Afghanistan's Taliban and provide economic support, although he has stopped short of backing recognition -- a step opposed by the United States. Sherman praised Pakistan's calls for an inclusive government in Afghanistan. "We look to Pakistan to play a critical role in enabling that outcome," she said. Pakistan, a Cold War ally of the United States, was one of only three nations to recognize the Taliban's hardline 1996-2001 regime, but quickly backed the US-led war to oust them after the September 11, 2001 attacks. Also Read: US senators seek probe into Pakistan's role in Taliban’s Afghan victory US officials say the segments of Pakistan's powerful intelligence service maintained backing for the Taliban, in part due to the former Western-backed Afghan government's close ties with India.

Ahead of Pakistan visit, US officials call for action against militants, extremist groups

American lawmakers have a day to avert a shutdown of the US government. If the budget is not passed, the US could default on its loans for the first time in its history. Palki Sharma tells you more.

Gravitas: In two weeks, the United States could run out of cash

Within 10 months into his presidency, Joe Biden already seems to be taking a massive hit in the approval ratings. According to an opinion poll, the public opinion of Biden has further declined compared to August. Susan Tehrani brings you more information.

United States: Poll shows declining approval for Joe Biden

Within 10 months into his presidency, Joe Biden already seems to be taking a massive hit in the approval ratings. According to ABC News/Ipsos opinion poll, the public opinion of Biden has further declined compared to August.

The ratings were based on Biden’s handling of key issues —the pandemic, immigration and the situation at the US-Mexico border, gun violence and rebuilding the nation's infrastructure.

The poll states that the dissatisfaction among the Republicans and independents is fuelling the decline, but the president’s ratings are also being hampered by more “lacklustre approval among members of his own party than presidents typically enjoy”.

His overall rating now stands at 49 per cent disapprove and 45&nbsp;per cent approve, which has worsened since late August.

However, the opinion polls indicated that the US President’s approval ratings have differed according to specific issues.

For example, Biden’s performance on the Coronavirus response seems to have been welcomed by many with nearly 6 in 10 (57 per cent ) Americans approving of how he is handling it.

But&nbsp;compared to the ABC News/Ipsos poll in August, Biden’s approval on this issue is down seven points overall and among independents, and down 14 points among Republicans.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/how-us-strategy-crumbled-in-afghanistan-as-bidens-approval-ratings-dive-406470#pervasive-corruption-put-us-funds-at-risk-406452">How US strategy crumbled in Afghanistan as Biden's approval ratings dive</a>

It's also down 15 points from his late March record high on COVID-19 job performance in ABC News/Ipsos polling.

Handling of the US economy continues to be the biggest challenge for the Biden administration, as about equal shares of the public approve and disapprove of his handling of the economic recovery, 51% to 48%.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-president-joe-biden-approval-rating-declines-in-two-months-367962">US President Joe Biden approval rating declines in two months</a>

The percentage of Americans disapproving of Biden on the economy increased seven points since late August.

On the issue of rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure, the Americans approve of Biden’s handling of this issue, 55 per cent to 44 per cent, but disapproval has increased by nine points since late August

Among Republicans and independents, approval dropped 10 and nine points, respectively.

Black and Hispanic Americans overwhelmingly support the president's handling of the United States' infrastructure, with 71 per cent and 70 per cent respectively approving, while a majority of white Americans (54 per cent ) disapprove.

Apart from that, Biden’s approval among US adults overall falls below 40 per cent on all three of those issues —38 per cent on gun violence,&nbsp;38 per cent on Afghanistan and 33 per cent on immigration and the situation at the border, the ABC News/Ipsos poll found.

(With inputs from agencies)

Within 10 months into his presidency, Joe Biden already seems to be taking a massive hit in the approval ratings. According to ABC News/Ipsos opinion poll, the public opinion of Biden has further declined compared to August.

Within 10 months into his presidency, Joe Biden already seems to be taking a massive hit in the approval ratings. According to ABC News/Ipsos opinion poll, the public opinion of Biden has further declined compared to August. The ratings were based on Biden’s handling of key issues —the pandemic, immigration and the situation at the US-Mexico border, gun violence and rebuilding the nation's infrastructure. The poll states that the dissatisfaction among the Republicans and independents is fuelling the decline, but the president’s ratings are also being hampered by more “lacklustre approval among members of his own party than presidents typically enjoy”. His overall rating now stands at 49 per cent disapprove and 45 per cent approve, which has worsened since late August. However, the opinion polls indicated that the US President’s approval ratings have differed according to specific issues. For example, Biden’s performance on the Coronavirus response seems to have been welcomed by many with nearly 6 in 10 (57 per cent ) Americans approving of how he is handling it. But compared to the ABC News/Ipsos poll in August, Biden’s approval on this issue is down seven points overall and among independents, and down 14 points among Republicans. Also read | How US strategy crumbled in Afghanistan as Biden's approval ratings dive It's also down 15 points from his late March record high on COVID-19 job performance in ABC News/Ipsos polling. Handling of the US economy continues to be the biggest challenge for the Biden administration, as about equal shares of the public approve and disapprove of his handling of the economic recovery, 51% to 48%. Also read | US President Joe Biden approval rating declines in two months The percentage of Americans disapproving of Biden on the economy increased seven points since late August. On the issue of rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure, the Americans approve of Biden’s handling of this issue, 55 per cent to 44 per cent, but disapproval has increased by nine points since late August Among Republicans and independents, approval dropped 10 and nine points, respectively. Black and Hispanic Americans overwhelmingly support the president's handling of the United States' infrastructure, with 71 per cent and 70 per cent respectively approving, while a majority of white Americans (54 per cent ) disapprove. Apart from that, Biden’s approval among US adults overall falls below 40 per cent on all three of those issues —38 per cent on gun violence, 38 per cent on Afghanistan and 33 per cent on immigration and the situation at the border, the ABC News/Ipsos poll found. (With inputs from agencies)

US President Biden’s approval ratings continue to fall, show opinion polls

On a windy Tuesday morning, the parking lot outside a small brick building on the Southside of Oklahoma City was filling up fast. The first to arrive, a red truck shortly before 8 a.m., was from Texas. So was the second and the third.

The building houses one of Oklahoma’s four abortion clinics, and at least two-thirds of its scheduled patients now come from Texas. So many, in fact, that it is trying to hire more staff members and doctors to keep up. The increase is the result of a new law in Texas banning abortions after about six weeks, a very early stage of pregnancy. As soon as the measure took effect this month, Texans started traveling elsewhere, and Oklahoma, close to Dallas, has become a major destination.

“We had every line lit up for eight hours straight,” said Jennifer Reince, who works the front desk phones at the clinic, Trust Women Oklahoma City, describing the first week the measure was in force.

The effects of the new law have been profound: Texans with unwanted pregnancies have been forced to make decisions quickly, and some have opted to travel long distances for abortions. As clinics in surrounding states fill up, appointments are being scheduled for later dates, making the procedures more costly. Other women are having to carry their pregnancies to term.

Marva Sadler, senior director of clinic services at Whole Woman’s Health, which operates four clinics in Texas, said she believed that many patients were not able to arrange child care or take time off work without losing their jobs to travel to other states.

“I think a majority of women are being sentenced to being parents,” she said.

The law is the latest in a string of successes by the anti-abortion movement, which for years has pushed for more conservative judges and control over state legislatures. Now the Supreme Court is preparing to take up an abortion case — the first to be argued before the court with all three of former President Donald Trump’s conservative appointees — that has the potential to remove federal protection for abortion altogether.

In Texas, the new state law has effectively accomplished that, at least for now.

Samerah, who requested that her last name not be published, was just five weeks pregnant when she lay on an examining table in Houston to get an ultrasound. It was Aug. 31, the day before the law went into effect. She had heard about it on the news and knew that it banned abortions after cardiac activity was detected. But when the doctor performed the ultrasound, there was no sound, and she was told to come back the next day for her procedure.

When she returned and lay again in a darkened room, staring up at a set of paper dancers hanging from the ceiling, the doctor got a different result.

“He said, ‘Take a deep breath,’ and budoom, budoom, budoom, all you hear is a heartbeat,” said Samerah, who is 22. “In that same breath, all the things I had been crossing my fingers about just came out, and I just bawled and bawled and bawled.”

She walked into the hallway, her mind racing, and saw other women there too.

“We were all just crying in the hallway like, ‘What are we going to do?’”

The answer for many women in her position has been to race to get an abortion in a different state. About half the patients at Hope Medical Group for Women in Shreveport, Louisiana, are now from Texas, up from about one-fifth before the law. At Little Rock Family Planning Services, in Arkansas, Texas patients make up 19% of the caseload now, compared with less than 2% in August.

Oklahoma does not require two trips to a clinic to get an abortion in most cases, so it has been a common choice. Trust Women had 11 Texas patients in August; it has 110 so far in September. Patients come from as far away as Galveston and Corpus Christi. Some drive through the night in time for a morning appointment. The high demand from Texas has meant that the clinic’s schedule is full for weeks. Last week, the earliest appointments were for mid-October.

Samerah arrived last Monday from Beaumont, a city near Houston, where she lives with her partner and their 2-year-old son.

The news of her pregnancy, she said, threatened the life they had built for him.

Their financial circumstances had only recently stabilized. She had gotten a customer service job. Her partner was driving a van for a medical service. They moved out of his family’s house into their own apartment. Their son has his own room. She bought new furniture: a sectional and a bed.

“This was our first time actually buying a brand-new, out-of-the-box mattress, not off of Facebook or something,” she said.

She felt proud to be able to give her son attention, toys, a stable home, things she said she never had herself. But she could not afford to do that for two. “I don’t want to be that parent,” said Samerah, whose mother was a teenager when she was born. “I don’t want to bring my kid into something that I can’t afford to take care of, because they don’t deserve it. I grew up in that kind of reality. And I know what it does to people.”

Samerah said she had gotten an abortion once before, the year after her son was born, for similar reasons. She said she made an appointment to get an IUD immediately after her procedure Tuesday.

As states pass more abortion restrictions, it increasingly is poor women who must grapple with their effects. Half of American women who got an abortion in 2014 lived in poverty, double the share from 1994, when about one-quarter of the women who had abortions were low-income, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights. Theories for why include demographic change, increased funding for abortions for low-income women, and higher-income women having more access to highly effective contraception.

The longer women have to wait, the more expensive their procedures become. Abortions at Trust Women range in cost from $650 for earlier stages to $2,350 for later stages. Financial assistance is also available.

Sarah, who works at a roofing company, found out she was 13 weeks pregnant on Aug. 23. But then the law went into effect, and she raced to find a clinic in another state.

“It has just been a scramble to get this taken care of, especially since I just ran out of time so quickly,” said Sarah, 21, who asked that her last name not be published to protect her privacy.

She finally got her abortion at the Oklahoma City clinic Sept. 20. She had to put off a car payment to cover her part of the $1,550 charge. Her partner, a police officer, split the cost and drove her the three hours from Dallas where they live.

She said she had been on her own for some time. Her mother died in a car crash when she was 9, and her father died of cancer when she was 19. And though she feels much more financially stable now than in her teens — she was putting herself through college studying criminal justice until the coronavirus pandemic — she said she could not support a baby.

“I would have to put my life on hold,” she said. “I don’t know if I would be able to go back to school."

Sarah had never been pregnant before, but she said she knew her decision was right. Still, it was difficult. In the weeks that she waited for her appointment, she said it was impossible not to think about what was growing inside her. The ultrasound confirming her pregnancy, which she received at a center run by an anti-abortion group, was performed by a woman who typed ‘Hi, Mommy’ and ‘Hi, it’s me' into the screen and gave Sarah the printout.

“It’s hard not to have the instinct to want to form a bond with it,” Sarah said. “And just having to remind myself every day, you can’t do it. Like, it’s just not the time for you. So that’s been the hardest part.”

Trust Women draws anti-abortion groups too. A recreational vehicle operated by anti-abortion activists that advertises free pregnancy tests and ultrasounds sometimes parks across the street at Rancho Village Food Mart.

Raymundo Marquez, 23, a cashier there, said his brother, an owner of the shop, allows it. But Marquez has conflicted feelings. He believes that abortion is wrong. When his girlfriend got pregnant in high school, they did not consider it. But he said it was hard to judge someone else for doing it, because he knows there are children who are homeless and neglected.

“It’s sad both ways,” he said.

By Tuesday afternoon, one protester had appeared, standing tall in a green flowered jacket and green flats, praying and looking toward the clinic’s security booth. Inside, Louis Padilla, the security guard, was watching her. She is a regular, and sometimes he walks outside to debate her.

Padilla said that he was Catholic and Republican but that he was won over to the cause of the clinic after working there for a while. Each woman has her own story, he said, and who are men like him to judge them? He mows the clinic’s lawn, puts up its flag and sometimes fixes appliances because repairmen refuse to come to an abortion clinic. He even bought a drone with his own money to watch the protesters outside.

The situation in Texas may be temporary. A hearing Oct. 1 will give the law’s opponents another chance to convince a judge to suspend it. But other restrictions are looming. In Oklahoma, there are five, including a law that requires abortion providers to be board-certified obstetricians. If it takes effect as scheduled Nov. 1, four of the eight doctors licensed to work at Trust Women could no longer do so.

Samerah made it to the Oklahoma clinic with the help of financial assistance funds, which covered plane tickets for her and her son. Her abortion was covered too. But her partner had to pay his own way there. He was fired, she said, when he asked for time off. And she lost several days’ pay.

She does not believe that the people who passed the law considered the consequences for women like her. Those officials, she said, go to their jobs in “their car that doesn’t have problems starting up, with a tire that is not flat.”

Meanwhile, she, her partner and her son will go back to Texas to a real fear that they may not be able to pay rent for October.

“I have to go home and figure out what to do in the next month, and the next month is in a couple of weeks. Like, what am I going to do, you know?”

On a windy Tuesday morning, the parking lot outside a small brick building on the Southside of Oklahoma City was filling up fast. The first to arrive, a red truck shortly before 8 a.

On a windy Tuesday morning, the parking lot outside a small brick building on the Southside of Oklahoma City was filling up fast. The first to arrive, a red truck shortly before 8 a.m., was from Texas. So was the second and the third. The building houses one of Oklahoma’s four abortion clinics, and at least two-thirds of its scheduled patients now come from Texas. So many, in fact, that it is trying to hire more staff members and doctors to keep up. The increase is the result of a new law in Texas banning abortions after about six weeks, a very early stage of pregnancy. As soon as the measure took effect this month, Texans started traveling elsewhere, and Oklahoma, close to Dallas, has become a major destination. “We had every line lit up for eight hours straight,” said Jennifer Reince, who works the front desk phones at the clinic, Trust Women Oklahoma City, describing the first week the measure was in force. The effects of the new law have been profound: Texans with unwanted pregnancies have been forced to make decisions quickly, and some have opted to travel long distances for abortions. As clinics in surrounding states fill up, appointments are being scheduled for later dates, making the procedures more costly. Other women are having to carry their pregnancies to term. Marva Sadler, senior director of clinic services at Whole Woman’s Health, which operates four clinics in Texas, said she believed that many patients were not able to arrange child care or take time off work without losing their jobs to travel to other states. “I think a majority of women are being sentenced to being parents,” she said. The law is the latest in a string of successes by the anti-abortion movement, which for years has pushed for more conservative judges and control over state legislatures. Now the Supreme Court is preparing to take up an abortion case — the first to be argued before the court with all three of former President Donald Trump’s conservative appointees — that has the potential to remove federal protection for abortion altogether. In Texas, the new state law has effectively accomplished that, at least for now. Samerah, who requested that her last name not be published, was just five weeks pregnant when she lay on an examining table in Houston to get an ultrasound. It was Aug. 31, the day before the law went into effect. She had heard about it on the news and knew that it banned abortions after cardiac activity was detected. But when the doctor performed the ultrasound, there was no sound, and she was told to come back the next day for her procedure. When she returned and lay again in a darkened room, staring up at a set of paper dancers hanging from the ceiling, the doctor got a different result. “He said, ‘Take a deep breath,’ and budoom, budoom, budoom, all you hear is a heartbeat,” said Samerah, who is 22. “In that same breath, all the things I had been crossing my fingers about just came out, and I just bawled and bawled and bawled.” She walked into the hallway, her mind racing, and saw other women there too. “We were all just crying in the hallway like, ‘What are we going to do?’” The answer for many women in her position has been to race to get an abortion in a different state. About half the patients at Hope Medical Group for Women in Shreveport, Louisiana, are now from Texas, up from about one-fifth before the law. At Little Rock Family Planning Services, in Arkansas, Texas patients make up 19% of the caseload now, compared with less than 2% in August. Oklahoma does not require two trips to a clinic to get an abortion in most cases, so it has been a common choice. Trust Women had 11 Texas patients in August; it has 110 so far in September. Patients come from as far away as Galveston and Corpus Christi. Some drive through the night in time for a morning appointment. The high demand from Texas has meant that the clinic’s schedule is full for weeks. Last week, the earliest appointments were for mid-October. Samerah arrived last Monday from Beaumont, a city near Houston, where she lives with her partner and their 2-year-old son. The news of her pregnancy, she said, threatened the life they had built for him. Their financial circumstances had only recently stabilized. She had gotten a customer service job. Her partner was driving a van for a medical service. They moved out of his family’s house into their own apartment. Their son has his own room. She bought new furniture: a sectional and a bed. “This was our first time actually buying a brand-new, out-of-the-box mattress, not off of Facebook or something,” she said. She felt proud to be able to give her son attention, toys, a stable home, things she said she never had herself. But she could not afford to do that for two. “I don’t want to be that parent,” said Samerah, whose mother was a teenager when she was born. “I don’t want to bring my kid into something that I can’t afford to take care of, because they don’t deserve it. I grew up in that kind of reality. And I know what it does to people.” Samerah said she had gotten an abortion once before, the year after her son was born, for similar reasons. She said she made an appointment to get an IUD immediately after her procedure Tuesday. As states pass more abortion restrictions, it increasingly is poor women who must grapple with their effects. Half of American women who got an abortion in 2014 lived in poverty, double the share from 1994, when about one-quarter of the women who had abortions were low-income, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights. Theories for why include demographic change, increased funding for abortions for low-income women, and higher-income women having more access to highly effective contraception. The longer women have to wait, the more expensive their procedures become. Abortions at Trust Women range in cost from $650 for earlier stages to $2,350 for later stages. Financial assistance is also available. Sarah, who works at a roofing company, found out she was 13 weeks pregnant on Aug. 23. But then the law went into effect, and she raced to find a clinic in another state. “It has just been a scramble to get this taken care of, especially since I just ran out of time so quickly,” said Sarah, 21, who asked that her last name not be published to protect her privacy. She finally got her abortion at the Oklahoma City clinic Sept. 20. She had to put off a car payment to cover her part of the $1,550 charge. Her partner, a police officer, split the cost and drove her the three hours from Dallas where they live. She said she had been on her own for some time. Her mother died in a car crash when she was 9, and her father died of cancer when she was 19. And though she feels much more financially stable now than in her teens — she was putting herself through college studying criminal justice until the coronavirus pandemic — she said she could not support a baby. “I would have to put my life on hold,” she said. “I don’t know if I would be able to go back to school." Sarah had never been pregnant before, but she said she knew her decision was right. Still, it was difficult. In the weeks that she waited for her appointment, she said it was impossible not to think about what was growing inside her. The ultrasound confirming her pregnancy, which she received at a center run by an anti-abortion group, was performed by a woman who typed ‘Hi, Mommy’ and ‘Hi, it’s me' into the screen and gave Sarah the printout. “It’s hard not to have the instinct to want to form a bond with it,” Sarah said. “And just having to remind myself every day, you can’t do it. Like, it’s just not the time for you. So that’s been the hardest part.” Trust Women draws anti-abortion groups too. A recreational vehicle operated by anti-abortion activists that advertises free pregnancy tests and ultrasounds sometimes parks across the street at Rancho Village Food Mart. Raymundo Marquez, 23, a cashier there, said his brother, an owner of the shop, allows it. But Marquez has conflicted feelings. He believes that abortion is wrong. When his girlfriend got pregnant in high school, they did not consider it. But he said it was hard to judge someone else for doing it, because he knows there are children who are homeless and neglected. “It’s sad both ways,” he said. By Tuesday afternoon, one protester had appeared, standing tall in a green flowered jacket and green flats, praying and looking toward the clinic’s security booth. Inside, Louis Padilla, the security guard, was watching her. She is a regular, and sometimes he walks outside to debate her. Padilla said that he was Catholic and Republican but that he was won over to the cause of the clinic after working there for a while. Each woman has her own story, he said, and who are men like him to judge them? He mows the clinic’s lawn, puts up its flag and sometimes fixes appliances because repairmen refuse to come to an abortion clinic. He even bought a drone with his own money to watch the protesters outside. The situation in Texas may be temporary. A hearing Oct. 1 will give the law’s opponents another chance to convince a judge to suspend it. But other restrictions are looming. In Oklahoma, there are five, including a law that requires abortion providers to be board-certified obstetricians. If it takes effect as scheduled Nov. 1, four of the eight doctors licensed to work at Trust Women could no longer do so. Samerah made it to the Oklahoma clinic with the help of financial assistance funds, which covered plane tickets for her and her son. Her abortion was covered too. But her partner had to pay his own way there. He was fired, she said, when he asked for time off. And she lost several days’ pay. She does not believe that the people who passed the law considered the consequences for women like her. Those officials, she said, go to their jobs in “their car that doesn’t have problems starting up, with a tire that is not flat.” Meanwhile, she, her partner and her son will go back to Texas to a real fear that they may not be able to pay rent for October. “I have to go home and figure out what to do in the next month, and the next month is in a couple of weeks. Like, what am I going to do, you know?”

With abortion largely banned in Texas, an Oklahoma clinic is inundated

President Tayyip Erdogan has said that Turkey still intended to buy a second batch of S-400 missile defence systems from Russia, a move that might escalate tensions with the United States, which has already warned that it puts the security of the NATO alliance at risk.&nbsp;

"In the future, nobody will be able to interfere in terms of what kind of defence systems we acquire, from which country at what level," told American broadcaster CBS News.&nbsp;

During the interview, which was taped Tuesday on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly and aired on Sunday (September 26), Erdogan said, "I explained everything to President Biden."&nbsp;

Erdogan also claimed that after America refused to sell Turkey the US-made Patriots system as an alternative, his government had no choice but to purchase the Russian system instead.&nbsp;This claim, however, has been disputed by the US.

On being asked about his intention, Erdogan said, "Of course, of course, yes."&nbsp;

ALSO READ | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/hillary-clinton-called-war-criminal-as-she-becomes-chancellor-of-queens-university-416187">Hillary Clinton called 'war criminal' as she becomes Chancellor of Queen's University</a>

Previously, Turkey's Defence Industry Directorate, chief Ismail Demir and three other employees were slapped with sanctions by the United States over the country's acquisition of the first batch of S-400s.&nbsp;

According to Washington, the S-400s pose a threat to its F-35 fighter jets and to NATO's broader defence systems. The US government also said that S-400 would collect detailed information about the F-35s and might erase their stealth advantages.&nbsp;

Although, talks continued between Russia and Turkey about the delivery of a second batch and might trigger fresh sanctions.&nbsp;

Erdogan will visit Russia next week to meet President Vladimir Putin to discuss issues including the violence in northwestern Syria.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

President Tayyip Erdogan has said that Turkey still intended to buy a second batch of S-400 missile defence systems from Russia, a move that might escalate tensions with the United States, which has already warned that it puts the security of the NATO alliance at risk.

President Tayyip Erdogan has said that Turkey still intended to buy a second batch of S-400 missile defence systems from Russia, a move that might escalate tensions with the United States, which has already warned that it puts the security of the NATO alliance at risk. "In the future, nobody will be able to interfere in terms of what kind of defence systems we acquire, from which country at what level," told American broadcaster CBS News. During the interview, which was taped Tuesday on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly and aired on Sunday (September 26), Erdogan said, "I explained everything to President Biden." Erdogan also claimed that after America refused to sell Turkey the US-made Patriots system as an alternative, his government had no choice but to purchase the Russian system instead. This claim, however, has been disputed by the US. On being asked about his intention, Erdogan said, "Of course, of course, yes." ALSO READ | Hillary Clinton called 'war criminal' as she becomes Chancellor of Queen's University Previously, Turkey's Defence Industry Directorate, chief Ismail Demir and three other employees were slapped with sanctions by the United States over the country's acquisition of the first batch of S-400s. According to Washington, the S-400s pose a threat to its F-35 fighter jets and to NATO's broader defence systems. The US government also said that S-400 would collect detailed information about the F-35s and might erase their stealth advantages. Although, talks continued between Russia and Turkey about the delivery of a second batch and might trigger fresh sanctions. Erdogan will visit Russia next week to meet President Vladimir Putin to discuss issues including the violence in northwestern Syria. (With inputs from agencies)

President Tayyip Erdogan says Turkey intends to buy more Russian defence systems

President Joe&nbsp;Biden&nbsp;cut a beleaguered figure Thursday as he raced to extinguish political fires on the left and right, at home and abroad, in an attempt to save his hopes of transforming the United States.

Whether it's war, diplomatic incidents, economic shocks or an obstructionist Congress, all presidents feel the heat sooner or later.

Biden's feeling all those flames at once.

To the south, there is the human and national security drama of thousands of Haitian migrants abruptly appearing across the border from Mexico and camping under a Texas bridge.

To the east across the Atlantic there is a disgruntled ally in France, furious at losing a conventional submarines contract when Australia accepted an offer for US nuclear submarines.

ALSO READ | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/france-says-uks-boris-johnson-offered-to-re-establish-cooperation-415593">France says UK's Boris Johnson offered to 're-establish cooperation'</a>

All over the United States there is the fight against Covid, which&nbsp;Biden&nbsp;declared on the way to being defeated in July, only to see it roar back with the Delta variant.

And right in Washington, the 78-year-old president faces the mind-boggling task of juggling a Republican opposition eager to wreck his presidency and a Democratic Party flirting with self-destruction.

"I've been here for cliffs and crises and wars, and this is going to be the biggest mashup we've ever had since I've been here," Democratic congressman Peter DeFazio, from Oregon, told NBC News.

Debt default?

DeFazio was talking about the perfect storm brewing in Congress, where Republicans are fighting Democrats over&nbsp;Biden's agenda and Democrats are fighting themselves.

Put simply, Republicans and Democrats did agree earlier this year -- back when&nbsp;Biden's presidency seemed to be going far better -- to pass a roughly $1 trillion infrastructure bill.

This was good news for America's crumbling bridges -- and for&nbsp;Biden's promise that he could heal national divisions.

However, the real prize was&nbsp;Biden's push for a separate, mammoth $3.5 trillion social spending bill that he argues will redress gross inequalities by reforming taxes, reinforcing education and resisting climate change.

On this, he never had Republican support, yet with Democrats holding a narrow majority in Congress he didn't have to worry.

That was the theory.

Fast forward to this week and both the smaller and bigger packages are on life support, with conservative Democrats insisting on whittling down the $3.5 trillion figure and leftist Democrats threatening to reject the $1 trillion version if the bigger version isn't passed first in its entirety.

Gleefully watching the infighting, Republicans have upped the tension now by refusing to join Democrats in authorizing more government debt.

In previous years this has been a largely uncontroversial, bipartisan decision that simply allows the government to keep borrowing so it can pay its bills.

However, hardball Republicans used the debt extension to shake Barack Obama's administration a decade ago and they're doing it again, trying to force the Democrats to take the decision by themselves -- making&nbsp;Biden's party easier to portray as a bunch of irresponsible spendthrifts.

Democrats so far refuse to cave, insisting that Republicans join them and accusing opponents of holding the US economy hostage.

As each side waits for the other to blink, this is the worst case scenario:

Paralysis in Congress. Current debt limits max out some time in October. The borrowing spigot goes dry. The government shuts down. And the United States defaults on debts, sending global stock markets into a panic.

"I have no idea how it all works out," DeFazio said.

Biden&nbsp;remains sunny

The mess -- especially the Covid rebound and the ugly Afghanistan withdrawal -- has made&nbsp;Biden&nbsp;deeply unpopular.

His latest Gallup approval rating of 43 percent is at Donald Trump levels and marks a plummet from 56 percent in June.

Yet for now, the veteran Democrat has not lost his trademark sunny optimism -- or belief in his vaunted experience as a lifelong Washington insider.

On Wednesday, he got on the phone with French President Emmanuel Macron to bury the hatchet in the submarine spat.

Then he spent hours in the White House with different Democratic factions to air out differences on the spending packages.

"He felt encouraged by how constructive the conversations were," Press Secretary Jen Psaki said Thursday, brushing off doomsayers by describing the congressional impasse as "a messy sausage-making process."

"He's going to have his sleeves rolled up and he'll be very engaged."

But even Psaki, master of the half-glass-full narrative, acknowledges that her boss is up against it.

"Well, I think the country is going through a lot right now," she replied Wednesday when asked about&nbsp;Biden's plunge in the polls.

President Joe Biden cut a beleaguered figure Thursday as he raced to extinguish political fires on the left and right, at home and abroad, in an attempt to save his hopes of transforming the United States.

President Joe Biden cut a beleaguered figure Thursday as he raced to extinguish political fires on the left and right, at home and abroad, in an attempt to save his hopes of transforming the United States. Whether it's war, diplomatic incidents, economic shocks or an obstructionist Congress, all presidents feel the heat sooner or later. Biden's feeling all those flames at once. To the south, there is the human and national security drama of thousands of Haitian migrants abruptly appearing across the border from Mexico and camping under a Texas bridge. To the east across the Atlantic there is a disgruntled ally in France, furious at losing a conventional submarines contract when Australia accepted an offer for US nuclear submarines. ALSO READ | France says UK's Boris Johnson offered to 're-establish cooperation' All over the United States there is the fight against Covid, which Biden declared on the way to being defeated in July, only to see it roar back with the Delta variant. And right in Washington, the 78-year-old president faces the mind-boggling task of juggling a Republican opposition eager to wreck his presidency and a Democratic Party flirting with self-destruction. "I've been here for cliffs and crises and wars, and this is going to be the biggest mashup we've ever had since I've been here," Democratic congressman Peter DeFazio, from Oregon, told NBC News. Debt default? DeFazio was talking about the perfect storm brewing in Congress, where Republicans are fighting Democrats over Biden's agenda and Democrats are fighting themselves. Put simply, Republicans and Democrats did agree earlier this year -- back when Biden's presidency seemed to be going far better -- to pass a roughly $1 trillion infrastructure bill. This was good news for America's crumbling bridges -- and for Biden's promise that he could heal national divisions. However, the real prize was Biden's push for a separate, mammoth $3.5 trillion social spending bill that he argues will redress gross inequalities by reforming taxes, reinforcing education and resisting climate change. On this, he never had Republican support, yet with Democrats holding a narrow majority in Congress he didn't have to worry. That was the theory. Fast forward to this week and both the smaller and bigger packages are on life support, with conservative Democrats insisting on whittling down the $3.5 trillion figure and leftist Democrats threatening to reject the $1 trillion version if the bigger version isn't passed first in its entirety. Gleefully watching the infighting, Republicans have upped the tension now by refusing to join Democrats in authorizing more government debt. In previous years this has been a largely uncontroversial, bipartisan decision that simply allows the government to keep borrowing so it can pay its bills. However, hardball Republicans used the debt extension to shake Barack Obama's administration a decade ago and they're doing it again, trying to force the Democrats to take the decision by themselves -- making Biden's party easier to portray as a bunch of irresponsible spendthrifts. Democrats so far refuse to cave, insisting that Republicans join them and accusing opponents of holding the US economy hostage. As each side waits for the other to blink, this is the worst case scenario: Paralysis in Congress. Current debt limits max out some time in October. The borrowing spigot goes dry. The government shuts down. And the United States defaults on debts, sending global stock markets into a panic. "I have no idea how it all works out," DeFazio said. Biden remains sunny The mess -- especially the Covid rebound and the ugly Afghanistan withdrawal -- has made Biden deeply unpopular. His latest Gallup approval rating of 43 percent is at Donald Trump levels and marks a plummet from 56 percent in June. Yet for now, the veteran Democrat has not lost his trademark sunny optimism -- or belief in his vaunted experience as a lifelong Washington insider. On Wednesday, he got on the phone with French President Emmanuel Macron to bury the hatchet in the submarine spat. Then he spent hours in the White House with different Democratic factions to air out differences on the spending packages. "He felt encouraged by how constructive the conversations were," Press Secretary Jen Psaki said Thursday, brushing off doomsayers by describing the congressional impasse as "a messy sausage-making process." "He's going to have his sleeves rolled up and he'll be very engaged." But even Psaki, master of the half-glass-full narrative, acknowledges that her boss is up against it. "Well, I think the country is going through a lot right now," she replied Wednesday when asked about Biden's plunge in the polls.

Joe Biden scrambles between multiple political fires

united-states

United States, News on United States, stories on United States, articles on United States, United States stories at Wion, United States news, United States latest news

united states