&nbsp;A U.S. Senate committee will hold a hearing on Jan. 24 on the lack of competition in the ticketing industry after Ticketmaster's problems managing the sale of Taylor Swift concert tickets.

The Senate Judiciary Committee hearing is titled "That’s The Ticket: Promoting Competition and Protecting Consumers in Live&nbsp;Entertainment." The committee did not disclose the witnesses.

In November, Ticketmaster cancelled a planned ticket sale to the general public for Swift's "Eras" tour, her first in five years, after more than 3.5 billion requests from fans, bots and scalpers overwhelmed its website.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/kim-kardashian-buys-princess-dianas-famous-diamond-pendant-for-this-whopping-price-554022">Kim Kardashian buys Princess Diana's famous diamond pendant for this whopping price</a>

"The issues within America’s ticketing industry were made painfully obvious when Ticketmaster’s website failed hundreds of thousands of fans hoping to purchase tickets for Taylor Swift’s new tour, but these problems are not new," said Senator Amy Klobuchar, who heads an antitrust subcommittee.

"We will examine how consolidation in the live&nbsp;entertainment&nbsp;and ticketing industries harms customers and artists alike."

Klobuchar and two other lawmakers argued in November that Ticketmaster and owner Live Nation&nbsp;Entertainment&nbsp;should be broken up by the Justice Department if any misconduct is found in an ongoing investigation.

Ticketmaster, which antitrust experts contend commands more than 70% market share of primary ticket services for major U.S. concert venues, did not respond to a Reuters request for comment late Tuesday.

In November, the company denied any anti-competitive practices and noted it remained under a consent decree with the Justice Department following its 2010 merger with Live Nation, adding that there was no "evidence of systemic violations of the consent decree."

Consent decrees are often used to prohibit potentially anticompetitive practices or impose other requirements as a condition of merger approvals.

A previous Ticketmaster dispute with the Justice Department culminated in a December 2019 settlement extending the consent agreement into 2025.

Swift has said previously that her team had been assured by ticket sellers that they could handle a surge in demand and that it was "excruciating" for her to watch mistakes happen with no recourse.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/wion-dispatch-madonna-unveils-celebration-tour-dates-553919/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

&nbsp;

A U.S. Senate committee will hold a hearing on Jan. 24 on the lack of competition in the ticketing industry after Ticketmaster's problems managing the sale of Taylor Swift concert tickets.

A U.S. Senate committee will hold a hearing on Jan. 24 on the lack of competition in the ticketing industry after Ticketmaster's problems managing the sale of Taylor Swift concert tickets. The Senate Judiciary Committee hearing is titled "That’s The Ticket: Promoting Competition and Protecting Consumers in Live Entertainment." The committee did not disclose the witnesses. In November, Ticketmaster cancelled a planned ticket sale to the general public for Swift's "Eras" tour, her first in five years, after more than 3.5 billion requests from fans, bots and scalpers overwhelmed its website. Kim Kardashian buys Princess Diana's famous diamond pendant for this whopping price "The issues within America’s ticketing industry were made painfully obvious when Ticketmaster’s website failed hundreds of thousands of fans hoping to purchase tickets for Taylor Swift’s new tour, but these problems are not new," said Senator Amy Klobuchar, who heads an antitrust subcommittee. "We will examine how consolidation in the live entertainment and ticketing industries harms customers and artists alike." Klobuchar and two other lawmakers argued in November that Ticketmaster and owner Live Nation Entertainment should be broken up by the Justice Department if any misconduct is found in an ongoing investigation. Ticketmaster, which antitrust experts contend commands more than 70% market share of primary ticket services for major U.S. concert venues, did not respond to a Reuters request for comment late Tuesday. In November, the company denied any anti-competitive practices and noted it remained under a consent decree with the Justice Department following its 2010 merger with Live Nation, adding that there was no "evidence of systemic violations of the consent decree." Consent decrees are often used to prohibit potentially anticompetitive practices or impose other requirements as a condition of merger approvals. A previous Ticketmaster dispute with the Justice Department culminated in a December 2019 settlement extending the consent agreement into 2025. Swift has said previously that her team had been assured by ticket sellers that they could handle a surge in demand and that it was "excruciating" for her to watch mistakes happen with no recourse.

After Taylor Swift chaos, US Senate panel to hold hearing on ticket industry issues

US President Joe Biden on Tuesday renominated former Los Angeles mayor and ambassador-designate to India Eric Garcetti as the new congressional session began. Despite the controversies surrounding his name, Garcetti has been Biden's preferred choice to serve as the ambassador to India.

US President Joe Biden on Tuesday renominated former Los Angeles mayor and ambassador-designate to India Eric Garcetti as the new congressional session began. Despite the controversies surrounding his name, Garcetti has been Biden's preferred choice to serve as the ambassador to India. Garcetti's name was first proposed in July 2021, a few months after Biden took over the office. However, since then, Garcetti has not been able to receive approval from the US Senate, primarily due to a sexual harassment controversy. Garcetti has been accused of turning a blind eye towards misconduct by a top aide in his mayor's office. A claim that he has repeatedly denied being aware of. Read more: Who is Eric Michael Garcetti, the next US ambassador to India? Here's what you should know Notably, it was Republican Senator Chuck Grassley that blocked Garcetti's confirmation initially but later the Democrats remained non-committal citing the lack of votes. However, with the Democrats gaining an advantage in the Senate after the November midterm elections, hopes have rekindled that Garcetti will earn his confirmation soon. The Biden administration's renomination of 85 of the 175 candidates that could not receive the nod in the last congressional session also pointed to a sense of urgency that had been missing for some time now. Ever since Kenneth Juster's departure as the US ambassador to India in January 2021, Washington has appointed six interim envoys. WATCH | US ambassador-designate to India Eric Garcetti: Will actively raise Human Rights issue × The bilateral relations between the two countries are at a crucial juncture. The absence of a full-time envoy can have a negative impact as the ambassador acts as a bridge between the top hierarchy of the two countries during critical periods. Usually, the absence of an ambassador is seen as a downgrade in ties. Countries often show displeasure over policy issues to foreign nations by recalling their envoys. However, with India playing a pivotal part in the region and on the global map, the US cannot afford to have any high-ranking officer in the Roosevelt House. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE:

Garcetti renominated by Biden. Will India finally receive its US envoy after two years?

A government spending bill, amounting to $1.7 trillion, was passed by the US Senate on Thursday to avert the government’s partial shutdown. The bill has now been sent to US President Joe Biden for his official signature and to the House for its approval.&nbsp;The legislation will provide funding for various US military and non-military programmes till September 30, 2023. Meanwhile, the legislation includes wartime aid worth $44.9 billion which will be provided to Ukraine and banning the usage of social media applications like TikTok, which are run owned by the Chinese, on devices of the federal government.

The passing of the bill was slowed down after an amendment was introduced by conservative Republican Mike Lee for slowing immigration. This gave the Democrats an opportunity to introduce an amendment for boosting law enforcement agencies’ funds, which are located on the border.

ALSO READ| <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/winter-storm-more-than-2000-flights-cancelled-as-us-braces-for-once-in-a-generation-event-545698">Winter storm: More than 2,000 flights cancelled as US braces for ‘once-in-a-generation event’</a>&nbsp; &nbsp;

However, the two amendments failed which permitted the lawmakers to go ahead. The massive spending bill includes $858 billion for defence as well as $772.5 billion for non-defence programmes.

Lawmakers hurried for the spending bill’s approval, as many of them were anxious about the completion of the task before they are stranded in Washington because of the winter storm ahead of the holidays. Few also wanted to finalise the funding before it is made harder by the new Republican-controlled House to find a compromise.&nbsp; &nbsp;

Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had on Wednesday night emphasised the importance of US aid in the Russia-Ukraine war. “Your money is not charity. It’s an investment in the global security and democracy that we handle in the most responsible way,” Zelenskyy had stated.

WATCH| TikTok in the US: TikTok's attempts to reassure government, security concerns surrounding the app

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/tiktok-in-the-us-tiktoks-attempts-to-reassure-government-security-concerns-surrounding-the-app-545724/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

The spending bill’s funds include Ukraine and NATO allies’ emergency assistance as per US President Joe Biden’s request. Chuck Schumer, leader of the Democratic majority, said that it will be Congress’ worst step to give any signal to Russian President Vladimir Putin that the US is wavering in its commitment made to Ukraine.

“He made it clear that without this aid package, the Ukrainians will be in real trouble and could even lose the war. So that makes the urgency of getting this legislation done all the more important,” Schumer said.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

A government spending bill, amounting to $1.7 trillion, was passed by the US Senate on Thursday to avert the government’s partial shutdown. The bill has now been sent to US President Joe Biden for his official signature and to the House for its approval.

A government spending bill, amounting to $1.7 trillion, was passed by the US Senate on Thursday to avert the government’s partial shutdown. The bill has now been sent to US President Joe Biden for his official signature and to the House for its approval. The legislation will provide funding for various US military and non-military programmes till September 30, 2023. Meanwhile, the legislation includes wartime aid worth $44.9 billion which will be provided to Ukraine and banning the usage of social media applications like TikTok, which are run owned by the Chinese, on devices of the federal government. The passing of the bill was slowed down after an amendment was introduced by conservative Republican Mike Lee for slowing immigration. This gave the Democrats an opportunity to introduce an amendment for boosting law enforcement agencies’ funds, which are located on the border. ALSO READ| Winter storm: More than 2,000 flights cancelled as US braces for ‘once-in-a-generation event’ However, the two amendments failed which permitted the lawmakers to go ahead. The massive spending bill includes $858 billion for defence as well as $772.5 billion for non-defence programmes. Lawmakers hurried for the spending bill’s approval, as many of them were anxious about the completion of the task before they are stranded in Washington because of the winter storm ahead of the holidays. Few also wanted to finalise the funding before it is made harder by the new Republican-controlled House to find a compromise. Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had on Wednesday night emphasised the importance of US aid in the Russia-Ukraine war. “Your money is not charity. It’s an investment in the global security and democracy that we handle in the most responsible way,” Zelenskyy had stated. WATCH| TikTok in the US: TikTok's attempts to reassure government, security concerns surrounding the app The spending bill’s funds include Ukraine and NATO allies’ emergency assistance as per US President Joe Biden’s request. Chuck Schumer, leader of the Democratic majority, said that it will be Congress’ worst step to give any signal to Russian President Vladimir Putin that the US is wavering in its commitment made to Ukraine. “He made it clear that without this aid package, the Ukrainians will be in real trouble and could even lose the war. So that makes the urgency of getting this legislation done all the more important,” Schumer said. (With inputs from agencies)

US Senate passes $1.7 trillion spending bill to avert partial government shutdown

The US Senate's negotiators have agreed to a tentative deal to decrease the disparity in the sentences announced in offences involving crack and powder cocaine and plan to include the measure in a government spending bill.

Currently, mandatory minimum sentences for committing offences related to crack are 18 times lengthier compared to the minimum sentence in the case of power cocaine, which has resulted in Black Americans' disproportionate incarceration, as the government adopted the policy almost four decades ago.

ALSO READ| <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-senate-passes-858bn-defence-bill-repealing-vaccine-mandate-for-troops-543586">US Senate passes $858bn defence bill; repeals vaccine mandate for troops</a>

As per the deal finalised by bipartisan negotiators, they will narrow down the proportion to 2.5-to-1 . The measure is most likely to be attached to the year-end spending bill by Congress that is currently being discussed by lawmakers.&nbsp;

Last year, legislation for the complete elimination of disparity in sentences awarded in cases of crack and cocaine powder passed by a wide margin in the House of Representatives, although the Senate has not yet passed the legislation.

The 2.5-to-1 proportion has received public support from various Senate Republicans, which includes the highest-ranking member of the party on the Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley.

WATCH| U.S: Senate passes legislation on banning TikTok for lawmakers

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-senate-passes-legislation-on-banning-tiktok-for-lawmakers-543494/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

There is no retroactive relief for those who have been already convicted in cases of crack-related offences in the tentative deal, which the sentencing reform groups have been demanding.&nbsp;

The disparity in sentences between crack and powder goes back to the 1980s' war-on-drugs policies. A law was passed by Congress in 1986 to set up mandatory minimum sentences for offences related to drug trafficking, which dealt with offences related to crack and powder cocaine using a 100-to-1 ratio.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

The US Senate's negotiators have agreed to a tentative deal to decrease the disparity in the sentences announced in offences involving crack and powder cocaine and plan to include the measure in a government spending bill.

The US Senate's negotiators have agreed to a tentative deal to decrease the disparity in the sentences announced in offences involving crack and powder cocaine and plan to include the measure in a government spending bill. Currently, mandatory minimum sentences for committing offences related to crack are 18 times lengthier compared to the minimum sentence in the case of power cocaine, which has resulted in Black Americans' disproportionate incarceration, as the government adopted the policy almost four decades ago. ALSO READ| US Senate passes $858bn defence bill; repeals vaccine mandate for troops As per the deal finalised by bipartisan negotiators, they will narrow down the proportion to 2.5-to-1 . The measure is most likely to be attached to the year-end spending bill by Congress that is currently being discussed by lawmakers. Last year, legislation for the complete elimination of disparity in sentences awarded in cases of crack and cocaine powder passed by a wide margin in the House of Representatives, although the Senate has not yet passed the legislation. The 2.5-to-1 proportion has received public support from various Senate Republicans, which includes the highest-ranking member of the party on the Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley. WATCH| U.S: Senate passes legislation on banning TikTok for lawmakers There is no retroactive relief for those who have been already convicted in cases of crack-related offences in the tentative deal, which the sentencing reform groups have been demanding. The disparity in sentences between crack and powder goes back to the 1980s' war-on-drugs policies. A law was passed by Congress in 1986 to set up mandatory minimum sentences for offences related to drug trafficking, which dealt with offences related to crack and powder cocaine using a 100-to-1 ratio. (With inputs from agencies)

US Senate to narrow sentencing disparities between crack and powder cocaine

In a landmark decision, the US Senate passed a bill on Tuesday to protect same-sex marriage, voting 61-36 for the Respect for Marriage Act.&nbsp;

Before being presented to President Joe Biden to be signed into law, the legislation must now be approved by the House. Notably, the House is anticipated to pass the legislation before the end of the year; which could be next week.&nbsp;

Biden said in a statement: "With today's bipartisan Senate passage of the Respect for Marriage Act, the United States is on the brink of reaffirming a fundamental truth: love is love, and Americans should have the right to marry the person they love."&nbsp;

ALSO READ |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/stewart-rhodes-us-militia-leader-guilty-of-sedition-in-us-capitol-assault-538672">US Capitol assault: Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes guilty of seditious conspiracy</a>&nbsp;

The US Supreme Court has upheld same-sex unions since 2015. However, following the court's historic decision in June to reverse a long-standing decision defending the right to an abortion, people fear that rights over same-sex marriage could also be in danger.&nbsp;

Importantly, the bill would require individual states to recognise the legal marriage of another state, even though it would not establish a federal mandate that all states must legalise same-sex unions.&nbsp;

Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer hailed a "momentous step forward for greater justice for LGBTQ Americans." In order to pass the legislation on what had been a highly contentious topic in America for decades, 11 Republicans joined Democrats.&nbsp;

ALSO READ |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/putin-trying-to-weaponise-winter-nato-urges-allies-to-boost-ukraine-aid-538657">Putin trying to 'weaponise' winter, NATO urges allies to boost Ukraine aid</a>&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
I just called my daughter and her wife—who are expecting a baby next spring—to let them know that this Senate passed the Respect for Marriage Act! 
 
What a great day! <a href="https://t.co/K3ZKM7r5Zo">pic.twitter.com/K3ZKM7r5Zo</a>
— Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) <a href="https://twitter.com/SenSchumer/status/1597738593996660736?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 29, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

American Civil Liberties Union hailed the "historic step forward". However, the group also called out the rise of laws that are apparently attacking the right of transgender people in several states.&nbsp;

James Esseks, director of the ACLU's LGBTQ &amp; HIV Rights Project, said in a statement: "While we welcome the historic vote on this measure, members of Congress must also fight like trans lives depend on their efforts because trans lives do."&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

In a landmark decision, the US Senate passed a bill on Tuesday to protect same-sex marriage, voting 61-36 for the Respect for Marriage Act. Before being presented to President Joe Biden to be signed into law, the legislation must now be approved by the House.

In a landmark decision, the US Senate passed a bill on Tuesday to protect same-sex marriage, voting 61-36 for the Respect for Marriage Act. Before being presented to President Joe Biden to be signed into law, the legislation must now be approved by the House. Notably, the House is anticipated to pass the legislation before the end of the year; which could be next week. Biden said in a statement: "With today's bipartisan Senate passage of the Respect for Marriage Act, the United States is on the brink of reaffirming a fundamental truth: love is love, and Americans should have the right to marry the person they love." ALSO READ | US Capitol assault: Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes guilty of seditious conspiracy The US Supreme Court has upheld same-sex unions since 2015. However, following the court's historic decision in June to reverse a long-standing decision defending the right to an abortion, people fear that rights over same-sex marriage could also be in danger. Importantly, the bill would require individual states to recognise the legal marriage of another state, even though it would not establish a federal mandate that all states must legalise same-sex unions. Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer hailed a "momentous step forward for greater justice for LGBTQ Americans." In order to pass the legislation on what had been a highly contentious topic in America for decades, 11 Republicans joined Democrats. ALSO READ | Putin trying to 'weaponise' winter, NATO urges allies to boost Ukraine aid I just called my daughter and her wife—who are expecting a baby next spring—to let them know that this Senate passed the Respect for Marriage Act! What a great day! pic.twitter.com/K3ZKM7r5Zo — Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) November 29, 2022 × American Civil Liberties Union hailed the "historic step forward". However, the group also called out the rise of laws that are apparently attacking the right of transgender people in several states. James Esseks, director of the ACLU's LGBTQ & HIV Rights Project, said in a statement: "While we welcome the historic vote on this measure, members of Congress must also fight like trans lives depend on their efforts because trans lives do." (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

'Love is love': US Senate's landmark vote to protect same-sex marriage

In a landmark decision, the US Senate passed a bill on Tuesday to protect same-sex marriage as the house senate voted 61-36 for the Respect for Marriage Act.

US Senate passes landmark vote to protect same-sex marriage

The US Senate passed the same-sex marriage protection bill on Tuesday that would protect the federal recognition of same-sex marriage. The measure was taken up in response to apprehensions that the Supreme Court could overturn a 2015 decision that legalised same-sex marriage in all the 50 states of the US. The bill is basically a pre-emptive measure to safeguard the rights of the LGBTQ+ community if the Supreme Court ever acted against the 2015 same-sex marriage decision in the future.

Though it will not bar states from blocking same-sex marriages if the Supreme Court allowed them to do so.&nbsp;

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/uaes-moon-mission-got-a-new-launch-date-538710">UAE's moon mission got a new launch date</a>

Talking about the bill, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Summer said in a statement, "Today, the long but inexorable march towards greater equality advances&nbsp;forward". He also affirmed that by passing this bill, they are sending out a message to all Americans that they are free to choose who to love, as everyone has a&nbsp;right to dignity and equal treatment under the law.&nbsp;

The legislation now goes back to the House of Representatives, which will approve it and send it to President Joe Biden to sign. The supporters of the bill are hoping&nbsp;to pass it before Republicans take control of the House in January.&nbsp; President Joe Biden reacted to the landmark bill and called it a "bipartisan achievement".&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Today's bipartisan Senate passage of the Respect for Marriage Act proves our nation is on the brink of reaffirming a fundamental truth: love is love. 
 
I look forward to the House passing this legislation and sending it to my desk, where I will proudly sign it into law.
— President Biden (@POTUS) <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1597776178458365956?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 30, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The journey of legalising same-sex marriage dates back to the 1990s when various civil unions existed for same-sex couples but at the federal level, they were denied access&nbsp;to more than 1100 federal rights. The Defense of Marriage Act was then signed into law in 1996 and defined marriage by the federal government as between a man and a woman, which allows states to deny marriage equality.

<h2>What is the Respect for Marriage Act?&nbsp;</h2>

The Respect for Marriage Act is a bipartisan bill passed in the United States Congress to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. The Respect for Marriage Act codifies marriages and recognises the validity of same-sex and interracial marriages in the United States. The bill was first supported by former President Bill Clinton and then by the&nbsp;administration of former President Barack Obama.&nbsp;

On 26 June 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell vs Hodges case that the 14th Amendment requires all the US&nbsp;states to recognise same-sex marriages. But the future of same-sex marriage in the United States was put back into question recently in 2022 when a&nbsp;concurring opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization argued that the Court "should reconsider" the Obergefell&nbsp;decision.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Today, the Senate took an historic step forward in Democrats’ fight to defend freedom, dignity and equality. The Respect for Marriage Act will uphold marriage equality under federal law – tearing the bigoted, unconstitutional 'Defense of Marriage Act’ off the books for good.
— Nancy Pelosi (@SpeakerPelosi) <a href="https://twitter.com/SpeakerPelosi/status/1597752455328333824?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 30, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

<h2>How the Respect for Marriage Bill was passed in the Senate?&nbsp;</h2>

This was for the first time that the Republican senators from across the country voted with Democrats on Tuesday with a tally of 61 in favour of the bill and 36 against the&nbsp;bill. Among the 61 supporters of the bill, 12 were Republicans. The new bill officially repeals the Defense of Marriage Act, a 1996 law that defined marriage&nbsp;as existing only between a man and a woman. In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that the law was unconstitutional.

<h2>Who all are covered under this act?</h2>

The US Supreme Court established national protections for same-sex marriage in 2015's historic Obergefell v Hodges decision. The ruling struck down existing state bans on gay marriage, giving same-sex partners the right to marry across the US and extending them the same legal rights and benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples. The recent act covers all same-sex partners — lesbians, and gays, and gives them the right of marriage and contraception.&nbsp;

Though there is one religious exception to this that was emphasised by the Republicans that the non-profit organisations and religious organisations are not bound&nbsp;to provide their support for same-sex marriages.

"I will be supporting the substitute amendment because it will ensure our religious freedoms are upheld and protected, one of the bedrocks of our democracy", said West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito in a statement.&nbsp;&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Meet the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SCOTUS?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SCOTUS</a> Plaintiffs: Luke Barlowe and Jimmy Meade - <a href="http://t.co/YqcThSgC2W">http://t.co/YqcThSgC2W</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/marriagequality?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#marriagequality</a> <a href="http://t.co/w77jBvs6jr">pic.twitter.com/w77jBvs6jr</a>
— LGBTQ Nation (@lgbtqnation) <a href="https://twitter.com/lgbtqnation/status/592040530701225986?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 25, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

<h2>Which was the first country to legalise same-sex marriage?</h2>

According to Pew Research Center, the first country to legalise same-sex marriage was The Netherlands. In December 2000, the Dutch parliament passed a landmark bill with a tally of 3-1 allowing the practice of marriage, divorce, and child adoption for same-sex couples.&nbsp;The legislation altered a single sentence in the existing civil marriage statute, which now reads, "A marriage can be contracted by two people of different or the same sex".&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Queen Beatrix signed the law to make Netherlands the first country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage in 2000. They were followed by Belgium and Canada 2 years later. It wasn't for another decade in 2013 that the UK legalised same sex marriage.<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/LGBTHM22?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#LGBTHM22</a> <a href="https://t.co/dCZZKWKN8g">pic.twitter.com/dCZZKWKN8g</a>
— LGBT+ in Facilities Management (@LGBTinFM) <a href="https://twitter.com/LGBTinFM/status/1489539313838788610?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 4, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Politicians from the 1990s have evolved along with the country. However, now a Supreme Court relic Justice Clarence Thomas from the 1990s is questioning&nbsp;the 2015 marriage decision that he opposed. As a result, Republicans and Democrats have joined forces once more to undo what they did in 1996 and ensure marriage is a right for all Americans.

The US Senate passed the same-sex marriage protection bill on Tuesday that would protect the federal recognition of same-sex marriage. The measure was taken up in response to apprehensions that the Supreme Court could overturn a 2015 decision that legalised same-sex marriage in all the 50 states of the US.

The US Senate passed the same-sex marriage protection bill on Tuesday that would protect the federal recognition of same-sex marriage. The measure was taken up in response to apprehensions that the Supreme Court could overturn a 2015 decision that legalised same-sex marriage in all the 50 states of the US. The bill is basically a pre-emptive measure to safeguard the rights of the LGBTQ+ community if the Supreme Court ever acted against the 2015 same-sex marriage decision in the future. Though it will not bar states from blocking same-sex marriages if the Supreme Court allowed them to do so. Also Read | UAE's moon mission got a new launch date Talking about the bill, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Summer said in a statement, "Today, the long but inexorable march towards greater equality advances forward". He also affirmed that by passing this bill, they are sending out a message to all Americans that they are free to choose who to love, as everyone has a right to dignity and equal treatment under the law. The legislation now goes back to the House of Representatives, which will approve it and send it to President Joe Biden to sign. The supporters of the bill are hoping to pass it before Republicans take control of the House in January. President Joe Biden reacted to the landmark bill and called it a "bipartisan achievement". Today's bipartisan Senate passage of the Respect for Marriage Act proves our nation is on the brink of reaffirming a fundamental truth: love is love. I look forward to the House passing this legislation and sending it to my desk, where I will proudly sign it into law. — President Biden (@POTUS) November 30, 2022 × The journey of legalising same-sex marriage dates back to the 1990s when various civil unions existed for same-sex couples but at the federal level, they were denied access to more than 1100 federal rights. The Defense of Marriage Act was then signed into law in 1996 and defined marriage by the federal government as between a man and a woman, which allows states to deny marriage equality. What is the Respect for Marriage Act? The Respect for Marriage Act is a bipartisan bill passed in the United States Congress to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. The Respect for Marriage Act codifies marriages and recognises the validity of same-sex and interracial marriages in the United States. The bill was first supported by former President Bill Clinton and then by the administration of former President Barack Obama. On 26 June 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell vs Hodges case that the 14th Amendment requires all the US states to recognise same-sex marriages. But the future of same-sex marriage in the United States was put back into question recently in 2022 when a concurring opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization argued that the Court "should reconsider" the Obergefell decision. Today, the Senate took an historic step forward in Democrats’ fight to defend freedom, dignity and equality. The Respect for Marriage Act will uphold marriage equality under federal law – tearing the bigoted, unconstitutional 'Defense of Marriage Act’ off the books for good. — Nancy Pelosi (@SpeakerPelosi) November 30, 2022 × How the Respect for Marriage Bill was passed in the Senate? This was for the first time that the Republican senators from across the country voted with Democrats on Tuesday with a tally of 61 in favour of the bill and 36 against the bill. Among the 61 supporters of the bill, 12 were Republicans. The new bill officially repeals the Defense of Marriage Act, a 1996 law that defined marriage as existing only between a man and a woman. In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that the law was unconstitutional. Who all are covered under this act? The US Supreme Court established national protections for same-sex marriage in 2015's historic Obergefell v Hodges decision. The ruling struck down existing state bans on gay marriage, giving same-sex partners the right to marry across the US and extending them the same legal rights and benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples. The recent act covers all same-sex partners — lesbians, and gays, and gives them the right of marriage and contraception. Though there is one religious exception to this that was emphasised by the Republicans that the non-profit organisations and religious organisations are not bound to provide their support for same-sex marriages. "I will be supporting the substitute amendment because it will ensure our religious freedoms are upheld and protected, one of the bedrocks of our democracy", said West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito in a statement. Meet the #SCOTUS Plaintiffs: Luke Barlowe and Jimmy Meade - http://t.co/YqcThSgC2W #marriagequality pic.twitter.com/w77jBvs6jr — LGBTQ Nation (@lgbtqnation) April 25, 2015 × Which was the first country to legalise same-sex marriage? According to Pew Research Center, the first country to legalise same-sex marriage was The Netherlands. In December 2000, the Dutch parliament passed a landmark bill with a tally of 3-1 allowing the practice of marriage, divorce, and child adoption for same-sex couples. The legislation altered a single sentence in the existing civil marriage statute, which now reads, "A marriage can be contracted by two people of different or the same sex". Queen Beatrix signed the law to make Netherlands the first country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage in 2000. They were followed by Belgium and Canada 2 years later. It wasn't for another decade in 2013 that the UK legalised same sex marriage.#LGBTHM22 pic.twitter.com/dCZZKWKN8g — LGBT+ in Facilities Management (@LGBTinFM) February 4, 2022 × Politicians from the 1990s have evolved along with the country. However, now a Supreme Court relic Justice Clarence Thomas from the 1990s is questioning the 2015 marriage decision that he opposed. As a result, Republicans and Democrats have joined forces once more to undo what they did in 1996 and ensure marriage is a right for all Americans.

EXPLAINED: How same-sex marriage in US gets protection through Respect for Marriage Act?

The Ticketmaster fiasco over Taylor Swift concert tickets' sale has now reached the US senate. An antitrust panel will reportedly now go ahead with a hearing on the lack of competition in the country's ticketing industry following the controversy that left a bitter taste for several of Swift's fans wanting to buy tickets to her concert.&nbsp;

Ticketmaster's parent company, Live Nation, has blamed presale problems for Swift’s Eras tour – the pop superstar’s first US tour in five years – on “unprecedented demand” and an effort to keep out bots run by ticket scalpers. 
 
Last week, several registered fans struggled with glitches for hours to get tickets in the presale, and tickets quickly began appearing for resale for as much as US$22,700 (£19,100, A$33,500). The confusion eventually led to Ticketmaster cancelling sales to the general public. It later claimed the demand for Swift tickets “could have filled 900 stadiums”. 
 
Days later, Swift stated that it was "excruciating" for her to watch fans struggling to secure tickets. She added that Ticketmaster had assured her it would be able to handle the demand. 
 
The chaos attracted the attention of several US politicians and many voiced their concern&nbsp;about how Ticketmaster has over the years become the dominant platform for ticketing in the US. The company merged with Live Nation in 2010 and since then has enjoyed a monopoly in the market, something that congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez feels should not have been approved in the first place. 
 
“Daily reminder that Ticketmaster is a monopoly, its merger with Live Nation should never have been approved, and they need to be reined in,” she tweeted. “Break them up.” 
Tennessee’s attorney general, Jonathan Skrmetti, has said he will launch a consumer protection investigation into the company after his office was bombarded with complaints from Swift fans. 
 
Senator Amy Klobuchar will chair the panel that will also have senator Mike Lee, the top Republican, on the committee.&nbsp;

“The high fees, site disruptions, and cancellations that customers experienced shows how Ticketmaster’s dominant market position means the company does not face any pressure to continually innovate and improve,” Klobuchar said. “We will hold a hearing on how consolidation in the live entertainment and ticketing industry harms customers and artists alike.”

The Ticketmaster fiasco over Taylor Swift concert tickets' sale has now reached the US senate. An antitrust panel will reportedly now go ahead with a hearing on the lack of competition in the country's ticketing industry following the controversy that left a bitter taste for several of Swift's fans wanting to buy tickets to her concert.

The Ticketmaster fiasco over Taylor Swift concert tickets' sale has now reached the US senate. An antitrust panel will reportedly now go ahead with a hearing on the lack of competition in the country's ticketing industry following the controversy that left a bitter taste for several of Swift's fans wanting to buy tickets to her concert. Ticketmaster's parent company, Live Nation, has blamed presale problems for Swift’s Eras tour – the pop superstar’s first US tour in five years – on “unprecedented demand” and an effort to keep out bots run by ticket scalpers. Last week, several registered fans struggled with glitches for hours to get tickets in the presale, and tickets quickly began appearing for resale for as much as US$22,700 (£19,100, A$33,500). The confusion eventually led to Ticketmaster cancelling sales to the general public. It later claimed the demand for Swift tickets “could have filled 900 stadiums”. Days later, Swift stated that it was "excruciating" for her to watch fans struggling to secure tickets. She added that Ticketmaster had assured her it would be able to handle the demand. The chaos attracted the attention of several US politicians and many voiced their concern about how Ticketmaster has over the years become the dominant platform for ticketing in the US. The company merged with Live Nation in 2010 and since then has enjoyed a monopoly in the market, something that congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez feels should not have been approved in the first place. “Daily reminder that Ticketmaster is a monopoly, its merger with Live Nation should never have been approved, and they need to be reined in,” she tweeted. “Break them up.” Tennessee’s attorney general, Jonathan Skrmetti, has said he will launch a consumer protection investigation into the company after his office was bombarded with complaints from Swift fans. Senator Amy Klobuchar will chair the panel that will also have senator Mike Lee, the top Republican, on the committee. “The high fees, site disruptions, and cancellations that customers experienced shows how Ticketmaster’s dominant market position means the company does not face any pressure to continually innovate and improve,” Klobuchar said. “We will hold a hearing on how consolidation in the live entertainment and ticketing industry harms customers and artists alike.”

Ticketmaster's Taylor Swift concert ticket chaos forces the US Senate to take note

Expect a wild two-year ride through legislative gridlock, Republican Party investigations of President Joe Biden, and ugly campaigns for the 2024 presidential elections for which former president Donald Trump announced his candidacy even though his star power is waning.

After results that fell far short of Republican expectations, it is far from certain that Trump will be the nominee of a party he has dominated for six years. Infighting broke out even before he announced his candidacy at an event shunned by senior party establishment figures and even his daughter Ivanka, a close aide and confidante during his four years in power.

Election day was November 8 but because of complicated electoral procedures that vary from state to state, it took nine days for the announcement that Republicans had captured the 218 seats they needed to control the 435-seat chamber. Their wafer-thin majority stands in stark contrast with predictions of a “red tsunami,” red being the party colour.

The Democrats kept control of the Senate, winning 50 of the 100 seats. One Senate contest, in Georgia, will be decided in a run-off vote on December 6. It pits the Democratic incumbent, Raphael Warnock, against the Trump-backed former football star Herschel Walker. But even if Walker wins, Democrats would control a 50-50 split as Vice President Kamala Harris has the tie-breaking vote.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/democrats-retain-control-of-us-senate-after-cortez-masto-wins-nevada-reports-533660">Read more:&nbsp;Democrats retain control of US Senate with Cortez Masto's win in Nevada</a>

The election result not only surprised Republican leaders and most media prognosticators predicting a “red wave” but it also ran against a long-established historical trend. In the 22 mid-term elections from 1934 to 2018, the incumbent president’s party averaged a loss of 28 seats in the House and four in the Senate.

The reason: Republicans largely campaigned on economic issues: inflation, the high price of food and gasoline as well as rising crime and immigration. Biden and Democratic candidates focused on threats to democracy highlighted by January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol by Trump followers trying to overturn the results of the presidential elections Biden won.

Another key theme was abortion after the Supreme Court, dominated by conservative judges, struck down a woman’s constitutional right to abortion established 47 years ago. The decision sparked demonstrations across the country.

The election featured an intervention without precedent on behalf of the Republican Party — a tweet from Elon Musk, the new owner of Twitter, to his 110 million followers. “Shared power curbs the worst excesses of both parties, therefore I recommend voting for a Republican Congress given that the Presidency is Democratic.”

It’s a simplistic argument, open for debate. Clearly, Americans paid little attention to the recommendation of the world’s richest man. Rather than curb excesses, the actual outcome of the vote, a divided congress, is more likely to result in frequent stalemates and scant chance of progress on issues of key importance for the future of the country.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/elon-musks-appeal-to-independent-minded-voters-pitches-for-republican-congress-532231">WATCH |&nbsp;Elon Musk's appeal to independent-minded voters, pitches for Republican Congress</a>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/elon-musks-appeal-to-independent-minded-voters-pitches-for-republican-congress-532231/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

A Republican House and a Democrat-controlled Senate make up for the standard definition of a 'gridlock'. Two legislative houses controlled by different parties with starkly different philosophies. In deeply polarised America, there is almost nothing the two parties agree on.

However, there is one important geopolitical issue on which they now see eye-to-eye — support for Ukraine since Russia unleashed a war on the country on February 24. But far-right Republicans have begun to question the massive military and financial support provided by the Biden administration and its NATO allies.

Just hours after the official result of the contest for the House was announced, it became clear that for the next two years, Republican focus would be on investigative rather than legislative efforts.

James Comer, the Kentucky Republican who is expected to chair the House Oversight and Reform Committee, announced the panel would investigate the Biden family’s financial affairs, with a focus on President Biden’s son Hunter and his business dealings in Ukraine, Russia and China.

Republicans are also planning a House Judiciary Committee probe into allegations that the Biden administration exerted undue influence on the Department of Justice and on courts pressing ahead with multiple criminal investigations arising from attempts to reverse Trump’s loss in the 2020 elections.

The former president is also facing a civil trial in New York that could wreck his financial empire. Analysts from both sides of the political divide have speculated that Trump’s announcement of his candidature was aimed to protect him from prosecution. According to the Justice Department, his status as a candidate would make no difference. But how this will play out remains to be seen.

In his speech announcing his presidential run, Trump appeared to assume he would be his party’s nominee. That would have been a reasonable bet before the mid-term elections and the defeat of candidates he endorsed in return for perpetuating his baseless assertion that the 2020 elections were stolen from him.

Now, even former allies and Rupert Murdoch’s media empire viz. the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post and Fox News,&nbsp;have begun to portray him as a loser.

In his speech announcing his third run at the presidency, Trump remarked “I am a victim. I will tell you. I am a victim,” a reference to an array of investigations and an FBI raid on his Mar-a-Largo home to seize top secret documents he had taken from the White House.

There was a succinct response from former New Jersey governor Chris Christie, once a close ally: “Republicans don’t vote for victims. They vote for leaders.”

Under Trump’s leadership, the Republican Party scored big losses in the 2018 mid-term elections; two years later he lost in the presidential race, and this year most Trump-backed candidates lost and the “red wave” turned out to be merely a trickle.

This makes little difference to the type of Trump supporters who stormed the Capitol and those who cheered the insurrection and continue to insist he won the vote. But what might change his status in the eyes of his devoted base is that Trump is becoming an object of public mockery.

The prize for diminishing the former president with ridicule goes to the once Trump-friendly New York Post which ran a front-page two days after the election with the headline ‘Trumpty Dumpty’ under a picture of Trump as an egg perched on a brick wall. The text next to the mock-up: “Don (who couldn’t build a wall) had a great fall – can all the GOP’s men put the party back together again?”

The Post, once described by Trump as his favourite paper, pushed its new-found, Murdoch-sanctioned disdain even further five days later. It buried Trump’s announcement of a 2024 run on page 26 and teased the story with a single line on the bottom of the front page: “Florida Man Makes Announcement.”

It’s difficult to imagine a jab more stinging for a man as hungry to be the centre of attention as Donald Trump.

WATCH WION LIVE HERE:&nbsp;

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

Expect a wild two-year ride through legislative gridlock, Republican Party investigations of President Joe Biden, and ugly campaigns for the 2024 presidential elections for which former president Donald Trump announced his candidacy even though his star power is waning.

Expect a wild two-year ride through legislative gridlock, Republican Party investigations of President Joe Biden, and ugly campaigns for the 2024 presidential elections for which former president Donald Trump announced his candidacy even though his star power is waning. After results that fell far short of Republican expectations, it is far from certain that Trump will be the nominee of a party he has dominated for six years. Infighting broke out even before he announced his candidacy at an event shunned by senior party establishment figures and even his daughter Ivanka, a close aide and confidante during his four years in power. Election day was November 8 but because of complicated electoral procedures that vary from state to state, it took nine days for the announcement that Republicans had captured the 218 seats they needed to control the 435-seat chamber. Their wafer-thin majority stands in stark contrast with predictions of a “red tsunami,” red being the party colour. The Democrats kept control of the Senate, winning 50 of the 100 seats. One Senate contest, in Georgia, will be decided in a run-off vote on December 6. It pits the Democratic incumbent, Raphael Warnock, against the Trump-backed former football star Herschel Walker. But even if Walker wins, Democrats would control a 50-50 split as Vice President Kamala Harris has the tie-breaking vote. Read more: Democrats retain control of US Senate with Cortez Masto's win in Nevada The election result not only surprised Republican leaders and most media prognosticators predicting a “red wave” but it also ran against a long-established historical trend. In the 22 mid-term elections from 1934 to 2018, the incumbent president’s party averaged a loss of 28 seats in the House and four in the Senate. The reason: Republicans largely campaigned on economic issues: inflation, the high price of food and gasoline as well as rising crime and immigration. Biden and Democratic candidates focused on threats to democracy highlighted by January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol by Trump followers trying to overturn the results of the presidential elections Biden won. Another key theme was abortion after the Supreme Court, dominated by conservative judges, struck down a woman’s constitutional right to abortion established 47 years ago. The decision sparked demonstrations across the country. The election featured an intervention without precedent on behalf of the Republican Party — a tweet from Elon Musk, the new owner of Twitter, to his 110 million followers. “Shared power curbs the worst excesses of both parties, therefore I recommend voting for a Republican Congress given that the Presidency is Democratic.” It’s a simplistic argument, open for debate. Clearly, Americans paid little attention to the recommendation of the world’s richest man. Rather than curb excesses, the actual outcome of the vote, a divided congress, is more likely to result in frequent stalemates and scant chance of progress on issues of key importance for the future of the country. WATCH | Elon Musk's appeal to independent-minded voters, pitches for Republican Congress × A Republican House and a Democrat-controlled Senate make up for the standard definition of a 'gridlock'. Two legislative houses controlled by different parties with starkly different philosophies. In deeply polarised America, there is almost nothing the two parties agree on. However, there is one important geopolitical issue on which they now see eye-to-eye — support for Ukraine since Russia unleashed a war on the country on February 24. But far-right Republicans have begun to question the massive military and financial support provided by the Biden administration and its NATO allies. Just hours after the official result of the contest for the House was announced, it became clear that for the next two years, Republican focus would be on investigative rather than legislative efforts. James Comer, the Kentucky Republican who is expected to chair the House Oversight and Reform Committee, announced the panel would investigate the Biden family’s financial affairs, with a focus on President Biden’s son Hunter and his business dealings in Ukraine, Russia and China. Republicans are also planning a House Judiciary Committee probe into allegations that the Biden administration exerted undue influence on the Department of Justice and on courts pressing ahead with multiple criminal investigations arising from attempts to reverse Trump’s loss in the 2020 elections. The former president is also facing a civil trial in New York that could wreck his financial empire. Analysts from both sides of the political divide have speculated that Trump’s announcement of his candidature was aimed to protect him from prosecution. According to the Justice Department, his status as a candidate would make no difference. But how this will play out remains to be seen. In his speech announcing his presidential run, Trump appeared to assume he would be his party’s nominee. That would have been a reasonable bet before the mid-term elections and the defeat of candidates he endorsed in return for perpetuating his baseless assertion that the 2020 elections were stolen from him. Now, even former allies and Rupert Murdoch’s media empire viz. the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post and Fox News, have begun to portray him as a loser. In his speech announcing his third run at the presidency, Trump remarked “I am a victim. I will tell you. I am a victim,” a reference to an array of investigations and an FBI raid on his Mar-a-Largo home to seize top secret documents he had taken from the White House. There was a succinct response from former New Jersey governor Chris Christie, once a close ally: “Republicans don’t vote for victims. They vote for leaders.” Under Trump’s leadership, the Republican Party scored big losses in the 2018 mid-term elections; two years later he lost in the presidential race, and this year most Trump-backed candidates lost and the “red wave” turned out to be merely a trickle. This makes little difference to the type of Trump supporters who stormed the Capitol and those who cheered the insurrection and continue to insist he won the vote. But what might change his status in the eyes of his devoted base is that Trump is becoming an object of public mockery. The prize for diminishing the former president with ridicule goes to the once Trump-friendly New York Post which ran a front-page two days after the election with the headline ‘Trumpty Dumpty’ under a picture of Trump as an egg perched on a brick wall. The text next to the mock-up: “Don (who couldn’t build a wall) had a great fall – can all the GOP’s men put the party back together again?” The Post, once described by Trump as his favourite paper, pushed its new-found, Murdoch-sanctioned disdain even further five days later. It buried Trump’s announcement of a 2024 run on page 26 and teased the story with a single line on the bottom of the front page: “Florida Man Makes Announcement.” It’s difficult to imagine a jab more stinging for a man as hungry to be the centre of attention as Donald Trump. WATCH WION LIVE HERE:

After America’s cliffhanger midterm elections, what next?

US Senate took a crucial step towards passing a landmark legislation - the bill aims to provide federal protections for same-sex marriages in the United States and the move was prompted by concerns that a more conservative Supreme Court could reverse a 2015 decision.

Federal protection for same-sex marriages: US Senate advances crucial legislation

Nearly five days after the midterm elections closed in the US, the final picture regarding who wrestles control of the Senate finally seems to have cleared. In a remarkable outcome that defies all predictions of a Republican victory in both houses of the Congress, US media network projections have called the electoral race in Nevada in favour of Democrat leader Catherine Cortez Masto, paving way for Democrat control over the Senate again in 2023.

Nearly five days after the midterm elections closed in the US, the final picture regarding who wrestles control of the Senate finally seems to have cleared. In a remarkable outcome that defies all predictions of a Republican victory in both houses of the Congress, US media network projections have called the electoral race in Nevada in favour of Democrat leader Catherine Cortez Masto, paving way for Democrat control over the Senate again in 2023. The incumbent Masto has reportedly defeated Republican challenger Adam Laxalt, a former state attorney general and a Trump backer, suggesting that the mythical 'red wave' never really managed to make significant dents across the country. WATCH | Everything you need to know about the US midterm elections × Masto's win means that Democrats have reached the magical figure of 50 seats for an effective majority in the senate with one race still undecided. As reported by WION, the Georgia seat is heading to a runoff election next month and even if the Republican challenger Herschel Walker wins the ballot, it will not anyhow earn a majority for the Republicans. Read more: Explainer: What causes a delay in US election results? Notably, even if Democrats and Republicans have 50 seats each, Democrats would have a majority considering Vice President Kamala Harris has the casting vote. However, if Democrat Senator Raphael Warnock manages to hold his fort, it would extend Democrat's majority to 51-49. This significant two-seat advantage plus Kamala Harris' vote will grant Democrats the much-required cushion to pass some of the controversial bills, which otherwise would have required 60 votes. The victory of Masto comes in the backdrop of Democrat Senator Mark Kelly's victory in Arizona, a day before. Read more: Democrat Senator Mark Kelly retains Arizona, party just a win short from majority: Reports Trump had hoped to ride a Republican "red wave" that would prime him for another presidential run but the party is looking at a much smaller victory than had been predicted. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE:

Democrats retain control of US Senate with Cortez Masto's win in Nevada

The US Senate has passed Democrats' $750 billion 'Inflation Reduction Act'. It includes climate provisions, tax changes, drug pricing provisions, and more.

US Senate passed $740 billion 'Inflation Reduction Act' package

After 18 months of rigorous debate, the US upper house made history by voting on a bill that is being touted as the boldest action ever taken against climate change.

WION Climate Tracker | US Senate passes major climate bill; President Biden calls it 'historic'

To get your day started, here are some stories.

In a big win for President Joe Biden and his party, the US Senate has approved the $750 billion health care, tax, and environment measure proposed by Democrats. The day also witnessed the swearing in of Colombia's first Leftist president, who made a commitment to combat inequality and bring peace to a nation long tormented by brutal conflicts between the rebels, the government, and drug traffickers. In the realm of sport, Ryan Giggs faces trial for assaulting his ex-girlfriend.&nbsp;

Click on the headline to read more:

<meta charset="utf-8" /><a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/in-a-major-victory-for-biden-us-senate-passes-750bn-healthcare-and-climate-bill-504670">In a major victory for Biden, US Senate passes $750bn healthcare and climate bill </a>

<img alt="US senate passes Democrats' $750 billion health care, tax and climate bill, in a significant victory for President Joe Biden and his party." data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="97dbbd23-5113-4f11-afba-b9465e866ee2" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/joe-biden.jpeg" />

After a 27-hour marathon discussion over the weekend where the Republicans tried to derail the package, the Senate on Sunday approved the legislation known as the Inflation Reduction Act by a 51-50 party line vote with Vice President Kamala Harris casting the tie-breaking vote.

<meta charset="utf-8" /><a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/former-guerrilla-group-takes-oath-as-colombias-first-leftist-president-504663">Former guerrilla group takes oath as Colombia’s first leftist president</a>

<img alt="Ex-rebel takes oath as Colombian president in historic shift" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="e6e3283a-03a5-4b76-ac88-008e747451ca" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/1200x-1_3.jpg" />

Promising to fight inequality and bring peace to a country long haunted by bloody feuds between the government and rebel groups, Colombia’s first leftist president was sworn into office Sunday.

<meta charset="utf-8" /><a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/court-battle-for-manchester-united-and-wales-icon-ryan-giggs-504667">Court battle for Manchester United and Wales icon Ryan Giggs</a>

<img alt="Ryan Giggs faces court trial for assaulting ex-girlfriend" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="5ddce49c-1bb9-4957-8379-ca1ca40f2ce9" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Ryan-Giggs-Wales-F365.jpg" />

The 48-year-old, who most recently served as the Wales national team's coach, has entered a not-guilty plea to the allegations, which carry a potential five-year jail sentence.

Watch:&nbsp;Russia, Ukraine plays blame game over Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant attack

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/russia-ukraine-plays-blame-game-over-zaporizhzhia-nuclear-plant-attack-504666/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo">&nbsp;</div>

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo">Watch:&nbsp;UN nuclear watchdog calls for end to military action near plant</div>

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo">&nbsp;</div>

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/russia-ukraine-war-un-nuclear-watchdog-calls-for-end-to-military-action-near-plant-504656/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

To get your day started, here are some stories. In a big win for President Joe Biden and his party, the US Senate has approved the $750 billion health care, tax, and environment measure proposed by Democrats.

To get your day started, here are some stories. In a big win for President Joe Biden and his party, the US Senate has approved the $750 billion health care, tax, and environment measure proposed by Democrats. The day also witnessed the swearing in of Colombia's first Leftist president, who made a commitment to combat inequality and bring peace to a nation long tormented by brutal conflicts between the rebels, the government, and drug traffickers. In the realm of sport, Ryan Giggs faces trial for assaulting his ex-girlfriend. Click on the headline to read more: In a major victory for Biden, US Senate passes $750bn healthcare and climate bill After a 27-hour marathon discussion over the weekend where the Republicans tried to derail the package, the Senate on Sunday approved the legislation known as the Inflation Reduction Act by a 51-50 party line vote with Vice President Kamala Harris casting the tie-breaking vote. Former guerrilla group takes oath as Colombia’s first leftist president Promising to fight inequality and bring peace to a country long haunted by bloody feuds between the government and rebel groups, Colombia’s first leftist president was sworn into office Sunday. Court battle for Manchester United and Wales icon Ryan Giggs The 48-year-old, who most recently served as the Wales national team's coach, has entered a not-guilty plea to the allegations, which carry a potential five-year jail sentence. Watch: Russia, Ukraine plays blame game over Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant attack Watch: UN nuclear watchdog calls for end to military action near plant

Morning brief: US Senate passes Biden's mega bill, Colombia gets first leftist president and more

The United States Senate has passed a bipartisan bill to boost chip output amid a global shortage. Legislation is aimed to help the US compete with China.

US Senate passes bill to boost chip output; Legislation aimed to help the US compete with China

TikTok has made it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) have never requested for their data on American users. "We have not provided US user data to the CCP, nor would we if asked," it said in an official letter which was first published by AFP and later confirmed by the company.

In response to questions from nine Republican senators about their data storage policies, TikTok said that they have taken steps to limit access to user data and that applies to employees of its parent company, the Chinese group ByteDance. Lately, TikTok has faced queries when it comes to their data storage strategy, but they said that it is stored on US-based servers operated by the Oracle.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/ukraine-accuses-russia-of-firing-phosphorus-bombs-on-snake-island-493706" hreflang="en">Ukraine accuses Russia of firing phosphorus bombs on Snake Island</a>

However, they did confirm that some employees in China do have access to the user data of American users, but the system operates within "robust cybersecurity controls and authorization approval protocols" which are monitored by the company's "US-based security team."

The social media platform is currently under investigation by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), an inter-agency government review board which looks into the various risks of on US national security, according to an AFP report.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/new-york-may-ban-concealed-guns-in-sensitive-areas-including-times-square-493711" hreflang="en">New York may ban concealed guns in 'sensitive areas', including Times Square</a>

TikTok has faced a lot of pressure from the White House in the past year with Donald Trump announcing a complete ban on the platform. However, the executive order signed by the former US President was never implemented and was later revoked by Joe Biden. However, the company has faced scrutiny from the current administration as well.

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

(With inputs from agencies)

TikTok has made it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) have never requested for their data on American users. "We have not provided US user data to the CCP, nor would we if asked," it said in an official letter which was first published by AFP and later confirmed by the company.

TikTok has made it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) have never requested for their data on American users. "We have not provided US user data to the CCP, nor would we if asked," it said in an official letter which was first published by AFP and later confirmed by the company. In response to questions from nine Republican senators about their data storage policies, TikTok said that they have taken steps to limit access to user data and that applies to employees of its parent company, the Chinese group ByteDance. Lately, TikTok has faced queries when it comes to their data storage strategy, but they said that it is stored on US-based servers operated by the Oracle. Also read | Ukraine accuses Russia of firing phosphorus bombs on Snake Island However, they did confirm that some employees in China do have access to the user data of American users, but the system operates within "robust cybersecurity controls and authorization approval protocols" which are monitored by the company's "US-based security team." The social media platform is currently under investigation by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), an inter-agency government review board which looks into the various risks of on US national security, according to an AFP report. Also read | New York may ban concealed guns in 'sensitive areas', including Times Square TikTok has faced a lot of pressure from the White House in the past year with Donald Trump announcing a complete ban on the platform. However, the executive order signed by the former US President was never implemented and was later revoked by Joe Biden. However, the company has faced scrutiny from the current administration as well. WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here. (With inputs from agencies)

User data not shared with Chinese Communist Party: TikTok tells US lawmakers

In the first big step towards Gun reform, the United States Senate has passed a bill to address gun violence, Republicans joined Democrats in support of the Bipartisan safer communities act. It comes at a time when gun violence has become a major issue for the Biden administration

US Senate passes first major gun safety legislation

US senators on Thursday (June 23) advanced a bipartisan bill that addressed gun violence in the country. The reforms are expected to be rubber-stamped by the House of Representatives. The bill approves a narrow package of new firearms restrictions and billions of dollars in mental health and school security funding

The bill is stil short of demands of gun safety advocates and President Joe Biden. But it has been hailed as a life-saving breakthrough.

Gun rights are enshrined in US Constitution and any attempt to introduce gun control meets stiff political resistance, especially from Republican party.

But shooting in Texas school in which 19 children lost lives created an uproar in public increasing pressure on lawmakers to act.

"This bipartisan legislation will help protect Americans," Biden said in a statement shortly after the Senate vote. "Kids in schools and communities will be safer because of it."

The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which was backed by all 50 Democratic senators and 15 Republicans, includes enhanced background checks for buyers under the age of 21, $11 billion in funding for mental health and $2 billion for school safety programs.

It also provides funding to incentivize states to implement "red flag" laws to remove firearms from people considered a threat.

The bill also plugs the so-called 'boyfriend' loophole. This loophole let domestic abusers evade ban on buying firearms if they were not married to or living with their victim.

"Tonight, the United States Senate is doing something many believed was impossible even a few weeks ago: we are passing the first significant gun safety bill in nearly 30 years," Senate Democratic majority leader Chuck Schumer said after the legislation passed.

"The gun safety bill we are passing tonight can be described with three adjectives: bipartisan, common sense, lifesaving."

His Republican counterpart Mitch McConnell said the legislation would make America safer "without making our country one bit less free."

"This is a common-sense package. Its provisions are very, very popular. It contains zero new restrictions, zero new waiting periods, zero mandates and zero bans of any kind for law-abiding gun owners."

(With inputs from agencies)

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

US senators on Thursday (June 23) advanced a bipartisan bill that addressed gun violence in the country. The reforms are expected to be rubber-stamped by the House of Representatives.

US senators on Thursday (June 23) advanced a bipartisan bill that addressed gun violence in the country. The reforms are expected to be rubber-stamped by the House of Representatives. The bill approves a narrow package of new firearms restrictions and billions of dollars in mental health and school security funding The bill is stil short of demands of gun safety advocates and President Joe Biden. But it has been hailed as a life-saving breakthrough. Gun rights are enshrined in US Constitution and any attempt to introduce gun control meets stiff political resistance, especially from Republican party. But shooting in Texas school in which 19 children lost lives created an uproar in public increasing pressure on lawmakers to act. "This bipartisan legislation will help protect Americans," Biden said in a statement shortly after the Senate vote. "Kids in schools and communities will be safer because of it." The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which was backed by all 50 Democratic senators and 15 Republicans, includes enhanced background checks for buyers under the age of 21, $11 billion in funding for mental health and $2 billion for school safety programs. It also provides funding to incentivize states to implement "red flag" laws to remove firearms from people considered a threat. The bill also plugs the so-called 'boyfriend' loophole. This loophole let domestic abusers evade ban on buying firearms if they were not married to or living with their victim. "Tonight, the United States Senate is doing something many believed was impossible even a few weeks ago: we are passing the first significant gun safety bill in nearly 30 years," Senate Democratic majority leader Chuck Schumer said after the legislation passed. "The gun safety bill we are passing tonight can be described with three adjectives: bipartisan, common sense, lifesaving." His Republican counterpart Mitch McConnell said the legislation would make America safer "without making our country one bit less free." "This is a common-sense package. Its provisions are very, very popular. It contains zero new restrictions, zero new waiting periods, zero mandates and zero bans of any kind for law-abiding gun owners." (With inputs from agencies) You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here. WATCH WION LIVE HERE ×

US Senate advances bipartisan bill on gun safety

Republican Missouri US Senate candidate Eric Greitens' campaign video, which shows him brandishing a shotgun and declaring that he’s hunting 'Republicans In Name Only' (RINOs), has been removed by Facebook.

In the ad, an armed tactical team breaks through the front door and throws what appear to be flash-bang grenades inside, following which Greitens enters an empty living room through the smoke.

Using a term popularised by former President Donald Trump and his allies to deride moderate or establishment Republicans, Greitens says “The RINO feeds on corruption and is marked by the stripes of cowardice.”

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/shooting-in-washington-dc-15-year-old-gunned-down-489850/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

“Join the MAGA crew. Get a RINO hunting permit. There’s no bagging limit, no tagging limit and it doesn’t expire until we save our country,” he added.

“For violating our policies prohibiting violence and incitement” Facebook removed the video after which Twitter mirrored its statement and said Greitens’ post violated its rules about abusive behavior.

Following fatal mass shootings and threats to government officials, the video comes at a time of renewed focus on violence in politics.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/in-us-gun-violence-kills-more-children-than-vehicular-accidents-causes-109-deaths-everyday-473362">Also read |&nbsp;In US, gun violence kills more children than vehicular accidents, causes 109 deaths everyday</a>

After threatening to kill the justice, a man carrying a gun was arrested near Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s house two weeks ago.

Confessing that he recently received a letter at his home threatening “to execute me, as well as my wife and 5-month-old child” Republican Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, said this has got to stop.

To fill the seat being vacated by retiring GOP Senator Roy Blunt, Greitens, a former Missouri governor who resigned in disgrace in 2018, is among the Republican candidates in a highly competitive August 2 primary.

(With inputs from agencies)

Watch WION's live TV here:

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1&lt;/div">&amp;times;</iframe></div>

&nbsp;
</div>

Republican Missouri US Senate candidate Eric Greitens' campaign video, which shows him brandishing a shotgun and declaring that he’s hunting 'Republicans In Name Only' (RINOs), has been removed by Facebook.

Republican Missouri US Senate candidate Eric Greitens' campaign video, which shows him brandishing a shotgun and declaring that he’s hunting 'Republicans In Name Only' (RINOs), has been removed by Facebook. In the ad, an armed tactical team breaks through the front door and throws what appear to be flash-bang grenades inside, following which Greitens enters an empty living room through the smoke. Using a term popularised by former President Donald Trump and his allies to deride moderate or establishment Republicans, Greitens says “The RINO feeds on corruption and is marked by the stripes of cowardice.” × “Join the MAGA crew. Get a RINO hunting permit. There’s no bagging limit, no tagging limit and it doesn’t expire until we save our country,” he added. “For violating our policies prohibiting violence and incitement” Facebook removed the video after which Twitter mirrored its statement and said Greitens’ post violated its rules about abusive behavior. Following fatal mass shootings and threats to government officials, the video comes at a time of renewed focus on violence in politics. Also read | In US, gun violence kills more children than vehicular accidents, causes 109 deaths everyday After threatening to kill the justice, a man carrying a gun was arrested near Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s house two weeks ago. Confessing that he recently received a letter at his home threatening “to execute me, as well as my wife and 5-month-old child” Republican Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, said this has got to stop. To fill the seat being vacated by retiring GOP Senator Roy Blunt, Greitens, a former Missouri governor who resigned in disgrace in 2018, is among the Republican candidates in a highly competitive August 2 primary. (With inputs from agencies) Watch WION's live TV here:

GOP Senate candidate’s ‘RINO hunting’ video removed by Facebook

The US Senate has rejected legislation adopted by the House of Representatives that would codify the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe Vs Wade decision by blocking governments from restricting access to abortion services.

US: Senate fails to codify right to abortion, yet again

Harry Reid, the Democrat who rose from childhood poverty in the rural Nevada desert to the heights of power in Washington, where he steered the Affordable Care Act to passage as Senate majority leader, died Tuesday in Henderson, Nevada. He was 82.

Reid had been treated for pancreatic cancer, which was diagnosed in 2018, but lived to see the Las Vegas airport renamed for him this month. His death was confirmed in statements from Gov. Steve Sisolak of Nevada and Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the majority leader.

Even by the standards of the political profession, where against-the-odds biographies are common and modest roots an asset, what Reid overcame was extraordinary. He was raised in almost Dickensian circumstances in tiny Searchlight, Nevada: His home had no indoor plumbing, his father was an alcoholic miner who eventually committed suicide, and his mother helped the family survive by taking in laundry from local brothels.

After two decades of campaigns in Nevada marked by success, setback and recovery, Reid was elected to the Senate in 1986. He became the chamber’s Democratic leader after the 2004 election.

But it was not until his colleague Barack Obama was elected president four years later that Reid was able to meld his deep knowledge of congressional rules, his facility with horse-trading and his cussed determination to unify his 60-seat majority and pass landmark legislation.

“If Harry said he would do something, he did it,” President Joe Biden, who served as Obama’s vice president, said in a statement Tuesday evening. “If he gave you his word, you could bank on it. That’s how he got things done for the good of the country for decades.”

Pushing through a sweeping economic stimulus after the Great Recession, a new set of rules governing Wall Street, and the most significant expansion of health care coverage since the Great Society of the 1960s — all with scant Republican support — Reid became, along with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, one of the indispensable lawmakers of the Obama era.

“The records will be written about the eight years of Obama and Reid,” Reid boasted shortly after he announced in 2015 that he would not seek reelection the following year.

Yet the three-decade Senate tenure of this soft-spoken yet ferociously combative Nevadan, a middleweight boxer in his youth, also traced the chamber’s evolution from a collegial and consensus-oriented institution to the partisan and fractured body it has become. Republicans placed some of the blame on Reid for this change, pointing to his 2013 decision to upend Senate rules by doing away with the filibuster on most nominations by a president.

Reid, though, reflected the broader leftward shift of his party and his state. First elected to the House of Representatives in 1982, when Nevada finally grew large enough to require a second seat, he arrived in the capital as a moderate western Democrat: opposed to abortion rights, largely supportive of gun rights and uneasy about immigration.

But as Nevada grew from an overwhelmingly rural, white redoubt of ranches and mines to a polyglot gambling mecca in which 70% of voters live in the Las Vegas area, Reid adapted as a matter of necessity. He won his final reelection in 2010, a dismal year for Democrats nationally, thanks in part to an outpouring of support from his state’s rapidly growing Hispanic and Asian communities after his popularity among many other Nevadans had plummeted in the economic collapse.

“I may have won without them, but I doubt it,” Reid said in a later interview about his support among immigrants in his 2010 campaign.

But after Democrats lost the Senate majority in 2014, and after he had lost nearly all the sight in his right eye the next year in a serious accident in his home during a workout, Reid decided not to run for a sixth term. He said he did not want to be one of those senators who served well into old age.

While he was willing to adjust with the times politically, he remained a stylistic throwback. A Mormon who neither drank nor smoked, he also shunned his state’s principal industry, claiming with his characteristic bluntness that “the only people who make money from gambling are the joints and government.”

Prone to ‘Reidisms’

Reid was a meandering and awkward public speaker, far more comfortable plotting strategy beneath the imposing portrait of Mark Twain in his Capitol office than he was making the case for his party on a Sunday news show, much less at a political rally.

In private, he wielded an irreverent sense of humour, but could be brusque, often not even saying goodbye to colleagues at the end of a phone call. When he did speak publicly or to the press, he was often given to verbal miscues that came to be known as “Reidisms.”

He deemed President George W. Bush “a loser” while addressing a group of high school juniors in Nevada in 2005, mused about the body odour of Washington’s tourists a few years later and, when Obama first ran for president, in 2008, said the country’s first Black president could be elected because he spoke “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.” (Reid telephoned Obama to apologize after the comments were made public; Obama issued a statement calling the remarks “unfortunate,” but added, “I know what’s in his heart.”)

It was Reid who saw Obama’s potential for a successful run at the White House when many Democrats were rallying behind Hillary Clinton. Recognizing that the young Illinois senator had little affection for the Senate’s byzantine ways, Reid in 2006 privately urged him to mount a bid for the Democratic nomination. “I am one of the reasons he’s president,” Reid told The Washington Post after announcing his retirement.

Obama confirmed as much Tuesday evening, when he posted on Twitter a letter he had recently written to Reid.

“I wouldn’t have been president had it not been for your encouragement and support, and I wouldn’t have got most of what I got done without your skill and determination,” Obama wrote.

Reid was as shrewd a tactician as he was poor a communicator, and nowhere was that more evident than in Nevada, where he became the state’s dominant political figure for the final two decades of his life — “a Machiavelli with malaprops,” as the Las Vegas-based journalist Jon Ralston called him.

Reid used his position on the Senate Appropriations Committee and his eventual majority leadership to block nuclear waste from being deposited in Nevada’s Yucca Mountain, a decades-long fight, while relentlessly earmarking spending for his state, where 85% of the land was federally owned when he left office. He also helped create Nevada’s Great Basin National Park, ensured that millions of acres in the state were protected as national parks or monuments, and made sure that federal funds were directed to cleaning and preserving Lake Tahoe, which straddles Nevada’s border with California.

Reid ran Nevada’s Democratic Party in the manner of an old-style political boss, determining which candidates would run up and down the ballot, arranging his own succession and even remaining in charge after his cancer diagnosis and through the 2018 midterm elections, nearly two years after his retirement from the Senate.

He also used his clout to elevate his state’s role in the presidential nominating process, moving Nevada’s caucuses up to become one of the early voting states in the Democratic primaries, and in 2016 he quietly helped Hillary Clinton salvage her nomination there.

A Difficult Start

Harry Mason Reid Jr. was born on Dec. 2, 1939, in Searchlight, a mining outpost that had about 200 residents in his youth. One of four sons of Harry Sr. and Inez (Jaynes) Reid, he grew up in privation. His father suffered from depression and was often unemployed. Harry worked at a gas station in high school, earning enough money to purchase his mother a new set of false teeth.

Boxing metaphors about Reid would eventually become clichéd — he even named his memoir “The Good Fight” — but he was quite the pugilist. He got into physical altercations with his father (when his father would become violent toward his mother) and with his future father-in-law (who was uneasy about his daughter marrying Reid).

To attend high school, he would hitchhike 40 miles to Henderson, near Las Vegas, where he had relatives. And it was there that his political career effectively began. He had a teacher and boxing coach named Mike O’Callaghan, who would be elected governor in 1970 with Reid as his running mate.

With financial assistance from Nevada businessmen, Reid graduated from Utah State University, where he converted to Mormonism. He then attended law school at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., moonlighting as a Capitol Police officer to pay his way through.

With his law degree, he returned to Nevada and became the local prosecutor in Henderson. He was elected to the Nevada state Assembly in 1968. Two years later, he and O’Callaghan were elected statewide.

Then, unexpectedly, Sen. Alan Bible, a Democrat, announced in 1974 that he would not run for reelection. Reid won his party’s nomination but lost in the general election to Paul Laxalt, a popular former Republican governor, by fewer than 700 votes. It was the only Democratic Senate seat in the country that year that Republicans picked up.

In an early demonstration of his political pugnacity, Reid had demanded during the campaign that Laxalt release his family’s financial interests.

“One problem,” Reid recalled with a chuckle years later. “His sister was a nun. I got killed on that.”

After an ill-fated bid for the Las Vegas mayoralty in 1975, Reid’s career was floundering. But O’Callaghan again came to his aid, making Reid chair of the Nevada Gaming Commission at a moment when state officials were trying to root out the mob from Las Vegas’ casinos.

It was only then that Reid realized how entrenched the mob still was on the city’s famous Strip. “That was a real eye-opener for me,” he said later, “because I thought I knew the state very well, but I didn’t.”

As gaming commissioner he was offered bribes and participated in FBI stings. Near the end of his tenure his wife, Landra Reid, came out of their house one day to find a bomb attached to the family’s station wagon.

Landra Reid, who was his closest adviser, survives him, as do his children, Rory, Lana Reid Barringer, Leif, Josh and Key, and 19 grandchildren.

Following the 1980 census, Nevada, for the first time in its history, had a large enough population to merit a second House seat, representing the Las Vegas area. Reid won the new district, but after two terms a Senate seat again opened up, thanks to Laxalt’s retirement.

Reid again benefited from running in a good Democratic year, in 1986, and this time his bare-knuckled tactics paid off as he handily defeated Laxalt’s handpicked successor, former Rep. Jim Santini.

He won a coveted seat on the Appropriations Committee in his first term and spent much of the first part of his career looking out for the needs of Nevada, which was beginning to boom as a global hospitality capital.

After another agonizingly close race in 1998 — he won by fewer than 500 votes following a recount — Reid was elected minority whip, the second-ranking Senate Democrat. Though still not a prominent figure in Washington, he was pivotal in wooing Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont to leave the Republican Party in 2001 and caucus with the Democrats, a move that gave Reid’s party control of the narrowly divided Senate.

After Sen. Tom Daschle of South Dakota, the Democratic leader, was defeated in 2004, Reid effectively secured the commitments he needed to take over the caucus by the next day.

The Majority Leader

A fierce critic of George W. Bush — he called him “a liar” as well as a loser — Reid became a beneficiary of the president’s unpopularity in 2006, when Democrats took back control of the Senate and Reid became majority leader. He played a key role in passing the bank bailout after the stock market collapsed in the fall of 2008. Later that year, when Obama was elected, Democrats made even more gains, giving Reid a filibuster-proof majority.

But the Democratic caucus included senators across the ideological spectrum and, with few moderate Republicans left, it took all of Reid’s legislative acumen, doggedness and even shamelessness to win some close votes. On the health law, for example, he offered Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska a generous expansion of Medicaid funding in his state, a deal that critics called “the Cornhusker Kickback.”

Reid’s hard-nosed tactics handed Democrats a series of major achievements, but he enraged Republicans and was vulnerable to defeat entering what would be his final reelection campaign in 2010.

He overcame his own unpopularity by meddling in the Republican primary, as his allies undermined a potentially strong candidate and helped lift a far-right conservative, Sharron Angle, who was herself as gaffe-prone as Reid. He won the general election comfortably even as the rise of the Tea Party movement propelled Republicans to victory across the country.

That same single-mindedness and indifference to criticism, however, embarrassed even some of his allies two years later when he sought to undermine Mitt Romney’s presidential candidacy in 2012 by repeatedly, and without evidence, claiming that Romney had gone a decade without paying income tax.

Reid was even more contemptuous of former President Donald Trump, calling him “a racist” and “sexual predator” who achieved prominence only because of the fortune he had inherited.

Being born into wealth was, of course, alien to Reid. At the end of his career — after great financial and political success and raising five children, one of whom became an elected official in Las Vegas — he relished showing visitors his dusty hometown. But he recalled that it was not until he saw Alex Haley give a talk about his book “Roots” that he stopped feeling ashamed by his impoverished background.

“He said be proud of who you are, you can’t escape who you are,” Reid said in his Senate farewell speech, adding that at that point he proudly became “Harry Reid, the guy from Searchlight.”

Harry Reid, the Democrat who rose from childhood poverty in the rural Nevada desert to the heights of power in Washington, where he steered the Affordable Care Act to passage as Senate majority leader, died Tuesday in Henderson, Nevada.

Harry Reid, the Democrat who rose from childhood poverty in the rural Nevada desert to the heights of power in Washington, where he steered the Affordable Care Act to passage as Senate majority leader, died Tuesday in Henderson, Nevada. He was 82. Reid had been treated for pancreatic cancer, which was diagnosed in 2018, but lived to see the Las Vegas airport renamed for him this month. His death was confirmed in statements from Gov. Steve Sisolak of Nevada and Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the majority leader. Even by the standards of the political profession, where against-the-odds biographies are common and modest roots an asset, what Reid overcame was extraordinary. He was raised in almost Dickensian circumstances in tiny Searchlight, Nevada: His home had no indoor plumbing, his father was an alcoholic miner who eventually committed suicide, and his mother helped the family survive by taking in laundry from local brothels. After two decades of campaigns in Nevada marked by success, setback and recovery, Reid was elected to the Senate in 1986. He became the chamber’s Democratic leader after the 2004 election. But it was not until his colleague Barack Obama was elected president four years later that Reid was able to meld his deep knowledge of congressional rules, his facility with horse-trading and his cussed determination to unify his 60-seat majority and pass landmark legislation. “If Harry said he would do something, he did it,” President Joe Biden, who served as Obama’s vice president, said in a statement Tuesday evening. “If he gave you his word, you could bank on it. That’s how he got things done for the good of the country for decades.” Pushing through a sweeping economic stimulus after the Great Recession, a new set of rules governing Wall Street, and the most significant expansion of health care coverage since the Great Society of the 1960s — all with scant Republican support — Reid became, along with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, one of the indispensable lawmakers of the Obama era. “The records will be written about the eight years of Obama and Reid,” Reid boasted shortly after he announced in 2015 that he would not seek reelection the following year. Yet the three-decade Senate tenure of this soft-spoken yet ferociously combative Nevadan, a middleweight boxer in his youth, also traced the chamber’s evolution from a collegial and consensus-oriented institution to the partisan and fractured body it has become. Republicans placed some of the blame on Reid for this change, pointing to his 2013 decision to upend Senate rules by doing away with the filibuster on most nominations by a president. Reid, though, reflected the broader leftward shift of his party and his state. First elected to the House of Representatives in 1982, when Nevada finally grew large enough to require a second seat, he arrived in the capital as a moderate western Democrat: opposed to abortion rights, largely supportive of gun rights and uneasy about immigration. But as Nevada grew from an overwhelmingly rural, white redoubt of ranches and mines to a polyglot gambling mecca in which 70% of voters live in the Las Vegas area, Reid adapted as a matter of necessity. He won his final reelection in 2010, a dismal year for Democrats nationally, thanks in part to an outpouring of support from his state’s rapidly growing Hispanic and Asian communities after his popularity among many other Nevadans had plummeted in the economic collapse. “I may have won without them, but I doubt it,” Reid said in a later interview about his support among immigrants in his 2010 campaign. But after Democrats lost the Senate majority in 2014, and after he had lost nearly all the sight in his right eye the next year in a serious accident in his home during a workout, Reid decided not to run for a sixth term. He said he did not want to be one of those senators who served well into old age. While he was willing to adjust with the times politically, he remained a stylistic throwback. A Mormon who neither drank nor smoked, he also shunned his state’s principal industry, claiming with his characteristic bluntness that “the only people who make money from gambling are the joints and government.” Prone to ‘Reidisms’ Reid was a meandering and awkward public speaker, far more comfortable plotting strategy beneath the imposing portrait of Mark Twain in his Capitol office than he was making the case for his party on a Sunday news show, much less at a political rally. In private, he wielded an irreverent sense of humour, but could be brusque, often not even saying goodbye to colleagues at the end of a phone call. When he did speak publicly or to the press, he was often given to verbal miscues that came to be known as “Reidisms.” He deemed President George W. Bush “a loser” while addressing a group of high school juniors in Nevada in 2005, mused about the body odour of Washington’s tourists a few years later and, when Obama first ran for president, in 2008, said the country’s first Black president could be elected because he spoke “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.” (Reid telephoned Obama to apologize after the comments were made public; Obama issued a statement calling the remarks “unfortunate,” but added, “I know what’s in his heart.”) It was Reid who saw Obama’s potential for a successful run at the White House when many Democrats were rallying behind Hillary Clinton. Recognizing that the young Illinois senator had little affection for the Senate’s byzantine ways, Reid in 2006 privately urged him to mount a bid for the Democratic nomination. “I am one of the reasons he’s president,” Reid told The Washington Post after announcing his retirement. Obama confirmed as much Tuesday evening, when he posted on Twitter a letter he had recently written to Reid. “I wouldn’t have been president had it not been for your encouragement and support, and I wouldn’t have got most of what I got done without your skill and determination,” Obama wrote. Reid was as shrewd a tactician as he was poor a communicator, and nowhere was that more evident than in Nevada, where he became the state’s dominant political figure for the final two decades of his life — “a Machiavelli with malaprops,” as the Las Vegas-based journalist Jon Ralston called him. Reid used his position on the Senate Appropriations Committee and his eventual majority leadership to block nuclear waste from being deposited in Nevada’s Yucca Mountain, a decades-long fight, while relentlessly earmarking spending for his state, where 85% of the land was federally owned when he left office. He also helped create Nevada’s Great Basin National Park, ensured that millions of acres in the state were protected as national parks or monuments, and made sure that federal funds were directed to cleaning and preserving Lake Tahoe, which straddles Nevada’s border with California. Reid ran Nevada’s Democratic Party in the manner of an old-style political boss, determining which candidates would run up and down the ballot, arranging his own succession and even remaining in charge after his cancer diagnosis and through the 2018 midterm elections, nearly two years after his retirement from the Senate. He also used his clout to elevate his state’s role in the presidential nominating process, moving Nevada’s caucuses up to become one of the early voting states in the Democratic primaries, and in 2016 he quietly helped Hillary Clinton salvage her nomination there. A Difficult Start Harry Mason Reid Jr. was born on Dec. 2, 1939, in Searchlight, a mining outpost that had about 200 residents in his youth. One of four sons of Harry Sr. and Inez (Jaynes) Reid, he grew up in privation. His father suffered from depression and was often unemployed. Harry worked at a gas station in high school, earning enough money to purchase his mother a new set of false teeth. Boxing metaphors about Reid would eventually become clichéd — he even named his memoir “The Good Fight” — but he was quite the pugilist. He got into physical altercations with his father (when his father would become violent toward his mother) and with his future father-in-law (who was uneasy about his daughter marrying Reid). To attend high school, he would hitchhike 40 miles to Henderson, near Las Vegas, where he had relatives. And it was there that his political career effectively began. He had a teacher and boxing coach named Mike O’Callaghan, who would be elected governor in 1970 with Reid as his running mate. With financial assistance from Nevada businessmen, Reid graduated from Utah State University, where he converted to Mormonism. He then attended law school at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., moonlighting as a Capitol Police officer to pay his way through. With his law degree, he returned to Nevada and became the local prosecutor in Henderson. He was elected to the Nevada state Assembly in 1968. Two years later, he and O’Callaghan were elected statewide. Then, unexpectedly, Sen. Alan Bible, a Democrat, announced in 1974 that he would not run for reelection. Reid won his party’s nomination but lost in the general election to Paul Laxalt, a popular former Republican governor, by fewer than 700 votes. It was the only Democratic Senate seat in the country that year that Republicans picked up. In an early demonstration of his political pugnacity, Reid had demanded during the campaign that Laxalt release his family’s financial interests. “One problem,” Reid recalled with a chuckle years later. “His sister was a nun. I got killed on that.” After an ill-fated bid for the Las Vegas mayoralty in 1975, Reid’s career was floundering. But O’Callaghan again came to his aid, making Reid chair of the Nevada Gaming Commission at a moment when state officials were trying to root out the mob from Las Vegas’ casinos. It was only then that Reid realized how entrenched the mob still was on the city’s famous Strip. “That was a real eye-opener for me,” he said later, “because I thought I knew the state very well, but I didn’t.” As gaming commissioner he was offered bribes and participated in FBI stings. Near the end of his tenure his wife, Landra Reid, came out of their house one day to find a bomb attached to the family’s station wagon. Landra Reid, who was his closest adviser, survives him, as do his children, Rory, Lana Reid Barringer, Leif, Josh and Key, and 19 grandchildren. Following the 1980 census, Nevada, for the first time in its history, had a large enough population to merit a second House seat, representing the Las Vegas area. Reid won the new district, but after two terms a Senate seat again opened up, thanks to Laxalt’s retirement. Reid again benefited from running in a good Democratic year, in 1986, and this time his bare-knuckled tactics paid off as he handily defeated Laxalt’s handpicked successor, former Rep. Jim Santini. He won a coveted seat on the Appropriations Committee in his first term and spent much of the first part of his career looking out for the needs of Nevada, which was beginning to boom as a global hospitality capital. After another agonizingly close race in 1998 — he won by fewer than 500 votes following a recount — Reid was elected minority whip, the second-ranking Senate Democrat. Though still not a prominent figure in Washington, he was pivotal in wooing Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont to leave the Republican Party in 2001 and caucus with the Democrats, a move that gave Reid’s party control of the narrowly divided Senate. After Sen. Tom Daschle of South Dakota, the Democratic leader, was defeated in 2004, Reid effectively secured the commitments he needed to take over the caucus by the next day. The Majority Leader A fierce critic of George W. Bush — he called him “a liar” as well as a loser — Reid became a beneficiary of the president’s unpopularity in 2006, when Democrats took back control of the Senate and Reid became majority leader. He played a key role in passing the bank bailout after the stock market collapsed in the fall of 2008. Later that year, when Obama was elected, Democrats made even more gains, giving Reid a filibuster-proof majority. But the Democratic caucus included senators across the ideological spectrum and, with few moderate Republicans left, it took all of Reid’s legislative acumen, doggedness and even shamelessness to win some close votes. On the health law, for example, he offered Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska a generous expansion of Medicaid funding in his state, a deal that critics called “the Cornhusker Kickback.” Reid’s hard-nosed tactics handed Democrats a series of major achievements, but he enraged Republicans and was vulnerable to defeat entering what would be his final reelection campaign in 2010. He overcame his own unpopularity by meddling in the Republican primary, as his allies undermined a potentially strong candidate and helped lift a far-right conservative, Sharron Angle, who was herself as gaffe-prone as Reid. He won the general election comfortably even as the rise of the Tea Party movement propelled Republicans to victory across the country. That same single-mindedness and indifference to criticism, however, embarrassed even some of his allies two years later when he sought to undermine Mitt Romney’s presidential candidacy in 2012 by repeatedly, and without evidence, claiming that Romney had gone a decade without paying income tax. Reid was even more contemptuous of former President Donald Trump, calling him “a racist” and “sexual predator” who achieved prominence only because of the fortune he had inherited. Being born into wealth was, of course, alien to Reid. At the end of his career — after great financial and political success and raising five children, one of whom became an elected official in Las Vegas — he relished showing visitors his dusty hometown. But he recalled that it was not until he saw Alex Haley give a talk about his book “Roots” that he stopped feeling ashamed by his impoverished background. “He said be proud of who you are, you can’t escape who you are,” Reid said in his Senate farewell speech, adding that at that point he proudly became “Harry Reid, the guy from Searchlight.”

Harry M Reid, a power in the Senate, dies at 82

Stymied by Republicans on voting rights legislation, Sen. Chuck Schumer on Monday gave the clearest sign yet that he would try to force a fundamental change in Senate rules if needed to enact federal laws to offset voting restrictions being imposed by Republican-led legislatures around the country.

In a letter to colleagues, Schumer, D-N.Y., the majority leader, said that the Senate would take up stalled voting rights legislation as early as the first week of January and that if Republicans continued to filibuster, the Senate would “consider changes to any rules which prevent us from debating and reaching final conclusion on important legislation.”

But it is not clear how far Democrats will be willing or able to go in working around the 60-vote requirement for most legislation and finding a way to pass voting rights legislation with a simple majority. While several formerly reluctant senators have in recent weeks endorsed rules change for voting issues, at least two Democratic senators — Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona — have resisted.

Alarmed by state laws being enacted in the aftermath of the 2020 election that seem aimed at making it more difficult for people, particularly minorities, to vote, Democrats have tried repeatedly this year to set federal standards for early and mail-in voting and curb partisan gerrymandering, among other provisions. But they have been consistently thwarted by a Republican blockade.

To this point, Democrats have not pressed the issue. But Schumer’s new stance shows that he is ready to take the next step and start a rules fight on the Senate floor though he has so far lacked the 50 Democratic votes needed to force through a change over Republican opposition.

Schumer’s move seems intended to change the dynamic of the debate and put new pressure on his colleagues to back a change. Schumer’s frustration boiled over in his letter, saying it was unfair to let states set new rules through partisan majority votes while Republicans were preventing the Senate from doing the same.

“I would ask you to consider this question,” he wrote. “If the right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy, then how can we in good conscience allow for a situation in which the Republican Party can debate and pass voter suppression laws at the state level with only a simple majority vote, but not allow the United States Senate to do the same?”

Schumer has in the past said mainly that “all options are on the table” when it comes to pressing voting rights legislation, refraining from a direct threat on Senate rules.

A group of more moderate Senate Democrats have been engaged in negotiations on rules changes with Manchin and Sinema and have reported some progress but no breakthrough. While Manchin on Sunday shattered Democratic plans to push forward on a sweeping social policy and climate change bill, he opened the door a crack to potential changes in Senate rules.

“If you can make the Senate work better, the rules are something we’ve changed over the years; 232 years, there’s been rule changes,” Manchin said Sunday on Fox News. But he also suggested that he might be interested in more modest changes than Schumer and others are contemplating, saying he would continue to support the 60-vote, supermajority threshold to overcome a filibuster.

Sinema has also drawn a line against partisan changes in the rules, but Democrats say they believe she would not want to be the lone holdout if Manchin were persuaded to relent on the legislative filibuster.

Democrats knowledgeable about the internal deliberations say that many possible changes are under consideration, including weakening the filibuster against the preliminary “motion to proceed” to bring legislation to the floor for consideration. But in a more significant move, Democrats say they are also discussing a change that would clear the way for final action on a bill through a simple majority vote after guaranteeing opponents the opportunity to alter the legislation through a significant number of amendments.

Instituting such a change would require the support of all 50 Democrats and the vote of Vice President Kamala Harris presiding to break a tie in the 50-50 Senate.

Democrats say such a filibuster “carve out” would apply only to issues grounded in constitutional rights such as voting, but Republicans and others say it would inevitably be extended to other legislation, diminishing the overall power of the filibuster.

The Democratic voting rights and rules change push would meet universal resistance from Republicans. Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., the minority leader, last week accused Democrats of “rattling swords about changing the structure of the Senate” and commended Manchin for opposing it.

“Changing the structure of the Senate in order to achieve a partisan advantage is a mistake for the Senate and a mistake for our country,” he said.

Once used rarely, the filibuster has become a routine aspect of the Senate in recent decades and virtually all legislation now has to clear a 60-vote hurdle just to be debated on the floor, severely limiting what business can be taken up.

Outraged over Republicans blocking President Barack Obama’s judicial nominees through regular filibusters, Democrats in 2013 took the procedural steps to allow most nominees to be confirmed with a simple majority vote. Republicans countered in 2017 by extending that rule to Supreme Court nominees, enabling President Donald Trump to install three high court justices.

In a statement in the letter directed at Manchin, Schumer noted that Sen. Robert C. Byrd, a Senate stalwart whose seat Manchin occupies, said in 1979 that sometimes Senate rules that seemed appropriate “must be changed to reflect changed circumstance.”

“I believe our constituents deserve to know which senators choose to hide behind ill-conceived and abused rules and which senators prefer to restore Senate floor procedures to better align with the founders’ intentions,” Schumer wrote.

Stymied by Republicans on voting rights legislation, Sen. Chuck Schumer on Monday gave the clearest sign yet that he would try to force a fundamental change in Senate rules if needed to enact federal laws to offset voting restrictions being imposed by Republican-led legislatures around the country.

Stymied by Republicans on voting rights legislation, Sen. Chuck Schumer on Monday gave the clearest sign yet that he would try to force a fundamental change in Senate rules if needed to enact federal laws to offset voting restrictions being imposed by Republican-led legislatures around the country. In a letter to colleagues, Schumer, D-N.Y., the majority leader, said that the Senate would take up stalled voting rights legislation as early as the first week of January and that if Republicans continued to filibuster, the Senate would “consider changes to any rules which prevent us from debating and reaching final conclusion on important legislation.” But it is not clear how far Democrats will be willing or able to go in working around the 60-vote requirement for most legislation and finding a way to pass voting rights legislation with a simple majority. While several formerly reluctant senators have in recent weeks endorsed rules change for voting issues, at least two Democratic senators — Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona — have resisted. Alarmed by state laws being enacted in the aftermath of the 2020 election that seem aimed at making it more difficult for people, particularly minorities, to vote, Democrats have tried repeatedly this year to set federal standards for early and mail-in voting and curb partisan gerrymandering, among other provisions. But they have been consistently thwarted by a Republican blockade. To this point, Democrats have not pressed the issue. But Schumer’s new stance shows that he is ready to take the next step and start a rules fight on the Senate floor though he has so far lacked the 50 Democratic votes needed to force through a change over Republican opposition. Schumer’s move seems intended to change the dynamic of the debate and put new pressure on his colleagues to back a change. Schumer’s frustration boiled over in his letter, saying it was unfair to let states set new rules through partisan majority votes while Republicans were preventing the Senate from doing the same. “I would ask you to consider this question,” he wrote. “If the right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy, then how can we in good conscience allow for a situation in which the Republican Party can debate and pass voter suppression laws at the state level with only a simple majority vote, but not allow the United States Senate to do the same?” Schumer has in the past said mainly that “all options are on the table” when it comes to pressing voting rights legislation, refraining from a direct threat on Senate rules. A group of more moderate Senate Democrats have been engaged in negotiations on rules changes with Manchin and Sinema and have reported some progress but no breakthrough. While Manchin on Sunday shattered Democratic plans to push forward on a sweeping social policy and climate change bill, he opened the door a crack to potential changes in Senate rules. “If you can make the Senate work better, the rules are something we’ve changed over the years; 232 years, there’s been rule changes,” Manchin said Sunday on Fox News. But he also suggested that he might be interested in more modest changes than Schumer and others are contemplating, saying he would continue to support the 60-vote, supermajority threshold to overcome a filibuster. Sinema has also drawn a line against partisan changes in the rules, but Democrats say they believe she would not want to be the lone holdout if Manchin were persuaded to relent on the legislative filibuster. Democrats knowledgeable about the internal deliberations say that many possible changes are under consideration, including weakening the filibuster against the preliminary “motion to proceed” to bring legislation to the floor for consideration. But in a more significant move, Democrats say they are also discussing a change that would clear the way for final action on a bill through a simple majority vote after guaranteeing opponents the opportunity to alter the legislation through a significant number of amendments. Instituting such a change would require the support of all 50 Democrats and the vote of Vice President Kamala Harris presiding to break a tie in the 50-50 Senate. Democrats say such a filibuster “carve out” would apply only to issues grounded in constitutional rights such as voting, but Republicans and others say it would inevitably be extended to other legislation, diminishing the overall power of the filibuster. The Democratic voting rights and rules change push would meet universal resistance from Republicans. Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., the minority leader, last week accused Democrats of “rattling swords about changing the structure of the Senate” and commended Manchin for opposing it. “Changing the structure of the Senate in order to achieve a partisan advantage is a mistake for the Senate and a mistake for our country,” he said. Once used rarely, the filibuster has become a routine aspect of the Senate in recent decades and virtually all legislation now has to clear a 60-vote hurdle just to be debated on the floor, severely limiting what business can be taken up. Outraged over Republicans blocking President Barack Obama’s judicial nominees through regular filibusters, Democrats in 2013 took the procedural steps to allow most nominees to be confirmed with a simple majority vote. Republicans countered in 2017 by extending that rule to Supreme Court nominees, enabling President Donald Trump to install three high court justices. In a statement in the letter directed at Manchin, Schumer noted that Sen. Robert C. Byrd, a Senate stalwart whose seat Manchin occupies, said in 1979 that sometimes Senate rules that seemed appropriate “must be changed to reflect changed circumstance.” “I believe our constituents deserve to know which senators choose to hide behind ill-conceived and abused rules and which senators prefer to restore Senate floor procedures to better align with the founders’ intentions,” Schumer wrote.

Schumer will try to change Senate rules if GOP stalls voting bill

A Democrat senator from New Jersey Robert Menendez stated that Pakistan offered a safe haven to the Taliban as its militants targeted and killed troops of the United States.

'Religious extremism rising in Pakistan,' US Senate committee hits out at Pak

A proposal in the US Senate that would have prevented $650 million in military sales to Saudi Arabia was defeated.

The motion was rejected in the Senate on Tuesday night by a vote of 30-67.

Saudi Arabia has received 280 medium-range air-to-air missiles from the United States, which will be used to protect against attacks such as Houthi explosive-equipped drones.&nbsp;

It was the latest squabble in Congress over weapons shipments to the country. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/saudi-arabia-targets-huthi-rebels-in-yemen-after-ballistic-missile-attack-434938">Also read | Saudi Arabia targets Huthi rebels in Yemen after ballistic missile attack</a>

Saudi Arabia has been a longtime ally of the United States, but resentment has grown over civilian casualties in the Saudi-led war in Yemen and the assassination of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi operatives.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Saudi Arabia will receive $650 million worth of weapons as part of the arms agreement. Almost 600 Raytheon missile launchers and nearly 300 air-to-air missiles, as well as spare parts and maintenance assistance, are included in the arms package.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Saudi Arabia will receive $650 million worth of weapons as part of the arms agreement. Almost 600 Raytheon missile launchers and nearly 300 air-to-air missiles, as well as spare parts and maintenance assistance, are included in the arms package. " target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">×</a></div>
</div>
</div>

Watch | Yemen: Saudi-led coalition launches airstrikes, Yemen locked in downward spiral

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/yemen-saudi-led-coalition-launches-airstrikes-yemen-locked-in-downward-spiral-431567/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Iran-backed Huthi rebels control much of northern Yemen, including the capital Sanaa, which they seized in 2014.

A year later, a Saudi-led coalition entered in Yemen to support the government in a conflict that has killed tens of thousands of people and displaced millions.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

A proposal in the US Senate that would have prevented $650 million in military sales to Saudi Arabia was defeated. The motion was rejected in the Senate on Tuesday night by a vote of 30-67.

A proposal in the US Senate that would have prevented $650 million in military sales to Saudi Arabia was defeated. The motion was rejected in the Senate on Tuesday night by a vote of 30-67. Saudi Arabia has received 280 medium-range air-to-air missiles from the United States, which will be used to protect against attacks such as Houthi explosive-equipped drones. It was the latest squabble in Congress over weapons shipments to the country. Also read | Saudi Arabia targets Huthi rebels in Yemen after ballistic missile attack Saudi Arabia has been a longtime ally of the United States, but resentment has grown over civilian casualties in the Saudi-led war in Yemen and the assassination of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi operatives. Saudi Arabia will receive $650 million worth of weapons as part of the arms agreement. Almost 600 Raytheon missile launchers and nearly 300 air-to-air missiles, as well as spare parts and maintenance assistance, are included in the arms package. × Watch | Yemen: Saudi-led coalition launches airstrikes, Yemen locked in downward spiral Iran-backed Huthi rebels control much of northern Yemen, including the capital Sanaa, which they seized in 2014. A year later, a Saudi-led coalition entered in Yemen to support the government in a conflict that has killed tens of thousands of people and displaced millions. (With inputs from agencies)

US Senate votes down resolution to block $650 million in missile sales to Saudi Arabia

In a historic vote, the US Senate has now approved legislation to temporarily raise the federal government's $28.4 trillion debt limit and avoid the risk of a historic default later this month. The development comes just 2 weeks before the 18th october deadline.

US Senate approves legislation to temporarily raise federal government's $28.4 trillion debt limit

Senate Democrats and Republicans neared agreement as they met into the early morning hours Thursday to temporarily pull the nation from the brink of a debt default. The deal would punt their showdown on raising the federal borrowing limit to December after Republicans bowed to pressure to stave off immediate fiscal calamity.

With the threat of a default as little as 12 days off, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, made a tactical retreat Wednesday and announced that Republicans would allow Democrats to vote on a short-term extension. He did not, however, lift his blockade of a longer-term increase in the debt cap, demanding anew that Democrats eventually use a complicated and time-consuming budget procedure known as reconciliation to lift it into next year or beyond.

Democrats declared the offer at least a temporary victory, even as they said they would never capitulate to McConnell’s longer-term demand. Senators met late into the night to try to iron out the details, though Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader, adjourned the Senate for the day shortly after midnight Thursday without a firm agreement.

“We’re making good progress — we’re not there yet, but I hope we can come to agreement tomorrow morning,” Schumer said.

Democrats said they would move forward with a vote as early as Thursday, then quickly pivot to negotiating a multitrillion-dollar measure to address climate change, expand the social safety net and raise taxes on the wealthy and corporations.

“Around here, two months is a lifetime,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., chair of the Budget Committee, who hailed McConnell’s offer as “very good news.”

“There would have been a global economic collapse if in fact the wealthiest nation on earth did not pay its debts,” Sanders said. “We’re going to pay our debts. We have two months to figure it out.”

For all the self-congratulations, the agreement, if nailed down, resolved little beyond the immediate timetable. It would set up yet another consequential deadline for December, when Congress is already facing a hard date by which it must fund the government. Democrats also hope to complete their push to enact President Joe Biden’s ambitious domestic agenda before then.

“We are willing to take this offer in order to stave off fiscal ruin,” said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn. “But we are all beside ourselves that the only thing Republicans are willing to do is prevent disaster for three months and put us right back in this position.”

They did so after weeks of intransigence on the debt ceiling and in the face of mounting pressure from the Biden administration, Wall Street and politically powerful interest groups. For a week, Biden has been emphasizing the stakes of failing to quickly raise the debt ceiling, and he has ratcheted up those efforts in recent days, in public remarks and during a meeting with finance executives at the White House on Wednesday.

Biden’s Council of Economic Advisers issued a report Wednesday morning laying out in detail the grim consequences of a default, and declaring, “If Congress fails to act, it could take decades for the United States to fully recover.”

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin also sounded the alarm with a statement warning that a debt ceiling breach would “seriously harm our service members and their families” by calling into question whether troops, Pentagon staff or defense contractors would be paid.

And in a letter to lawmakers circulated by the White House, AARP, a powerful lobbying group for seniors, cautioned that millions of older Americans could go without Social Security or Medicare benefits if the cap were not raised.

McConnell’s proposal offered a way to defuse criticism that his party was acting recklessly by blocking Democrats from even taking up a bill to raise the debt ceiling until December 2022. It also put off, for the time being, the prospect that Democrats might change the filibuster rules to allow themselves to go around Republicans and raise the debt ceiling unilaterally. It was that possibility, some GOP senators said Wednesday, that had motivated McConnell to seek a deal.

The offer also confronted Democrats with the prospect of a politically uncomfortable vote that some of them had wanted to avoid. McConnell demanded that they specify a dollar amount by which they would raise the debt cap, not simply suspend it until a certain date, potentially opening politically vulnerable Democrats to campaign ads attacking them for endorsing large amounts of spending.

“This will moot Democrats’ excuses about the time crunch they created and give the unified Democratic government more than enough time to pass stand-alone debt limit legislation through reconciliation,” McConnell said in a statement.

Even if the deal comes together, Democrats face three difficult choices for what to do in December when the new debt deadline cap would be reached. They could bow to McConnell’s demand and pass the long-term debt increase on their own through a time-consuming process that could bog them down and allow Republicans ample opportunities to tag them as big spenders.

Another option would be to move to change the Senate’s filibuster rules and allow a simple majority vote to raise the debt ceiling. Or, they could keep hoping that Republicans eventually fold under pressure, as they appeared to — at least temporarily — Wednesday.

McConnell’s offer was intended to counter Democrats’ argument that they did not have enough time to go through the multistep process of using budget rules to raise the debt limit. But his move may have been driven just as much by the threat of eliminating the filibuster.

Carving out an exception to the filibuster rules, which effectively require 60 votes to move forward with most legislation, has been done before to confirm judicial and executive branch nominees. But doing so unilaterally to raise the debt ceiling would be a step toward ending the practice for all policy matters and instituting straight majority rule.

The move has long been resisted by institutionalists and centrists in both parties — including two Democratic senators, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona — although some leading Democrats argue the debt ceiling crisis could change minds.

“Nothing changed,” Manchin told reporters Wednesday.

Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri, the No. 4 Republican, warned that if Democrats changed the filibuster rule, “they’ll permanently change the Senate, permanently change the relationships that still matter in the Senate, and institute the idea that 50 of you plus a vice president of your party can always do whatever you want to do.

“I don’t think that’s healthy for the country,” he added. “It certainly wouldn’t be healthy for the Senate.”

Praying for Republicans to fold was an even riskier play for Democrats, given the stakes. If, for the first time, the U.S. government could not meet its obligations to international lenders, its role as the world economy’s safe-harbor investment would be called into question. Interest rates would most likely rise sharply, and global financial institutions would begin searching for new vehicles to store money, where it would not be subject to the whims of partisan politics.

“We’re not asking them to blink; we’re asking them to be the slightest bit reasonable,” Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, said of Republican leaders. “The political gain of this strikes me as low. The loss to the country strikes me as extraordinarily high.”

Republican obstruction on the borrowing limit forced Democrats last week to strip a debt ceiling increase from a must-pass spending bill to avert a government shutdown. And McConnell refused to allow Democrats to unilaterally move to a vote.

“Democratic leaders haven’t wanted solutions,” McConnell said on the Senate floor Wednesday. “They’ve wanted to turn their failure into everybody else’s crisis, playing risky games with our economy, using manufactured drama to bully their own members, indulging petty politics instead of governing.”

Top Democrats have since dropped their insistence that Republicans join them in bipartisan support for raising the statutory cap on the government’s ability to borrow to meet its financial obligations. They, in turn, want McConnell to honor his demand that Democrats lift the ceiling alone — either by granting consent to move to a vote or by providing 10 Republican votes to break the filibuster.

“We’ve already presented Republicans numerous opportunities to do what they say they want, including by offering a simple majority vote so Democrats can suspend the debt ceiling on our own as Republicans have asked,” Schumer said Wednesday. “But each time, Republicans have chosen obstruction.”

While top Republicans have said most of their members would privately support allowing Democrats to move forward on their own, they have been unwilling to vote publicly that way, and any single senator can object and force a vote.

McConnell has asserted in recent days that even if he wanted to, he had no way of corralling every Republican to allow a debt ceiling increase to move forward. But his offer Wednesday indicated that he could prevail on all 50 Republicans to agree to allow such a vote — if it was only for a short period of time.

Yet the political risks of doing so were immediately evident. Former President Donald Trump slammed the Senate leader in a statement Wednesday, suggesting that Republicans should continue blocking any debt limit increase.

“Looks like Mitch McConnell is folding to the Democrats, again,” Trump wrote. “He’s got all the cards with the debt ceiling.”

Democrats have repeatedly noted they joined with Republicans to raise the debt cap during Trump’s presidency with little drama, and that most of the debt they are now seeking to repay was incurred by policies he signed into law.

And while they united in opposition to debt ceiling increases under President George W. Bush, Democrats allowed Republicans to do the increases on their own, without filibusters. Republicans say they are using the tactic now because Democrats are pushing forward with their efforts to unilaterally pass a multitrillion-dollar climate change and social safety net bill that would be paid for by tax increases aimed at the rich and businesses.

On Wednesday, McConnell suggested that Republicans might drop their debt limit obstruction if Democrats gave up on their top legislative priority.

“If Democrats abandon their efforts to ram through another historically reckless taxing and spending spree that will hurt families and help China,” McConnell wrote, “a more traditional bipartisan governing conversation could be possible.”

Senate Democrats and Republicans neared agreement as they met into the early morning hours Thursday to temporarily pull the nation from the brink of a debt default.

Senate Democrats and Republicans neared agreement as they met into the early morning hours Thursday to temporarily pull the nation from the brink of a debt default. The deal would punt their showdown on raising the federal borrowing limit to December after Republicans bowed to pressure to stave off immediate fiscal calamity. With the threat of a default as little as 12 days off, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, made a tactical retreat Wednesday and announced that Republicans would allow Democrats to vote on a short-term extension. He did not, however, lift his blockade of a longer-term increase in the debt cap, demanding anew that Democrats eventually use a complicated and time-consuming budget procedure known as reconciliation to lift it into next year or beyond. Democrats declared the offer at least a temporary victory, even as they said they would never capitulate to McConnell’s longer-term demand. Senators met late into the night to try to iron out the details, though Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader, adjourned the Senate for the day shortly after midnight Thursday without a firm agreement. “We’re making good progress — we’re not there yet, but I hope we can come to agreement tomorrow morning,” Schumer said. Democrats said they would move forward with a vote as early as Thursday, then quickly pivot to negotiating a multitrillion-dollar measure to address climate change, expand the social safety net and raise taxes on the wealthy and corporations. “Around here, two months is a lifetime,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., chair of the Budget Committee, who hailed McConnell’s offer as “very good news.” “There would have been a global economic collapse if in fact the wealthiest nation on earth did not pay its debts,” Sanders said. “We’re going to pay our debts. We have two months to figure it out.” For all the self-congratulations, the agreement, if nailed down, resolved little beyond the immediate timetable. It would set up yet another consequential deadline for December, when Congress is already facing a hard date by which it must fund the government. Democrats also hope to complete their push to enact President Joe Biden’s ambitious domestic agenda before then. “We are willing to take this offer in order to stave off fiscal ruin,” said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn. “But we are all beside ourselves that the only thing Republicans are willing to do is prevent disaster for three months and put us right back in this position.” They did so after weeks of intransigence on the debt ceiling and in the face of mounting pressure from the Biden administration, Wall Street and politically powerful interest groups. For a week, Biden has been emphasizing the stakes of failing to quickly raise the debt ceiling, and he has ratcheted up those efforts in recent days, in public remarks and during a meeting with finance executives at the White House on Wednesday. Biden’s Council of Economic Advisers issued a report Wednesday morning laying out in detail the grim consequences of a default, and declaring, “If Congress fails to act, it could take decades for the United States to fully recover.” Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin also sounded the alarm with a statement warning that a debt ceiling breach would “seriously harm our service members and their families” by calling into question whether troops, Pentagon staff or defense contractors would be paid. And in a letter to lawmakers circulated by the White House, AARP, a powerful lobbying group for seniors, cautioned that millions of older Americans could go without Social Security or Medicare benefits if the cap were not raised. McConnell’s proposal offered a way to defuse criticism that his party was acting recklessly by blocking Democrats from even taking up a bill to raise the debt ceiling until December 2022. It also put off, for the time being, the prospect that Democrats might change the filibuster rules to allow themselves to go around Republicans and raise the debt ceiling unilaterally. It was that possibility, some GOP senators said Wednesday, that had motivated McConnell to seek a deal. The offer also confronted Democrats with the prospect of a politically uncomfortable vote that some of them had wanted to avoid. McConnell demanded that they specify a dollar amount by which they would raise the debt cap, not simply suspend it until a certain date, potentially opening politically vulnerable Democrats to campaign ads attacking them for endorsing large amounts of spending. “This will moot Democrats’ excuses about the time crunch they created and give the unified Democratic government more than enough time to pass stand-alone debt limit legislation through reconciliation,” McConnell said in a statement. Even if the deal comes together, Democrats face three difficult choices for what to do in December when the new debt deadline cap would be reached. They could bow to McConnell’s demand and pass the long-term debt increase on their own through a time-consuming process that could bog them down and allow Republicans ample opportunities to tag them as big spenders. Another option would be to move to change the Senate’s filibuster rules and allow a simple majority vote to raise the debt ceiling. Or, they could keep hoping that Republicans eventually fold under pressure, as they appeared to — at least temporarily — Wednesday. McConnell’s offer was intended to counter Democrats’ argument that they did not have enough time to go through the multistep process of using budget rules to raise the debt limit. But his move may have been driven just as much by the threat of eliminating the filibuster. Carving out an exception to the filibuster rules, which effectively require 60 votes to move forward with most legislation, has been done before to confirm judicial and executive branch nominees. But doing so unilaterally to raise the debt ceiling would be a step toward ending the practice for all policy matters and instituting straight majority rule. The move has long been resisted by institutionalists and centrists in both parties — including two Democratic senators, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona — although some leading Democrats argue the debt ceiling crisis could change minds. “Nothing changed,” Manchin told reporters Wednesday. Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri, the No. 4 Republican, warned that if Democrats changed the filibuster rule, “they’ll permanently change the Senate, permanently change the relationships that still matter in the Senate, and institute the idea that 50 of you plus a vice president of your party can always do whatever you want to do. “I don’t think that’s healthy for the country,” he added. “It certainly wouldn’t be healthy for the Senate.” Praying for Republicans to fold was an even riskier play for Democrats, given the stakes. If, for the first time, the U.S. government could not meet its obligations to international lenders, its role as the world economy’s safe-harbor investment would be called into question. Interest rates would most likely rise sharply, and global financial institutions would begin searching for new vehicles to store money, where it would not be subject to the whims of partisan politics. “We’re not asking them to blink; we’re asking them to be the slightest bit reasonable,” Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, said of Republican leaders. “The political gain of this strikes me as low. The loss to the country strikes me as extraordinarily high.” Republican obstruction on the borrowing limit forced Democrats last week to strip a debt ceiling increase from a must-pass spending bill to avert a government shutdown. And McConnell refused to allow Democrats to unilaterally move to a vote. “Democratic leaders haven’t wanted solutions,” McConnell said on the Senate floor Wednesday. “They’ve wanted to turn their failure into everybody else’s crisis, playing risky games with our economy, using manufactured drama to bully their own members, indulging petty politics instead of governing.” Top Democrats have since dropped their insistence that Republicans join them in bipartisan support for raising the statutory cap on the government’s ability to borrow to meet its financial obligations. They, in turn, want McConnell to honor his demand that Democrats lift the ceiling alone — either by granting consent to move to a vote or by providing 10 Republican votes to break the filibuster. “We’ve already presented Republicans numerous opportunities to do what they say they want, including by offering a simple majority vote so Democrats can suspend the debt ceiling on our own as Republicans have asked,” Schumer said Wednesday. “But each time, Republicans have chosen obstruction.” While top Republicans have said most of their members would privately support allowing Democrats to move forward on their own, they have been unwilling to vote publicly that way, and any single senator can object and force a vote. McConnell has asserted in recent days that even if he wanted to, he had no way of corralling every Republican to allow a debt ceiling increase to move forward. But his offer Wednesday indicated that he could prevail on all 50 Republicans to agree to allow such a vote — if it was only for a short period of time. Yet the political risks of doing so were immediately evident. Former President Donald Trump slammed the Senate leader in a statement Wednesday, suggesting that Republicans should continue blocking any debt limit increase. “Looks like Mitch McConnell is folding to the Democrats, again,” Trump wrote. “He’s got all the cards with the debt ceiling.” Democrats have repeatedly noted they joined with Republicans to raise the debt cap during Trump’s presidency with little drama, and that most of the debt they are now seeking to repay was incurred by policies he signed into law. And while they united in opposition to debt ceiling increases under President George W. Bush, Democrats allowed Republicans to do the increases on their own, without filibusters. Republicans say they are using the tactic now because Democrats are pushing forward with their efforts to unilaterally pass a multitrillion-dollar climate change and social safety net bill that would be paid for by tax increases aimed at the rich and businesses. On Wednesday, McConnell suggested that Republicans might drop their debt limit obstruction if Democrats gave up on their top legislative priority. “If Democrats abandon their efforts to ram through another historically reckless taxing and spending spree that will hurt families and help China,” McConnell wrote, “a more traditional bipartisan governing conversation could be possible.”

Senate nears agreement to stave off debt crisis until December

Microsoft co-founder&nbsp;Bill&nbsp;Gates&nbsp;on Thursday said his climate fund would pour $1.5 billion into projects with the United States if the government enacts a program to cut carbon emissions currently working its way through Congress.

A $1.2 trillion infrastructure package passed by the US Senate this week would funnel billions of dollars to the Department of Energy for projects battling climate change.

If the infrastructure package&nbsp;becomes law, "this collaboration will not only send us on a more durable path to net zero, but will create both immediate and long-term jobs in communities across the country,"&nbsp;Gates&nbsp;said in a statement published by CNBC.

By funding work on roads, bridges and ports, as well as clean water and high-speed internet, US President Joe Biden said the&nbsp;bill, which still needs House approval,&nbsp;would create thousands of high-paying jobs for people without college degrees.

"This historic investment in infrastructure is what I believe you, the American people, want," Biden said in a White House address.&nbsp;

Needing just a simple majority, the package passed by 69 votes to 30 with backing from a third of Republican Senators.

The measure now faces a make-or-break vote in the House of Representatives in coming weeks, where its future is less certain as divisions have sprung up in the Democratic majority.

The ambitious plan provides for $550 billion in new federal spending on transport infrastructure, and also for public transit, broadband internet and clean water, as well as electric charging stations and other measures to fight climate change.

A&nbsp;Gates&nbsp;fund run by his Breakthrough Energy company would spend the $1.5 billion over the course of three years with the goal of eliminating greenhouse gas emissions contributing to climate change, according to US media reports.

Projects could include airplanes that don't spew pollution and technology for capturing carbon from the air.

"Critical for all these climate technologies is to get the costs down and to be able to scale them up to a pretty gigantic level,"&nbsp;Gates&nbsp;was quoted as telling the Wall Street Journal.

"You'll never get that scale up unless the government's coming in with the right policies, and the right policy is exactly what's in that infrastructure&nbsp;bill."

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates on Thursday said his climate fund would pour $1.5 billion into projects with the United States if the government enacts a program to cut carbon emissions currently working its way through Congress.

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates on Thursday said his climate fund would pour $1.5 billion into projects with the United States if the government enacts a program to cut carbon emissions currently working its way through Congress. A $1.2 trillion infrastructure package passed by the US Senate this week would funnel billions of dollars to the Department of Energy for projects battling climate change. If the infrastructure package becomes law, "this collaboration will not only send us on a more durable path to net zero, but will create both immediate and long-term jobs in communities across the country," Gates said in a statement published by CNBC. By funding work on roads, bridges and ports, as well as clean water and high-speed internet, US President Joe Biden said the bill, which still needs House approval, would create thousands of high-paying jobs for people without college degrees. "This historic investment in infrastructure is what I believe you, the American people, want," Biden said in a White House address. Needing just a simple majority, the package passed by 69 votes to 30 with backing from a third of Republican Senators. The measure now faces a make-or-break vote in the House of Representatives in coming weeks, where its future is less certain as divisions have sprung up in the Democratic majority. The ambitious plan provides for $550 billion in new federal spending on transport infrastructure, and also for public transit, broadband internet and clean water, as well as electric charging stations and other measures to fight climate change. A Gates fund run by his Breakthrough Energy company would spend the $1.5 billion over the course of three years with the goal of eliminating greenhouse gas emissions contributing to climate change, according to US media reports. Projects could include airplanes that don't spew pollution and technology for capturing carbon from the air. "Critical for all these climate technologies is to get the costs down and to be able to scale them up to a pretty gigantic level," Gates was quoted as telling the Wall Street Journal. "You'll never get that scale up unless the government's coming in with the right policies, and the right policy is exactly what's in that infrastructure bill."

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates offers $1.5 billion in climate help if US takes legislative action

us-senate

Us Senate, News on Us Senate, stories on Us Senate, articles on Us Senate, Us Senate stories at Wion, Us Senate news, Us Senate latest news

us senate

After Taylor Swift chaos, US Senate panel to hold hearing on ticket industry issues

Garcetti renominated by Biden. Will India finally receive its US envoy after two years?

US Senate passes $1.7 trillion spending bill to avert partial government shutdown

US Senate to narrow sentencing disparities between crack and powder cocaine

'Love is love': US Senate's landmark vote to protect same-sex marriage

US Senate passes landmark vote to protect same-sex marriage

EXPLAINED: How same-sex marriage in US gets protection through Respect for Marriage Act?

Ticketmaster's Taylor Swift concert ticket chaos forces the US Senate to take note

After America’s cliffhanger midterm elections, what next?

Federal protection for same-sex marriages: US Senate advances crucial legislation

Democrats retain control of US Senate with Cortez Masto's win in Nevada

US Senate passed $740 billion 'Inflation Reduction Act' package

WION Climate Tracker | US Senate passes major climate bill; President Biden calls it 'historic'

WION Climate Tracker | US Senate passes major climate bill; President Biden calls it 'historic'

Morning brief: US Senate passes Biden's mega bill, Colombia gets first leftist president and more

US Senate passes bill to boost chip output; Legislation aimed to help the US compete with China

User data not shared with Chinese Communist Party: TikTok tells US lawmakers

US Senate passes first major gun safety legislation

US Senate advances bipartisan bill on gun safety

GOP Senate candidate’s ‘RINO hunting’ video removed by Facebook

US: Senate fails to codify right to abortion, yet again

Harry M Reid, a power in the Senate, dies at 82

Schumer will try to change Senate rules if GOP stalls voting bill

'Religious extremism rising in Pakistan,' US Senate committee hits out at Pak