Some major Silicon Valley donors are mobilizing behind a plan to recall California Gov. Gavin Newsom, using their money to turn what was a quixotic attempt into a looming political threat to Newsom’s career.

In recent weeks, leading tech figures have started flexing their political muscle by funding Rescue California, a group financing the effort to collect enough signatures to force a recall vote later this year. The stature of Newsom, once a mayor of San Francisco and a favorite of the tech industry, has fallen in the eyes of some as California’s vaccine rollout has lagged the rest of the nation. And the recall appears increasingly likely to at least qualify for the ballot, though Newsom’s opponents aren’t yet known.

To be sure, Newsom remains liked by many tech industry leaders. But now, some people from that same industry are proving to be a political thorn — with some supporters even turning on him.

Some of the money is coming from conservative tech leaders: Famed tech investor Doug Leone, one of the few major Silicon Valley supporters of Trump during his presidency, and his wife donated about $100,000 to the recall effort late last month, according to state records. Another $100,000 came from venture capitalist Dixon Doll, a longtime GOP donor, and his wife.

Other money has come from Newsom’s earlier supporters: David Sacks, a prominent tech executive, donated about $60,000 when Newsom first ran for governor a few years ago. Now he’s supporting a recall, and his wife, Jacqueline, contributed $25,000 to the recall effort last week. Chamath Palihapitiya, a former Facebook executive and a major Democratic donor, has said publicly that he is a supporter of the effort, although the billionaire has yet to make a donation to it.

The other tech leaders, though, rank among the biggest overall donors to the recall effort, which has raised about $1.5 million to date. That could all presage real money in a recall campaign that would likely cost more than $100 million in total.

“Certainly they wouldn’t be upset to have some buy-in from Silicon Valley, but I don’t know if I’d say that their involvement would be ‘crucial’ during this initial qualifying stage,” said Rob Pyers, research director for California Target Book, which analyzes money in California politics. “Once it’s at that point, then just by virtue of their deep pockets, Silicon Valley becomes an important player.”

The moves come as some leading tech industry figures — especially those with a conservative bent — are rebelling against a tax system, Covid-related policies, and a broader culture that they see as repressive. Elon Musk, the billionaire founder of Tesla, has been sharply critical of California’s policies on the coronavirus and how the state treats the tech industry, so much so that he moved last year to Texas. Some other tech leaders have flocked to Miami, where leaders have tried to capitalize on the disgust and recreate Silicon Valley’s magic.

Anne Dunsmore, a Republican fundraiser who is leading the recall effort, said that is precisely the type of Silicon Valley donor she is pursuing to finance her effort.

“It’s a cautious industry. And historically, it’s been very Democratic,” she said. “Now, when you start talking about lost business in the state of California and facing the idea that you might have to move out and move your entire business, people start taking a different view of where they stand.”

Dunsmore said the fundraising effort in Silicon Valley consisted largely of “major donors reaching out to other major donors.”

A Newsom recall effort seemed like a fool’s errand until recently. California has been one of the most aggressive states in seeking to limit the spread of the coronavirus, implementing one of the country’s first stay-at-home orders. Some business leaders bristled at that crackdown, but experts say it contributed to California’s relative success at mitigating the pandemic.

The logic of that trade-off, though, has been tested in recent months by the rampant spread of the disease in the state, especially in the Los Angeles area. California has also had one of the country’s worst records when it comes to distributing the vaccine at a time when experts say too many states are moving too slowly. Newsom’s credibility was also damaged by a visit to an exclusive Napa Valley restaurant in November that undercut his own rhetoric about staying at home.

“We have now created an inhospitable culture for innovation,” Palihapitiya said on his podcast last week. “I think he should get recalled. He’s trash.”

The real test will be whether these leaders dig deep rather than merely use their platforms to speak out. Palihapitiya, the former Facebook executive, has tweeted a link to the Rescue California committee but didn’t return requests for comment about whether he planned to pledge money to the effort. Dunsmore said she hadn’t heard from Palihapitiya — or even of him, despite him being a major Democratic donor, which speaks to the recall’s uphill climb. Palihapitiya contributed more than $1 million to back Democrats during the 2020 campaign.

Newsom rose to prominence alongside many of today’s tech leaders, and his political base remains San Francisco. Major donors to his last campaign included former Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer, billionaire philanthropist Laurene Powell Jobs, and even Trump ally and venture capitalist Peter Thiel.

Josh Felser, a tech investor who has been close to Newsom since he met the then-lieutenant governor in a gym and became a workout partner, argued that Newsom is quite simpatico with the tech industry, pointing to his record on issues like gay marriage, gun control, and climate change.

“He stands up for the things he believes in, even when it’s unpopular. In tech, we all think of ourselves as pioneers. And I think that’s what the governor has been,” said Felser, who is part of a pandemic advisory group to Newsom composed of business leaders. “There’s a strong libertarian vein in tech. That group — which is a minority of tech folks — they’re wealthy and activists. And then there’s the majority of the folks in tech — and they’re not funding this recall and they’re looking for ways to help.”

Some tech leaders — even those who are critical of Newsom — told Recode that they have concerns that the replacement for Newsom could be worse. Dunsmore said that comes up often in her conversation with possible Democratic supporters.

If organizers collect the required 1.5 million signatures by the mid-March deadline, which observers say is likely, the recall would be triggered, with the vote happening sometime late in 2021 or early in 2022. A number of prominent California Republicans, including former San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer, have expressed interest in challenging Newsom.

While that might ordinarily sound like a long shot in the heavily Democratic state, there is a precedent: the 2003 recall of Democratic Gov. Gray Davis and the subsequent election of Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Source Article from https://www.vox.com/recode/22245414/gavin-newsom-recall-silicon-valley-money

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday put an end to two lawsuits that had accused President Donald J. Trump of violating the Constitution’s emoluments clauses by profiting from his hotels and restaurants in New York and Washington.

In brief orders, the court wiped out rulings against Mr. Trump in the two cases and dismissed them as moot. There were no dissents noted.

The move means that there will be no definitive Supreme Court ruling on the meaning of the two provisions of the Constitution concerning emoluments, a term that means compensation for labor or services. One provision, the domestic emoluments clause, bars the president from receiving “any other emolument” from the federal government or the states beyond his official compensation.

The other provision, the foreign emoluments clause, bars anyone holding a federal “office of profit or trust” from accepting “any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state” without the consent of Congress.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/25/us/emoluments-trump-supreme-court.html

President Biden signs an executive order Monday reversing a Trump-era ban on transgender people serving in the military.

Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images

President Biden signs an executive order Monday reversing a Trump-era ban on transgender people serving in the military.

Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images

Updated at 12:31 p.m. ET

President Biden has repealed a controversial Trump-era ban on transgender people serving in the U.S. military.

Biden signed an executive order on the issue Monday morning, ahead of an Oval Office meeting with new Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley and Vice President Harris.

Speaking briefly to reporters in the Oval Office, Biden said the order will allow all “qualified Americans to serve their country in uniform.”

Biden had campaigned on overturning former President Donald Trump’s ban. At his recent Senate confirmation hearing, Austin told lawmakers he supported the move.

“If you’re fit and you’re qualified to serve, and you can maintain the standards, you should be allowed to serve,” Austin said.

Trump initially ordered a ban on transgender troops in a series of tweets in July 2017.

“After consultation with my generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States government will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. military,” Trump wrote on the online platform he has since been banned from.

Despite that claim, the announcement caught then-Defense Secretary James Mattis and the rest of Pentagon leadership by surprise.

A month later, Trump made the order official in a presidential memo, though the ban was then blocked by federal courts before the U.S. Supreme Court finally allowed it to go forward in early 2019.

The executive order Biden signed Monday will take several steps:

  • It will fully repeal the two different orders Trump signed barring transgender individuals from military service;
  • it will immediately bar servicemembers from being discharged or denied reenlistment for their gender identity;
  • and it will order both the secretary of defense and the secretary of homeland security to begin the process of allowing transgender servicemembers to serve openly.

Biden is also asking for a progress report from both departments within 60 days.

The civil rights organization the Human Rights Campaign applauded Biden’s move.

“For years, transgender patriots were forced to continue to hide their identity while serving in our military. But today … they may live and serve openly as themselves,” the group’s president, Alphonso David, said in a statement. “The greatest military in the world will again value readiness over bias, and qualifications over discrimination.”

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/sections/president-biden-takes-office/2021/01/25/960338217/biden-repeals-trump-era-ban-on-transgender-soldiers

One of the suits, brought by the group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, along with New York area restaurant owners and workers, was filed days after Trump took office in 2017. The other was filed in June of that year by the attorneys general of the District of Columbia and Maryland.

After more than three years in the courts, neither case had reached a fact-finding stage.

Formally, the justices’ decision Monday declared the two suits moot — apparently due to Trump leaving office last week. The high court also wiped out rulings that federal appeals courts in New York and Virginia had issued saying the suits could proceed to discovery.

The Supreme Court did not offer a detailed explanation of its rationale. No justice recorded any dissent. The action was announced as part of a routine orders list the court issued Monday morning.

Last October, the justices turned down review of another suit focused on Trump’s alleged profits from his presidency. That suit, brought by Democratic Senators and House members, was turned aside by a federal appeals court on standing grounds.

One strand of the D.C. and Maryland suit remains pending before the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., but the attorneys general filed a motion on Friday seeking to dismiss that appeal because Trump is no longer in office.

Source Article from https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/25/supreme-court-trump-emolument-cases-462134

Moderna said Monday it’s accelerating work on a Covid-19 booster shot to guard against the recently discovered variant in South Africa.

The company’s researchers said its current coronavirus vaccine appears to work against the two highly transmissible strains found in the U.K. and South Africa, although it looks like it may be less effective against the latter.

The two-dose vaccine produced an antibody response against multiple variants, including B.1.1.7 and B.1.351, which were first identified in the U.K. and South Africa, respectively, according to a Moderna study conducted in collaboration with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. The study has not yet been peer reviewed.

The vaccine generated a weaker immune response against the South African strain, but the antibodies remained above levels that are expected to be protective against the virus, the company said, adding the findings may suggest “a potential risk of earlier waning of immunity to the new B.1.351 strains.”

“Out of an abundance of caution and leveraging the flexibility of our mRNA platform, we are advancing an emerging variant booster candidate against the variant first identified in the Republic of South Africa into the clinic to determine if it will be more effective to boost titers against this and potentially future variants,” Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel said in a statement.

Shares of Moderna were up more than 10% in morning trading after the announcement.

Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, said he’s glad Moderna is preparing for the possibility that the virus could mutate enough to evade the protection of the current vaccines. He added the ultimate goal of the vaccine is to prevent severe infections and keep people out of the hospital.

“This is not a problem yet,” said Offit, also a member of the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee. “Prepare for it. Sequence these viruses. Get ready just in case a variant emerges, which is resistant” to the vaccine.

On Thursday, White House health advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci said new data showed that the Covid-19 vaccines currently on the market may not be as effective in guarding against new, more contagious strains of the coronavirus. Some early findings that were published in the preprint server bioRxiv indicate that the South Africa variant can evade the antibodies provided by some coronavirus treatments.

The news also comes after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said earlier this month that the U.K. variant could become the dominant strain in the U.S. by March. “It is highly likely there are many variants evolving simultaneously across the globe,” Jason McDonald, a spokesman for the CDC, said in an email to CNBC at the time.

The Food and Drug Administration authorized Moderna’s vaccine for people who are 18 years old and older in December.

Moderna’s vaccine, like Pfizer’s, uses messenger RNA, or mRNA, technology. It’s a new approach to vaccines that uses genetic material to provoke an immune response. Late-stage clinical trial data published in November shows Moderna’s vaccine is more than 94% effective in preventing Covid, is safe and appears to fend off severe disease. To achieve maximum effectiveness, the vaccine requires two doses taken four weeks apart.

Bancel told CNBC that Moderna’s vaccine will be protective against the South African strain in the short term, but the company doesn’t know how long that protection may last.

“What is unknowable right now is what will happen in six months, 12 months, especially to the elderly because, as you know, they have a weaker immune system,” he said during an interview with “Squawk Box.” “Because of that unknown … we decided to take into the clinic, out of an abundance of caution, a new vaccine.”

“We cannot be behind. We cannot fall behind this virus,” he said, adding the coronavirus will “keep mutating.”

– CNBC’s Noah Higgins-Dunn contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/25/covid-vaccine-moderna-working-on-covid-booster-shots-for-south-african-strain.html

Amid signs of improving COVID-19 conditions in California, Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) lifted statewide stay-at-home orders Monday, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) said. 

 

The move allows restaurants to open for outdoor dining options and salons to resume indoor appointments. Outdoor church services are also permitted. Reopening options apply to regions including the San Francisco Bay Area, Central Valley and Southern California and marks the first reopening opportunity since December.

The state will now revert to a county tier system, which eases lockdowns depending on case rates and gives local officials the option to set their own restrictions, KCRA reports. 

“Californians heard the urgent message to stay home as much as possible and accepted that challenge to slow the surge and save lives,” Tomás Aragón, CDPH director and state public health officer, said in a statement obtained by KCRA. “Together, we changed our activities knowing our short-term sacrifices would lead to longer-term gains. COVID-19 is still here and still deadly, so our work is not over, but it’s important to recognize our collective actions saved lives and we are turning a critical corner.”

Prior to Newsom’s decision, some California restaurateurs criticized the measures and took legal action against the dining restrictions. In August 2020, the advocacy organization California Restaurant Association (CFA) released a grim statistic: 30 percent of California restaurants will permanently shut their doors. 

The CFA largely blames Newsom’s lack of aid for the economic crunch.

“Restaurants cannot sustain themselves or their employees when they operate with strict capacity limits, which means the state should long ago have crafted a comprehensive aid package to help these small businesses hibernate,” CFA CEO Jot Condie said. “This is what we had repeatedly urged the Newsom administration to do – make state help available to restaurants so that, once the pandemic is behind us, the families who own these businesses could go back, open the doors and turn the lights on again. Instead, they are closing for good, by the thousands.”

Although state mandates surrounding business operations are relaxing, county officials could still impose stricter limits on business activity in a bid to prevent further COVID-19 transmission.

State data confirms that as of Jan. 24, California has more than 3.1 million confirmed COVID-19 infections. After months of rising and peaking case numbers, accompanied by similarly troubling increases in hospitalizations and deaths related to the virus, 14-day averages suggest relief for the beleaguered state.

Looking at state data, good news is tempered with unchanging scenarios. The number of patients requiring hospitalization and intensive care units is slowly falling, which indicates fewer instances of severe COVID-19 cases. Simultaneously, the vast majority of California counties still have “widespread” COVID-19 transmission, indicating the pandemic is far from contained. 

There was a petition to recall Newsom based on his statewide restrictions. The movement has since been linked to extremist groups that promote distrust in science and medicine as well as conspiracy theories, The Los Angeles Times reports. Many supporters of the recall are not from extremist groups, The Times adds. 

The petition has garnered at least 1.2 million signatures. For the campaign to remove Newsom to be successful, the petition would need at least 1.5 million verified signatures by March 17.

Source Article from https://thehill.com/changing-america/resilience/smart-cities/535659-in-huge-step-california-governor-will-lift-stay-at

As recently as last week, Mr. Giuliani was on his New York City-based radio show saying that “so long as you have Dominion, there is clear and present danger” that election results could be rigged. He added that he had “boxes of evidence to support his claims.”

Dominion has indicated that it plans to file more lawsuits. The suit against Mr. Giuliani says he acted with other prominent conservatives and news networks, including Mike Lindell, Lou Dobbs, Fox News, Fox Business, Newsmax and One America News Network.

Mr. Clare, Dominion’s lawyer, left open the possibility of litigation against Mr. Trump.

“We’re not ruling anybody out,” he said. “Obviously, this lawsuit against the president’s lawyer moves one step closer to the former president and understanding what his role was and wasn’t.”

The threats from Dominion have prompted some conciliatory responses from conservative news outlets hoping to avoid a legal battle. This month, the American Thinker, a conservative website, posted an apologetic note saying that its reports about Dominion “are completely false and have no basis in fact” and that “it was wrong for us to publish these false statements.”

Mr. Giuliani was one of the main public faces of the effort to reverse the election results, with Mr. Trump rarely appearing in public and preferring to send out broadsides on Twitter against the democratic process.

Dominion argues that Mr. Giuliani profited significantly from his false claims, noting that he “reportedly demanded $20,000 per day” for his legal services to Mr. Trump and “cashed in by hosting a podcast where he exploited election falsehoods to market gold coins, supplements, cigars and protection from ‘cyberthieves.’”

The lawsuit notes just how quickly and widely the lies and false narratives had spread leading up to the riot at the Capitol. “Over a three-hour period on December 21, 2020, the terms ‘dominion’ and ‘fraud’ were tweeted out together by more than 2,200 users with over 8.75 million total followers,” the suit says.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/25/us/politics/rudy-giuliani-dominion-trump.html

WASHINGTON (AP) — As the House prepares to bring the impeachment charge against Donald Trump to the Senate for trial, a growing number of Republican senators say they are opposed to the proceeding, dimming the chances that former president will be convicted on the charge that he incited a siege of the U.S. Capitol.

House Democrats will carry the sole impeachment charge of “incitement of insurrection” across the Capitol late Monday evening, a rare and ceremonial walk to the Senate by the prosecutors who will argue their case. They are hoping that strong Republican denunciations of Trump after the Jan. 6 riot will translate into a conviction and a separate vote to bar Trump from holding office again.

But instead, GOP passions appear to have cooled since the insurrection. Now that Trump’s presidency is over, Republican senators who will serve as jurors in the trial are rallying to his legal defense, as they did during his first impeachment trial last year.

“I think the trial is stupid, I think it’s counterproductive,” said Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla.. He said that “the first chance I get to vote to end this trial, I’ll do it” because he believes it would be bad for the country and further inflame partisan divisions.

Trump is the first former president to face impeachment trial, and it will test his grip on the Republican Party as well as the legacy of his tenure, which came to a close as a mob of loyal supporters heeded his rally cry by storming the Capitol and trying to overturn Joe Biden’s election. The proceedings will also force Democrats, who have a full sweep of party control of the White House and Congress, to balance their promise to hold the former president accountable while also rushing to deliver on Biden’s priorities.

Arguments in the Senate trial will begin the week of Feb. 8. Leaders in both parties agreed to the short delay to give Trump’s team and House prosecutors time to prepare and the Senate the chance to confirm some of Biden’s Cabinet nominees. Democrats say the extra days will allow for more evidence to come out about the rioting by Trump supporters, while Republicans hope to craft a unified defense for Trump.

Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., said in an interview with The Associated Press on Sunday that he hopes that evolving clarity on the details of what happened Jan. 6 “will make it clearer to my colleagues and the American people that we need some accountability.”

Coons questioned how his colleagues who were in the Capitol that day could see the insurrection as anything other than a “stunning violation” of tradition of peaceful transfers of power.

“It is a critical moment in American history and we have to look at it and look at it hard,” Coons said.

An early vote to dismiss the trial probably would not succeed, given that Democrats now control the Senate. Still, the mounting Republican opposition indicates that many GOP senators would eventually vote to acquit Trump. Democrats would need the support of 17 Republicans — a high bar — to convict him.

When the House impeached Trump on Jan. 13, exactly one week after the siege, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said he didn’t believe the Senate had the constitutional authority to convict Trump after he had left office. On Sunday, Cotton said “the more I talk to other Republican senators, the more they’re beginning to line up” behind that argument.

“I think a lot of Americans are going to think it’s strange that the Senate is spending its time trying to convict and remove from office a man who left office a week ago,” Cotton said.

Democrats reject that argument, pointing to a 1876 impeachment of a secretary of war who had already resigned and to opinions by many legal scholars. Democrats also say that a reckoning of the first invasion of the Capitol since the War of 1812, perpetrated by rioters egged on by a president who told them to “fight like hell” against election results that were being counted at the time, is necessary so the country can move forward and ensure such a siege never happens again.

A few GOP senators have agreed with Democrats, though not close to the number that will be needed to convict Trump.

Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, said he believes there is a “preponderance of opinion” that an impeachment trial is appropriate after someone leaves office.

“I believe that what is being alleged and what we saw, which is incitement to insurrection, is an impeachable offense,” Romney said. “If not, what is?”

But Romney, the lone Republican to vote to convict Trump when the Senate acquitted the then-president in last year’s trial, appears to be an outlier.

Sen. Mike Rounds, R-South Dakota, said he believes a trial is a “moot point” after a president’s term is over, “and I think it’s one that they would have a very difficult time in trying to get done within the Senate.”

On Friday, GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a close Trump ally who has been helping him build a legal team, urged the Senate to reject the idea of a post-presidency trial — potentially with a vote to dismiss the charge — and suggested Republicans will scrutinize whether Trump’s words on Jan. 6 were legally “incitement.”

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who said last week that Trump “provoked” his supporters before the riot, has not said how he will vote or argued any legal strategies. The Kentucky senator has told his GOP colleagues that it will be a vote of conscience.

One of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s nine impeachment managers said Trump’s encouragement of his loyalists before the riot was “an extraordinarily heinous presidential crime.”

Rep. Madeleine Dean, D-Pennsylvania., said “I mean, think back. It was just two-and-a-half weeks ago that the president assembled a mob on the Ellipse of the White House. He incited them with his words. And then he lit the match.”

Trump’s supporters invaded the Capitol and interrupted the electoral count as he falsely claimed there was massive fraud in the election and that it was stolen by Biden. Trump’s claims were roundly rejected in the courts, including by judges appointed by Trump, and by state election officials.

Rubio and Romney were on “Fox News Sunday,” Cotton appeared on Fox News Channel’s “Sunday Morning Futures” and Romney also was on CNN’s “State of the Union,” as was Dean. Rounds was interviewed on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

___

Associated Press writer Hope Yen contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://apnews.com/article/capitol-siege-donald-trump-trials-impeachments-trump-impeachment-f4b8bf18ce0e23b877ba945545c3e257

Moderna said Monday it’s accelerating work on a Covid-19 booster shot to guard against the recently discovered variant in South Africa.

Its researchers said its current coronavirus vaccine appears to work against the two highly transmissible strains found in the U.K. and South Africa, although it looks like it may be less effective against the latter.

The two-dose vaccine produced an antibody response against multiple variants, including B.1.1.7 and B.1.351, which were first identified in the U.K. and South Africa, respectively, according to a Moderna study conducted in collaboration with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. The study has not yet been peer reviewed.

The vaccine generated a weaker immune response against the South African strain, but the antibodies remained above levels that are expected to be protective against the virus, the company said, adding the findings may suggest “a potential risk of earlier waning of immunity to the new B.1.351 strains.”

“Out of an abundance of caution and leveraging the flexibility of our mRNA platform, we are advancing an emerging variant booster candidate against the variant first identified in the Republic of South Africa into the clinic to determine if it will be more effective to boost titers against this and potentially future variants,” Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel said in a statement.

Shares of Moderna were up nearly 4% in premarket trading after the announcement.

Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, said he’s glad Moderna is preparing for the possibility that the virus could mutate enough to evade the protection of the current vaccines. He added the ultimate goal of the vaccine is to prevent severe infections and keep people out of the hospital.

“This is not a problem yet,” said Offit, also a member of the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee. “Prepare for it. Sequence these viruses. Get ready just in case a variant emerges, which is resistance” to the vaccine.

On Thursday, White House health advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci said new data showed that the Covid-19 vaccines currently on the market may not be as effective in guarding against new, more contagious strains of the coronavirus. Some early findings that were published in the preprint server bioRxiv indicate that the South Africa variant can evade the antibodies provided by some coronavirus treatments.

The news also comes after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said earlier this month that the U.K. strain could become the dominant strain in the U.S. by March. “It is highly likely there are many variants evolving simultaneously across the globe,” Jason McDonald, a spokesman for the CDC, said in an email to CNBC at the time.

The Food and Drug Administration authorized Moderna’s vaccine for people who are 18 years old and older in December.

Moderna’s vaccine, like Pfizer’s, uses messenger RNA, or mRNA, technology. It’s a new approach to vaccines that uses genetic material to provoke an immune response. Late-stage clinical trial data published in November shows Moderna’s vaccine is more than 94% effective in preventing Covid, is safe and appears to fend off severe disease. To achieve maximum effectiveness, the vaccine requires two doses taken four weeks apart.

Bancel told CNBC that Moderna’s vaccine will be protective against the South African strain in the short term, but the company doesn’t know how long that protection may last.

“What is unknowable right now is what will happen in six months, 12 months, especially to the elderly because, as you know, they have a weaker immune system,” he said during an interview with “Squawk Box.” “Because of that unknown … we decided to take into the clinic, out of an abundance of caution, a new vaccine.”

“We cannot be behind. We cannot fall behind this virus,” he said, adding the virus will “keep mutating.”

–CNBC’s Noah Higgins-Dunn contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/25/covid-vaccine-moderna-working-on-covid-booster-shots-for-south-african-strain.html

BALTIMORE (AP) — President Joe Biden plans to sign on Monday an executive order that aims to boost government purchases from U.S. manufacturers, according to administration officials.

The United States has shed roughly 540,000 factory jobs since last February as the coronavirus pandemic hurled the world’s largest economy into recession. The goal of the order would be to use the $600 billion the federal government spends on procurement to boost domestic factories and hiring, said officials who insisted on anonymity to discuss the forthcoming announcement.

Biden’s order would modify the rules for the Buy American program, making it harder for contractors to qualify for a waiver and sell foreign-made goods to federal agencies. It also changes rules so that more of a manufactured good’s components must originate from U.S. factories. American-made goods would also be protected by an increase in the government’s threshold and price preferences, the difference in price over which the government can buy a foreign product.

The order also has elements that apply to the separate Buy America program, which applies separately to highways and bridges. It seeks to open up government procurement contracts to new companies by scouting potential contractors. The order would create a public website for companies that received waivers to sell foreign goods to the government, so that U.S. manufacturers can have more information and be in a more competitive position.

To help enforce these goals, the order establishes a job at the White House Office of Management and Budget to monitor the initiative and focus on ensuring the government buys more domestically made goods. It also requires federal agencies to report on their progress in purchasing American goods, as well as emphasizing Biden’s support for the Jones Act, which mandates that only U.S.-flag vessels carry cargo between U.S. ports.

Past presidents have promised to revitalize manufacturing as a source of job growth and achieved mixed results. The government helped save the automotive sector after the 2008 financial crisis, but the number of factory jobs has been steadily shrinking over the course of four decades.

The number of U.S. manufacturing jobs peaked in 1979 at 19.5 million and now totals 12.3 million, according to the Labor Department. Biden’s predecessor, Donald Trump, famously promised a factory renaissance, yet manufacturing employment never returned to its pre-Great Recession levels before the coronavirus struck.

Source Article from https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-business-coronavirus-pandemic-united-states-economy-98746adbf890cd7fa53056de1c187275

Gov. Gavin Newsom is expected on Monday to lift regional coronavirus stay-at-home orders across California, a change that could allow restaurants and gyms in many counties to reopen outdoor dining and services.

All counties will return to the colored tier system that assigns local risk levels based on case numbers and rates of positive test results for COVID-19 infections, according to sources briefed on the plan by the governor’s office.

Most counties will go into the “widespread” risk tier, which permits hair salons to offer limited services indoors but restricts many other nonessential indoor business operations. The change is expected to take effect immediately after Newsom’s announcement on Monday.

It’s far from clear whether the decision will lead to easing of stay-at-home rules in Los Angeles County, which has become a national epicenter of the coronavirus with hospitals overwhelmed by patients. In less than one month, more than 5,000 people have died of COVID-19 in the county alone.

Read the full story at LATimes.com.

A letter from the California Restaurant Association to its members, dated Sunday, said senior officials in the Newsom administration confirmed that the governor is expected to make the formal announcement Monday morning.

Source Article from https://ktla.com/news/california/gov-newsom-may-lift-californias-regional-coronavirus-stay-at-home-orders-monday/

It was during Congress’ certification of Biden’s win that a mob of pro-Trump rioters stormed the Capitol, breaching the building’s walls and temporarily halting the proceedings. Lawmakers were forced to shelter-in-place as both chambers went into lockdown, and at least five people died as a result of the violence — including a Capitol police officer.

Immediately prior to the attack, former President Donald Trump ginned up his supporters at a rally on the White House Ellipse, encouraging them to march on the Capitol with hot-blooded rhetoric. Trump was impeached by the House two weeks ago for “incitement of insurrection” — becoming the only president in American history to twice face the historic rebuke — and he is now set to stand trial in the Senate early next month.

But Democratic lawmakers and some Republicans have also directed their fury at colleagues who sought to overturn the election results in Congress, arguing that their actions and refusal to acknowledge the reality of Biden’s win played a role in provoking the deadly Capitol siege. Hawley and Cruz, in particular, have received calls to resign or be expelled from the Senate — potential punishments which Hawley alluded to in his letter on Monday.

“In light of the shameful abuse of the ethics process you have deliberately engaged in, I have considered whether I should call for you to resign or be expelled from the Senate,” Hawley wrote to the seven Democrats. “But I continue to believe in the First Amendment, which the US Supreme Court has repeatedly said protects even ‘offensive’ and malicious speech, such as yours.”

Source Article from https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/25/hawley-ethics-complaint-democrats-462053

Mr. Biden earlier this month rolled out a plan that would provide an additional $1,400 in direct payments per person, topping off the $600 checks approved in December. The plan also includes money for rental assistance and food stamps, to extend federal unemployment assistance through September and increase the weekly federal subsidy to $400 from $300.

“It seems premature to be considering a package of this size and scope. That concern, which I had prior to the briefing, remains a concern of mine,”

Sen. Susan Collins

(R., Maine), a leader of the bipartisan group, along with

Sen. Joe Manchin

(D., W.Va.), said after the call, which aides said lasted about an hour and 15 minutes. Other Republicans echoed that concern, noting that Congress had passed a roughly $900 billion relief bill in December, following other aid earlier in 2020.

Mr. Manchin mentioned reservations over the bill’s cost in his closing remarks, saying the proposal was too large and needed to be able to garner the support of fiscally-responsible lawmakers, according to aides.

Democratic supporters of Mr. Biden’s plan say the package’s size meets the twin public health and economic crises created by the Covid-19 pandemic, which has killed more than 400,000 people in the U.S.

“President Biden’s plan is needed to get the virus under control and prevent lasting damage to our economy,”

Sen. Dick Durbin

(D., Ill.) said in a statement after the meeting. “The Senate must come together on a bipartisan basis and provide the resources the American people need to survive this pandemic and this lengthy financial hardship.”

Lawmakers said they did coalesce around the need to quickly pass additional funding for vaccine distribution and related issues, such as compensating rural hospitals for the cost of administering the vaccine.

“That was raised as part of a concern of the timing that we have because obviously we have an impeachment trial coming up,”

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen

(D., N.H.) said of focusing a bill on vaccine funding. “We don’t have a lot of time to move things and in terms of what could be most helpful” vaccine funding received wide support on the call, Ms. Shaheen said.

Lawmakers also expressed a hope that a third round of direct payments to Americans be more targeted to make sure those most in need are receiving the checks. The administration officials said they would provide more data about how they arrived at their policy provisions, including on education funding.

“The additional stimulus checks that the president is proposing are not well targeted,” Ms. Collins said. “That was echoed by several other senators and I hope the administration will take a second look at that.”

Lawmakers said they expected the bipartisan group, which includes lawmakers from both chambers, would continue to meet to try to fashion a more targeted package.

The concerns aired in Sunday’s meeting reinforced earlier comments from GOP lawmakers about the proposal’s price tag and the inclusion of unrelated, longtime Democratic policy proposals such as an increase in the minimum wage.

On CNN on Sunday,

Sen. Mitt Romney

(R., Utah) said he is open to discussion with the White House, but added, “I think people recognize it’s important that we don’t borrow hundreds of billions, actually trillions of dollars from the Chinese, for things that may not be absolutely necessary.”

The White House has signaled it is prepared to negotiate.

Ron Klain,

Mr. Biden’s chief of staff, said on NBC that he saw signs of bipartisanship in considering the new administration’s agenda, citing the Senate’s quick confirmation of Mr. Biden’s choices for defense secretary and director of national intelligence with broad GOP support.

Such quick action should also apply to combating the coronavirus, he said, “Americans, both Democrats and Republicans are dying.”

Negotiations over the package, however, are at risk of being derailed by the second impeachment trial of Mr. Trump.


“What we want to do is work with the Congress, reach out to members in both parties, see what we can get done as quickly as possible.”


— Ron Klain, President Biden’s chief of staff

On Monday,

Rep. Jamie Raskin

(D., Md.), the lead impeachment manager, is scheduled to walk over the article alleging incitement of insurrection along with his eight fellow managers, reading the article on the Senate floor. Senators will be sworn in as jurors on Tuesday for the trial.

The beginning of the likely time-consuming trial will complicate efforts to negotiate and pass a major relief package, pushing lawmakers to try to reach an agreement before it starts.

“It’s a big bill, it’s a big subject matter and the question is how much can we get done in two weeks, that’s going to be the topic for the next few days,” said

Sen. Angus King

(I., Maine), who participated in the call Sunday.

Beyond the impeachment trial, senators have yet to hammer out an agreement on operating the chamber, which is divided 50-50 between the two parties. Vice President

Kamala Harris

can cast a tiebreaker vote, which gives Democrats the majority by the slightest of margins.

Negotiations stalled after Republicans insisted Democrats pledge not to eliminate the legislative filibuster, which requires 60 votes to bring most bills to the floor. Since it is rare for one party to hold 60 or more seats, proponents of the supermajority procedural hurdle say it forces compromise by giving the minority party a voice and some power in negotiations.

But the filibuster also can lead to gridlock, and there is momentum among some Democratic lawmakers and activists to lower or eliminate the 60-vote threshold so that their narrow Senate majority can pass bills more quickly and advance Mr. Biden’s agenda.

Mr. Durbin, the second highest ranking Democrat, said on NBC Sunday that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s desire for absolute protection of the legislative filibuster is a nonstarter. On Friday,

Sen. John Cornyn

(R., Texas) said “there’s not going to be an organizing resolution as long as the elimination of the legislative filibuster is hanging over the Congress.”

Some Democrats, skeptical a bipartisan deal can be reached, already are calling on the president to pass his relief plan on a party-line vote.

Since most bills take 60 votes to clear procedural hurdles in the Senate, Mr. Biden would need to round up 10 Republican votes if all the 50 senators who caucus with Democrats voted as a bloc. Using a process known as reconciliation, however, certain legislation tied to the budget would require only 50 votes.

Reconciliation is the most partisan of all political tools: Presidents

George W. Bush

and Trump enacted tax cuts using reconciliation, and President Barack

Obama

relied in part on the technique to pass the Affordable Care Act.

Sen. Bernie Sanders

(I., Vt.) defended the use of reconciliation. “What we cannot do is wait weeks and weeks, and months and months, to go forward,” Mr. Sanders said Sunday on CNN.

Mr. Klain wouldn’t say whether the White House would drop certain provisions, like a push for a higher federal minimum wage, to win GOP support. “What we want to do is work with the Congress, reach out to members in both parties, see what we can get done as quickly as possible,” he said.

As for impeachment of the former president, Mr. Klain indicated that Mr. Biden wouldn’t take a position. “He’s not a senator, he’s not going to vote on impeachment, so I think his focus is on being president, not on doing the job he used to have which is being a U.S. senator.” Mr. Klain said.

Republicans appear divided on whether to convict Mr. Trump, which could lead to a follow-on vote to bar him from holding federal office again.

Mr. Romney, the lone Republican to vote to convict Mr. Trump in his first impeachment trial, said he has an open mind on the current proceedings.

“Well, there’s no question but that the article of impeachment that was sent over by the House suggests impeachable conduct,” Mr. Romney said on Fox News. He said he would wait to hear the evidence before deciding how to vote.

On the same show,

Sen. Marco Rubio

(R., Fla.) said he would vote to acquit. “The first chance I get to vote to end this trial, I’ll do it because I think it’s really bad for America,” he said. He called the trial stupid and counterproductive because it would further divide Americans.

Write to Kristina Peterson at kristina.peterson@wsj.com and Andrew Duehren at andrew.duehren@wsj.com

Source Article from https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-19-bill-negotiations-offer-first-test-of-bidens-bipartisanship-renewal-effort-11611522159

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden is set to issue an executive order to reverse a Pentagon policy that largely bars transgender individuals from joining the military, dumping a ban ordered by President Donald Trump in a tweet during his first year in office, a person briefed on the decision tells The Associated Press.

Biden has been widely expected to overturn the Trump policy in his early days in office. The White House could announce the move as early as Monday, according to the person briefed on the decision who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the order.

The move to reverse the policy has the support of Biden’s newly confirmed defense secretary, retired Army Gen. Lloyd Austin, who spoke of the need to overturn it during his Senate confirmation hearing last week.

“I support the president’s plan or plan to overturn the ban,” Austin said. “If you’re fit and you’re qualified to serve and you can maintain the standards, you should be allowed to serve.”

The decision comes as Biden plans to turn his attention to equity issues that he believes continue to shadow nearly all aspects of American life. Ahead of his inauguration, Biden’s transition team circulated a memo from Ron Klain, now the White House chief of staff, that sketched out Biden’s plan to use his first full week as president “to advance equity and support communities of color and other underserved communities.”

The move to overturn the transgender ban is also the latest example of Biden using executive authority in his first days as president to dismantle Trump’s legacy. His early actions include orders to overturn a Trump administration ban on travelers from several predominantly Muslim countries, stop construction of the wall at the U.S.-Mexico border, and launch an initiative to advance racial equity.

Biden is also scheduled to hold a ceremonial swearing-in ceremony on Monday at the White House for Austin, who became the nation’s first Black defense secretary.

It was unclear how quickly the Pentagon can put a new policy in effect, and whether it will take some time to work out details.

Until a few years ago service members could be discharged from the military for being transgender, but that changed during the Obama administration. In 2016, Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced that transgender people already serving in the military would be allowed to serve openly. And the military set July 1, 2017, as the date when transgender individuals would be allowed to enlist.

After Trump took office, however, his administration delayed the enlistment date and called for additional study to determine if allowing transgender individuals to serve would affect military readiness or effectiveness.

A few weeks later, Trump caught military leaders by surprise, tweeting that the government wouldn’t accept or allow transgender individuals to serve “in any capacity” in the military. “Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail,” he wrote.

It took nearly two years, but after a lengthy and complicated legal battle and additional reviews, the Defense Department in April 2019 approved the new policy that fell short of an all-out ban but barred transgender troops and military recruits from transitioning to another sex and required most individuals to serve in their birth gender.

Under that policy, currently serving transgender troops and anyone who had signed an enlistment contract before the effective date could continue with plans for hormone treatments and gender transition if they had been diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

But after that date, no one with gender dysphoria who was taking hormones or has transitioned to another gender was allowed to enlist. Troops that were already serving and were diagnosed with gender dysphoria were required to serve in their birth gender and were barred from taking hormones or getting transition surgery.

Under the Trump policy, a service member can be discharged based on a diagnosis of gender dysphoria if he or she is “unable or unwilling to adhere to all applicable standards, including the standards associated with his or her biological sex, or seeks transition to another gender.” And it said troops must be formally counseled and given a chance to change their decision before the discharge is finalized.

As of 2019, an estimated 14,700 troops on active duty and in the Reserves identify as transgender, but not all seek treatment. Since July 2016, more than 1,500 service members were diagnosed with gender dysphoria; as of Feb. 1, 2019, there were 1,071 currently serving. According to the Pentagon, the department spent about $8 million on transgender care between 2016 and 2019. The military’s annual health care budget tops $50 billion.

All four service chiefs told Congress in 2018 that they had seen no discipline, morale or unit readiness problems with transgender troops serving openly in the military. But they also acknowledged that some commanders were spending a lot of time with transgender individuals who were working through medical requirements and other transition issues.

___

Associated Press writer Aamer Madhani contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-donald-trump-biden-cabinet-lloyd-austin-confirmation-hearings-82138242acd4b6dad80ff4d82f5b7686