Connect with us

The Dictatorship

Indiana Republicans refused to be put in a gerrymandered box

Published

on

Indiana Republicans refused to be put in a gerrymandered box

The Indiana Senate’s Republican supermajority had a choice Thursday. They could acquiesce to the White House’s demands that they approve a new congressional mapand potentially turn the state’s entire House delegation red. Or they could listen to their constituents and consciences. As their sweeping 31-19 rejection of the new map showed, they chose well.

This outcome was in no way a foregone conclusion. President Donald Trump had promised to back a primary challenger against any Indiana Republican lawmaker who vote against redistricting. Vice President JD Vance, Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Indiana Gov. Dan Braun were all recruited to work the phones, meet with lawmakers and threaten dire consequences for any Republican who defied Trump’s wishes. Outside groups spammed everyday Hoosiers hoping to persuade them to pressure their representatives to support a new map. And still a majority of the state senate’s Republican caucus voted no.

The proposed gerrymandered map wasn’t even produced by state lawmakers or their staff.

Trump has been lobbying GOP state lawmakers hard this year to gerrymander their congressional districts to shore up the fragile Republican majority in next year’s midterms. Republicans hold seven of Indiana’s nine seats in the U.S. House. The new map would have doomed the two Democratic-held seats by carving up Indianapolis among four districts and splitting another blue stronghold near Lake Michigan over two districts.

The Indiana House voted last week 57-41 to support that aggressive gerrymander, but Senate President Pro Tempore Rodric Bray had long made it clear to the White House that the votes weren’t there in the Indiana Senate. And Bray gave no indication he was willing to strongarm his members to do Trump’s bidding. But Trump kept pushing until the legislature agreed to Braun’s request to hold a special session after Thanksgiving to consider the issue.

Importantly, as Indianapolis’ WFYI reportedthe proposed gerrymandered map wasn’t even produced by state lawmakers or their staff. The National Republican Redistricting Trust provided the proposed borders to the bill’s main author, who said during a hearing last week: “I got it handed to me on paper.” NRRT executive director Adam Kincaid also helped draw up the gerrymandered map Texas lawmakers approved in August, designed to add five new Republican seats. That kicked off the ongoing tit-for-tat redistricting rush across the country.

But it turns out Hoosiers don’t look kindly on being told what to do. As CNN reportedspeaking with voters across Indiana “underscored two political realities: Rank-and-file Republicans in this deep-red state generally haven’t soured on Trump. But they aren’t rushing into battle for him, either — and they don’t think this issue will be top of mind when they cast their votes in a state Senate primary.” Bray in particular received plenty of support from the Indiana voters BLN spoke with and has shrugged off the idea that he would be vulnerable to a challenger.

Many of Bray’s members showed that same stubborn indignation at the idea they’d listen to Washington’s aggressive tactics over their constituents. The Atlantic’s Russel Berman reported ahead of Thursday’s vote, that many Indianians he spoke to, Democrats and Republicans, “said that the push for mid-decade redistricting simply ran afoul of the small-c conservatism on which many Indiana Republican legislators still pride themselves.” There wasn’t only ideology at play though, as Berman noted, but a very pragmatic political reality at work:

Only half of the senators will be on the ballot next year, and a number of Republicans in the chamber have already announced their retirement. GOP senators also have reason to doubt that either Trump or his allies will follow through on promised spending in the coming years, particularly for those whose next election isn’t until 2028. “The idea that Trump would be spending political capital not just four months from now, but two and a half years from now, individually targeting Indiana senators who defied them on one vote? Just crazy,” [Indianapolis city council member Nick Roberts] said. By 2028, “they will have bigger fish to fry.”

Still, there was no guarantee that Indiana state senators would take that chance. There were multiple threats of political violence against state lawmakers who spoke against the redistricting plan before the vote. But as state Sen. Sue Glick said after she voted against the proposed map: “You have to know Hoosiers. We can’t be bullied, we don’t like it.”

In effect, gerrymandering envisions a world where elections are decided without a single vote being cast.

Gerrymandering is undemocratic at its core; it’s an attempt to pre-sort voters into supposedly safe and unsafe districts, effectively homogenizing the electorate. In effect, gerrymandering envisions a world where elections are decided without a single vote being cast.

Gerrymandered lines drawn up by lawmakers are bad enough, but having them drawn up, in this case, by people disconnected from the state, means that not even the concerns of Indiana’s Republicans were driving the process: only the national party’s concerns.

In the end, the Indiana State Senate rejected a map drawn up by a national group to further national Republican goals. A majority of the GOP caucus voted with every Democrat in standing firm against the proposal. In voting that Trump-backed map down, the Republicans voting no demonstrated that not all Republicans are the same and that even in a MAGA dominant era and that voters don’t appreciate being told that their vote won’t matter. Even if what happened in Indiana will be harder to replicate elsewhere, these lawmakers’ refusal to be shoved into a misshapen box is encouraging.

Hayes Brown is a writer and editor for MS NOW Daily.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

The harsh realities of Arctic mining undercut Trump’s argument to take Greenland

Published

on

The harsh realities of Arctic mining undercut Trump’s argument to take Greenland

Greenland’s harsh environment, lack of key infrastructure and difficult geology have so far prevented anyone from building a mine to extract the sought-after rare earth elements that many high-tech products require. Even if President Donald Trump prevails in his effort to take control of the Arctic islandthose challenges won’t go away.

Trump has prioritized breaking China’s stranglehold on the global supply of rare earths ever since the world’s number two economy sharply restricted who could buy them after the United States imposed widespread tariffs last spring. The Trump administration has invested hundreds of millions of dollars and even taken stakes in several companies. Now the president is again pitching the idea that wresting control of Greenland away from Denmark could solve the problem.

“We are going to do something on Greenland whether they like it or not,” Trump said Friday.

But Greenland may not be able to produce rare earths for years — if ever. Some companies are trying anyway, but their efforts to unearth some of the 1.5 million tons of rare earths encased in rock in Greenland generally haven’t advanced beyond the exploratory stage. Trump’s fascination with the island nation may be more about countering Russian and Chinese influence in the Arctic than securing any of the hard-to-pronounce elements like neodymium and terbium that are used to produce the high-powered magnets needed in electric vehicles, wind turbines, robots and fighter jets among other products.

“The fixation on Greenland has always been more about geopolitical posturing — a military-strategic interest and stock-promotion narrative — than a realistic supply solution for the tech sector,” said Tracy Hughes, founder and executive director of the Critical Minerals Institute. “The hype far outstrips the hard science and economics behind these critical minerals.”

Stay up to date with the news and the best of AP by following our WhatsApp channel.

Follow on WhatsApp

Trump confirmed those geopolitical concerns at the White House Friday.

“We don’t want Russia or China going to Greenland, which if we don’t take Greenland, you can have Russia or China as your next door neighbor. That’s not going to happen,” Trump said

A difficult place to build a mine

The main challenge to mine in Greenland is, “of course, the remoteness. Even in the south where it’s populated, there are few roads and no railways, so any mining venture would have to create these accessibilities,” said Diogo Rosa, an economic geology researcher at the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland. Power would also have to be generated locally, and expert manpower would have to be brought in.

Another concern is the prospect of mining rare earths in the fragile Arctic environment just as Greenland tries to build a thriving tourism industry, said Patrick Schröder, a senior fellow in the Environment and Society program at the Chatham House think-tank in London.

“Toxic chemicals needed to separate the minerals out from the rock, so that can be highly polluting and further downstream as well, the processing,” Shröder said. Plus, rare earths are often found alongside radioactive uranium.

Besides the unforgiving climate that encases much of Greenland under layers of ice and freezes the northern fjords for much of the year, the rare earths found there tend to be encased in a complex type of rock called eudialyte, and no one has ever developed a profitable process to extract rare earths from that type of rock. Elsewhere, these elements are normally found in different rock formation called carbonatites, and there are proven methods to work with that.

“If we’re in a race for resources — for critical minerals — then we should be focusing on the resources that are most easily able to get to market,” said David Abraham, a rare earths expert who has followed the industry for decades and wrote the book “The Elements of Power.”

This week, Critical Metals’ stock price more than doubled after it said it plans to build a pilot plant in Greenland this year. But that company and more than a dozen others exploring deposits on the island remain far away from actually building a mine and would still need to raise at least hundreds of millions of dollars.

Producing rare earths is a tough business

Even the most promising projects can struggle to turn a profit, particularly when China resorts to dumping extra materials onto the market to depress prices and drive competitors out of business as it has done many times in the past. And currently most critical minerals have to be processed in China.

The U.S. is scrambling to expand the supply of rare earths outside of China during the one-year reprieve from even tougher restrictions that Trump said Xi Jinping agreed to in October. A number of companies around the world are already producing rare earths or magnets and can deliver more quickly than anything in Greenland, which Trump has threatened to seize with military power if Denmark doesn’t agree to sell it.

“Everybody’s just been running to get to this endpoint. And if you go to Greenland, it’s like you’re going back to the beginning,” said Ian Lange, an economics professor who focuses on rare earths at the Colorado School of Mines.

Focusing on more promising projects elsewhere

Many in the industry, too, think America should focus on helping proven companies instead of trying to build new rare earth mines in Greenland, Ukraine, Africa or elsewhere. A number of other mining projects in the U.S. and friendly nations like Australia are farther along and in much more accessible locations.

The U.S. government has invested directly in the company that runs the only rare earths mine in the U.S., MP Materialsand a lithium miner and a company that recycles batteries and other products with rare earths.

Scott Dunn, CEO of Noveon Magnetics, said those investments should do more to reduce China’s leverage, but it’s hard to change the math quickly when more than 90% of the world’s rare earths come from China.

“There are very few folks that can rely on a track record for delivering anything in each of these instances, and that obviously should be where we start, and especially in my view if you’re the U.S. government,” said Dunn, whose company is already producing more than 2,000 metric tons of magnets each year at a plant in Texas from elements it gets outside of China.

___

Funk reported from Omaha, Nebraska, and Naishadham reported from Madrid.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Trump administration to send ‘hundreds more’ federal agents to Minneapolis

Published

on

Trump administration to send ‘hundreds more’ federal agents to Minneapolis

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Sunday that “hundreds more” federal officers are being sent to Minneapolis following the killing of a 37-year-old Minnesota woman by an ICE agent last week.

Noem told Fox News that the surge of federal forces are being sent “in order to allow our ICE and Border Patrol individuals working in Minneapolis to do so safely.”

The additional officers are expected to arrive on Sunday and Monday, Noem said.

The surge was announced after an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent fatally shot Renee Good in Minneapolis on Wednesday in an incident that has drawn large protests against the Trump administration’s widespread deployment of federal agents and National Guard troops to major U.S. cities. The demonstrations continued through the weekend as thousands of people protested in Minneapolis and other cities across the country.

Local and state officials, including Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, D, and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob FreyD, were outraged by the killing and have doubled down on demands for immigration officials to leave the city, arguing they are making the area less safe.

At a news conference after Good’s killing, Frey told immigration officials to “Get the fuck out of Minneapolis” and vowed to get justice.

Frey told NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday: “I don’t want our police officers spending time working with ICE on immigration enforcement… You know what I want our police officers doing? I want them stopping murders from happening. I want them preventing car-jackings.”

Cellphone video said to have been taken by Jonathan Ross, the ICE officer who fatally shot Good, was released Friday. The new video does not clearly demonstrate that Good was attempting to hit Ross with her car, as Trump officials have claimed.

Earlier bystander footage shows the wheels turned to the right as Good’s car pulls forward, away from Ross, who then shoots Good through the car’s windshield.

Noem and other Trump administration officials have called Good a “domestic terrorist,” and repeatedly claimed that she had tried to “run over” immigration officers.

Minnesota saw a massive 30-day surge of federal agents beginning earlier this month, with roughly 1,000 additional officers deployed to Minneapolis and St. Paul, including from ICE, the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Minneapolis is one of many cities targeted by the administration in a nationwide crackdown on crime and immigration. Since President Donald Trump took office for a second term last year, immigration agencies and National Guard troops have been sent to cities including Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., Chicago, Charlotte, N.C., and Memphis.

Erum Salam is a breaking news reporter and producer for MS NOW. She previously was a breaking news reporter for The Guardian.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

National Portrait Gallery changes Trump portrait, removes text about Jan. 6

Published

on

National Portrait Gallery changes Trump portrait, removes text about Jan. 6

The National Portrait Gallery in Washington, D.C., has swapped out a portrait of President Donald Trump and removed text about his two impeachments and the Jan.6 insurrection at the Capitol.

The White House announced the news on Saturday, sharing a photo of the black-and-white portrait of the president in the Oval Office with his fists on the desk taken by White House photographer Daniel Torok.

The previous phototaken by Washington Post photojournalist Matt McClain, showed Trump in a red tie with text on a nearby wall that read, in part: “Impeached twice, on charges of abuse of power and incitement of insurrection after supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, he was acquitted by the Senate in both trials.

A spokesperson for the Smithsonian told MS NOW that it is “beginning its planned update of the America’s Presidents gallery which will undergo a larger refresh this Spring” and that “the history of Presidential impeachments continues to be represented in our museums, including the National Museum of American History.”

A White House spokesperson said that “for the first time in history, the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery has hung up an iconic photo taken by the White House honoring President Trump. His unmatched aura will be seen and felt throughout the halls of the National Portrait Gallery.”

The Colorado legislature agreed last year to remove a portrait of Trump from the state Capitol after he called the painting “the worst.” He also said his photo on the cover of Time magazine in 2025 was taken from an unflattering angel, calling it the “Worst of All Time.”

Last week, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-Louisiana, said that a federal law requiring Congress to hang a plaque in the Capitol honoring law enforcment officers who helped protect the Capitol on Jan. 6, was “not implementable.” But senators quickly passed a resolution to “prominently display” the plaque in the Senate wing of the building.

Erum Salam is a breaking news reporter and producer for MS NOW. She previously was a breaking news reporter for The Guardian.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending