Why Are Americans Wary While the Economy Is Healthy? Look at Nevada.

The New York Times

Why Are Americans Wary While the Economy Is Healthy? Look at Nevada.

Peter S. Goodman – February 5, 2024

Nevada is dependent on a single industry — casino resorts and the hospitality trade — for roughly one-fourth of its jobs. (Bridget Bennett/The New York Times)
Nevada is dependent on a single industry — casino resorts and the hospitality trade — for roughly one-fourth of its jobs. (Bridget Bennett/The New York Times)

LAS VEGAS — Toni Irizarry recognizes that the economy has improved. Compared with the first wave of the pandemic, when Las Vegas went dark, and joblessness soared to levels not seen since the Great Depression, these are days of relative normalcy.

Irizarry, 64, oversees a cafe at the Orleans Hotel and Casino, a property just off the Las Vegas Strip that caters mostly to locals. Guests have returned, filling the blackjack and roulette tables amid the cacophony of jingling slot machines — the sound of money.

She started in the hospitality industry busing tables when she was only 16. Her paychecks have allowed her to purchase a home, raise three children and buy each of them their first car. But as she contemplates the future, she cannot shake a sense of foreboding.

The outlook of people like Irizarry could be crucial in determining who occupies the White House. Nevada is one of six battleground states that are likely to decide the outcome of November’s presidential election. Its economic centerpiece, Las Vegas, was constructed on dreams of easy money. That proved a winning proposition for generations of working people, yielding middle-class paychecks for bartenders, restaurant servers, casino dealers and maids. Yet over the last two decades, a series of shocks have eroded confidence.

First, a speculative bonanza in real estate went spectacularly wrong, turning the city into the epicenter of a national foreclosure crisis. The Great Recession inflicted steep layoffs on the hospitality industry, demolishing the notion that gambling was immune to downturns. Then in 2020, the pandemic turned Las Vegas into a ghost town.

“There is that sense of the unknown,” Irizarry said. “People are scared. They think, ‘If this could happen, which we never ever had before, what else could happen?’”

That the fate of the 2024 presidential election could hinge on economic sentiments is widely taken as a given among political operatives.

In the battleground states, 57% of registered voters identified the economy as the most important issue in a poll conducted in October by The New York Times and Siena College. More than half of all respondents described economic conditions as “poor” — a key reason that President Joe Biden was trailing his presumptive Republican challenger, former President Donald Trump, in five of the six states.

Such indications of worry appear to conflict with data points that reflect an unambiguous strengthening of the U.S. economy. Incomes have risen, unemployment remains low and consumer confidence is improving. Fears of recession have yielded to exultation over economic growth that registered 3.3% over the last three months of 2023. And the Super Bowl, coming to Las Vegas for the first time Sunday, will bring a short-term boost of as much as $700 million to the local economy.

Still, a sense of insecurity has seeped into the crevices of everyday experience. This feeling is especially palpable in Nevada, a state dependent on a single industry — casino resorts and the hospitality trade — for roughly one-fourth of its jobs.

In Nevada, 59% of those polled described the economy as “poor,” the highest margin among the six states. Seventeen percent of registered Democrats asserted intentions to vote for Trump.

The state’s unemployment rate is down sharply, registering 5.4% in November — a fraction of the 31% logged in April 2020 — even as it remains higher than any other state. Wages have grown, especially for more than 40,000 leisure and hospitality workers represented by a pair of local unions. The rate of inflation on a range of consumer goods has slowed markedly.

But those figures leave out key sources of distress that are playing out across the country and even globally, and whose origins are not confined to the four-year windows conventionally used to assess presidential administrations.

While prices for many goods have stopped rising, they remain higher than before the pandemic, especially for critical things like gasoline, groceries and rent.

Higher interest rates — the result of the Federal Reserve’s credit tightening to choke off inflation — have increased credit card burdens for those carrying balances. They have multiplied mortgage payments for homeowners whose interest payments float with broader rates.

Of special concern in Nevada is recognition that potentially lucrative pursuits like advanced manufacturing could take years to produce significant numbers of jobs.

For decades, Nevada’s leaders have sought to diminish the state’s dependence on casinos and tourism. Las Vegas is rapidly filling with warehouses as the metro area emerges as a hub for the distribution of products. Ventures centered on the transition to green energy are generating high-paying jobs, especially near Reno.

Nonetheless, Nevada remains heavily reliant on the willingness of people around the world to fly in, pack into resorts and convention centers, and scatter their dollars across casinos, restaurants and entertainment venues. Which makes the enterprise subject to abrupt changes of fortune. Which makes people nervous.

“We’re still very vulnerable to another recession,” said Andrew Woods, director of the Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. “If the U.S. economy decides to go off the deep end, we are not any more resilient than we were before.”

The Strains of High Prices

Much of the unhappiness in Nevada, as in the rest of the country, centers on high costs for everyday items along with housing.

Antonio Muñoz, a former police officer, owns 911 Taco Bar, a restaurant tucked inside a food court near the Strip. He laments how the price of chicken has increased to $3.50 a pound from $1.20 before the pandemic. A 5-gallon jug of cooking oil has risen to $60 from $25. He has been forced to increase wages to keep his five full-time workers.

Much of his business is dedicated to catering work. Large events have come back robustly, he said. The annual Consumer Electronics Show in early January produced a surge of orders for rib eye and shrimp tacos as technology companies hosted visitors in private suites. He was gearing up for the Super Bowl.

But smaller bookings — birthday parties in particular — diminished last year by one-fifth compared with 2022. He blames Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine, conflict in the Middle East and acrimony over the U.S. election for making people nervous and tight with money.

He worries that worry itself could take down the economy.

“I feel like it’s teetering,” Muñoz said. “People seem to be waiting to see what happens.”

More Pay, Greater Security

One group is celebrating potent gains. After threatening to strike, tens of thousands of people represented by the Culinary Workers Union Local 226 and Bartenders Union Local 165 secured a contract settlement that includes raises of 32% over the next five years.

Union workers played a critical role in turning out voters for Biden four years ago, and their greater pay could motivate them to repeat that effort. And given the importance of their wages in fueling local spending, the new contracts are themselves a source of economic vibrancy.

Kimberly Dopler has worked as a cocktail server at Wynn’s Las Vegas for nearly 20 years. The job is physically exhausting and fraught with the pitfalls of tending to customers who are “drinking and gambling, and not in their right state of mind,” she said. Yet she navigates those risks for the resulting security.

“I get to go home with money in my pocket every day, and I can take my shoes off and relax,” she said.

The union contract has enhanced her sense that the economy is strong. “I see a lot of hiring happening at my job, hiring events throughout town,” Dopler said. “I feel like people have a good opportunity in this town to find work.”

Raymond Lujan, 61, a union steward and server at Edge Steakhouse, a restaurant inside the Westgate Las Vegas, was born and raised in the city. His mother worked as a cocktail server at the Stardust. His brother is a bellman at the Bellagio.

Before the pandemic, Lujan had never been out of work. When the restaurant where he worked closed, he drew on savings, but many of his co-workers live check to check.

He remains confident in a future centered on the hospitality industry.

“This is Vegas,” he said. “It’s still the destination capital of the world.”

‘It’s Still Hard’

Yet for working people who lack the protection of a union, Las Vegas remains something else: an economy subject to violent fluctuations.

Before the pandemic, Carlos Arias, 51, was earning more than $2,000 a week as an Uber driver. When the casinos shut down, he found work as a cook — first at Denny’s for $13.75 an hour, then at IHOP for 50 cents more.

Suddenly earning only one-fourth of his previous income, Arias and his partner, a manger at a McDonald’s, struggled to pay the $1,100 monthly rent on their one-bedroom apartment. They tapped credit cards to keep gas in their car. They cut grocery purchases to bare essentials like rice, beans and instant ramen.

They fell behind on the payments for their Cadillac van. One morning, it was gone, seized in repossession.

He found a new job as a cook at a Mexican restaurant for an extra $1 an hour, and then a second one at an eatery inside the Ellis Island casino. For a year, he worked both positions, rising at 4 a.m. for the early shift, and sometimes not getting home until after midnight.

He felt dizzy, his vision blurring. He could not tell if he was ill or merely exhausted, and he had no health insurance. When he nearly collapsed, he went to the hospital and was diagnosed with diabetes. The medicine the doctor prescribed cost more than $50 for a 30-day course — more than he could manage.

Early last year, he took a job at a restaurant in the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino, for $19 an hour.

On paper, Arias presents as an example of an improving economy. He is earning more than during the worst of the pandemic. He has health insurance, and is taking medication for his diabetes.

But he is earning less than half what he did before the unraveling began.

“It’s still hard,” he said. “You go to the store and buy $100 worth of groceries and there’s nothing in the car.”

Ex-GOP Lawmaker Has Urgent 2024 Message For Former Trump Loyalists

HuffPost

Ex-GOP Lawmaker Has Urgent 2024 Message For Former Trump Loyalists

Josephine Harvey – February 5, 2024

Former Rep. Denver Riggleman  (R-Va.) says it’s time for more of Donald Trump’s former allies to throw their weight behind President Joe Biden.

On MSNBC Sunday, Riggleman said it’s “absolutely” important for those who no longer support Trump to publicly back Biden. As examples, he pointed to former Trump aide Anthony Scaramucci and former Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), both of whom have said they would vote for Biden in his likely rematch with Trump this year.

“This is a person that you don’t want anywhere near … the Oval Office again,” Riggleman told MSNBC’s Alex Witt of the quadruply-indicted former president. “This is an individual that is out of touch with reality, or pretends that he’s out of touch with reality, to actually ignite the base, or to try to make the base violent, or to do things outside of what normal behavior would be.”

Riggleman said that when he considers what Trump has done and what kind of people he has surrounded himself with, “there’s nobody else who I’d vote for but Joe Biden.”

The ex-congressman announced in 2022 that he had left the Republican Party over its devotion to Trump.

Numerous former Trump associates and officials have in recent months spoken out about the former president and warned about the dangers of a potential White House return, but some have stopped short of saying they’d vote for Biden.

Riggleman later shared a RawStory editor’s tweet about his comments, writing: “Yes. I said this.”

“I am done identifying with a party,” he wrote on X (formerly Twitter). “I am an American— and right now that means supporting Democratic institutions and our way of life no matter what.”

Biden challenges House GOP to solve border crisis — or ‘keep playing politics’

Politico

Biden challenges House GOP to solve border crisis — or ‘keep playing politics’

Myah Ward and Jennifer Haberkorn – February 4, 2024

BLUE BELL, PENNSYLVANIA – JANUARY 5: U.S. President Joe Biden speaks during a campaign event at Montgomery County Community College January 5, 2024 in Blue Bell, Pennsylvania. In his first campaign event of the 2024 election season, Biden stated that democracy and fundamental freedoms are under threat if former U.S. President Donald Trump returns to the White House. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)More

President Joe Biden urged Congress to pass the bipartisan border deal unveiled Sunday night by Senate negotiators, ramping up the pressure on House Republicans who have repeatedly cast doubt on the bipartisan effort.

“Working with my administration, the United States Senate has done the hard work it takes to reach a bipartisan agreement. Now, House Republicans have to decide. Do they want to solve the problem? Or do they want to keep playing politics with the border?” Biden said in a lengthy statement.

The president’s response came not long after senators released the long-awaited $118 billion deal that would unleash stricter border and immigration policies, while sending billions of dollars to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan as well as the southern border. The bill’s introduction kicks off a sprint as the White House and negotiators work to sell the deal to Republicans and progressives before it heads for a procedural vote in the Senate scheduled for Wednesday.

The president said the agreement released Sunday includes some of the “toughest and fairest set of border reforms in decades,” and ones that he “strongly” supports. Biden asked Congress to pass the deal quickly — placing the fate of the deal in their hands. And he once again dared Republicans to reject the deal as it faces a make-or-break moment amid GOP fissures in both chambers.

“I’ve made my decision. I’m ready to solve the problem. I’m ready to secure the border. And so are the American people,” the president said. “I know we have our divisions at home but we cannot let partisan politics get in the way of our responsibilities as a great nation. I refuse to let that happen.”

The border has long been a challenging issue for the Biden White House. The president has seen record crossings since taking office in 2021, further straining a southern border already weighed down by irregular migration and an overwhelmed asylum processing system. Border Patrol agents reported a record 302,034 encounters with migrants over the southern border in December, according to figures released by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

In addition, the fast-approaching 2024 election has piled on the pressure for Biden to take action on the border — to address the crisis but to also win the messaging battle on an issue Republicans frequently used to rally their base. Former President Donald Trump, Biden’s likely 2024 opponent, is sure to continue his efforts to combust a deal, adding another layer to efforts to sell the border legislation.

The legislation includes an authority that would effectively “close” the border if the number of migrant crossings reach a certain number over a certain period of time, although a limited number of people would still be allowed to apply for asylum at ports of entry.

Biden suggested publicly late last month that he’d be open to such an authority, vowing to “shut down the border” as soon as the bill was passed.

“I urge Congress to come together and swiftly pass this bipartisan agreement,” Biden said in Sunday night’s statement. “Get it to my desk so I can sign it into law immediately.”

Given the White House’s work with Senate Republicans on the legislation, Biden administration officials have focused their attention on Speaker Mike Johnson, casting him and House Republicans as the barrier to securing the border.

During the Senate talks, the Biden administration has tried to flip the long-held view — one borne out in public polling — that Republicans are better trusted on the issues of immigration and protecting the border. The administration argues the House GOP has blocked all of the president’s efforts to secure the border.

“Despite arguing for 6 straight years that presidents need new legal authority to secure the border, and despite claiming to agree with President Biden on the need for hiring more Border Patrol agents and deploying new fentanyl detection equipment, Speaker Johnson is now the chief impediment to all 3,” White House spokesperson Andrew Bates wrote in a strategy memo released last week.

Johnson’s camp has blamed Biden for reversing Trump-era border regulations that led to an uptick in migrants crossing the border.

“In a desperate attempt to shift blame for a crisis their policies have induced, they have argued it’s a funding problem,” wrote Johnson spokesperson Raj Shah in a memo last month. “Clearly, they have no facts to back up their claim.”

The bill raises “credible fear” standards for migrants; if they are able to pass the more challenging and faster screening, the migrants would be released after full adjudication of their cases and be allowed to work immediately. The legislation would also provide 50,000 visas a year — a mix of family and employment visas, and include the Fend Off Fentanyl Act and the Afghan Adjustment Act.

A major sticking point in talks was the president’s humanitarian parole authority, which the administration uses to accept up to 30,000 migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela each month. The legislation would not affect this program, which has been central to the administration’s border management strategy, including an agreement with Mexico to also accept 30,000 migrants a month from those four countries.

But the administration would no longer be able to offer parole grants to incentivize migrants to use the online app CBP One, which would curtail the president’s authority to allow more undocumented immigrants into the country.

“This agreement on border security and immigration does not include everything we have fought for over the past three years — and we will continue to fight for these priorities — but it shows: we can make the border more secure while preserving legal immigration, consistent with our values as a nation,” Vice President Kamala Harris said in a statement.

Trump suggests he would consider a tariff upward of 60% on all Chinese imports if reelected

CNN

Trump suggests he would consider a tariff upward of 60% on all Chinese imports if reelected

Kate Sullivan, CNN – February 4, 2024

Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters

Former President Donald Trump said Sunday he would consider imposing a tariff upward of 60% on all Chinese imports if he regains the presidency. His remarks come at a time of high economic and other tensions between the US and China.

“No, I would say maybe it’s going to be more than that,” Trump said when asked by Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo on “Sunday Morning Futures” whether he would consider imposing a 60% tariff, as The Washington Post has reported.

As president, Trump slapped tariffs of 25% on $50 billion of Chinese goods in June 2018. Beijing countered with its own tariffs, and the spiral continued until the two countries arrived at an agreement in 2020. The Biden administration has largely kept the Trump-era tariffs in place.

The former president also said he thought China would try to interfere in the 2024 presidential election.

“I think they will, and they won’t be interfering on my behalf. We should go same-day voting, paper ballots, voter ID and no mail-in ballots,” Trump said.

Chinese leader Xi Jinping told President Joe Biden that China would not interfere in the 2024 US presidential election when the two men met in November, CNN has reported. But FBI Director Christopher Wray warned Wednesday that Chinese hackers are preparing to “wreak havoc and cause real-world harm” to the US.

Trump also praised Xi, whom he described as “a very good friend of mine during my term,” and said, “I want China to do great, I do.”

Trump would not say whether he would intervene if China tried taking over Taiwan, arguing that doing so would “jeopardize my negotiating ability with China.”

China’s ruling Communist Party views Taiwan as part of its territory, despite never having controlled it, and leader Xi has not ruled out the use of military force to “reunify” the island with the mainland.

The US, meanwhile, is obligated under the Taiwan Relations Act to provide Taiwan with the military means to defend itself, something Beijing regards as interference in its internal affairs.

CNN’s Jack Forrest and Brad Lendon contributed to this report.

Trump campaign pumps small-dollar donors for $55m in legal expenses, records show

Independent

Trump campaign pumps small-dollar donors for $55m in legal expenses, records show

Alex Woodward – February 1, 2024

Two political action committees supporting Donald Trump spent more than $55m on the former president’s legal bills in 2023, with more than half of that cash spent within the second half of the year.

Campaign finance reports filed by Trump-allied PACs on Wednesday show Mr Trump paid out millions of dollars to almost 50 firms over the last year.

Many of these firms represent the Republican Party’s likely nominee for president as he faces 91 criminal charges, a massive defamation verdict and a potentially business-crushing lawsuit.

His committees paid out nearly $30m in legal costs within the last six months, records show. By the end of the year, across all his supporting PACs, Mr Trump’s campaign had more than $70m on hand.

A massive chunk of that campaign cash came from small-dollar donors, whose contributions face a fine print that 90 cents of every dollar goes to campaign committees while 10 cents goes to his Save America PAC.

That committee, founded in the wake of his 2020 presidential election loss as the campaign waged failed legal battles to overturn the results, raised tens of millions of dollars on a spurious pledge to fight for his victory in court. It’s now effectively a bank account for his legal expenses, with many donors giving donations of less than $50 at a time.

Wednesday’s filings only scratch the surface of Mr Trump’s mounting legal expenses. Jury trials have not yet started, he is in the middle of several appeals involving at least two cases likely headed to the US Supreme Court, and he cannot legally touch PAC money to pay out civil suit judgments.

Staggering legal expenses

The campaign finance reports show Mr Trump’s campaigns paid legal bills to 46 firms last year, though eight of them earned the lion’s share of that $55m.

The firms of Chris Kise, who is defending Mr Trump in both his New York civil fraud trial and in the federal classified documents case involving his Mar-a-Lago resort, were paid nearly $5m last year. The firm of Clifford Robert, a Trump family attorney representing Donald Trump Jr and Eric Trump in the civil fraud case, was paid nearly $4m.

The firm of Alina Habba, who represented Mr Trump in the fraud case and in E Jean Carroll’s defamation suit, was also paid nearly $4m.

John Lauro and Todd Blanche, attorneys in the federal criminal case involving his efforts to overturn 2020 election results, were paid $2.5m and $1.9m, respectively.

Donald Trump’s attorney Alina Habba walks outside a federal courthouse in Manhattan on 26 January. (REUTERS)
Donald Trump’s attorney Alina Habba walks outside a federal courthouse in Manhattan on 26 January. (REUTERS)

Save America PAC, which started 2022 with $105m, was burning through cash for Mr Trump’s legal bills through the first half of last year. The organisation spent more than $40m on legal fees by July.

The group asked for a refund of a $60m donation to the Trump-connected MAGA Inc. That PAC refunded $30m to Save America in the second half of the year – an average of about $5m a month – in addition to $12.5m that it gave back to Save America in the first half of the year, records show.

In all, a PAC established to re-elect Mr Trump funneled $42.5m back into a fund that is now chiefly used for paying lawyers, a total that is nearly equivalent to super PAC spending on other campaign expenses like television advertising.

The FEC filings detail Mr Trump’s web of legal obstacles and fees to attorneys wrapped up in them. Filings show payments to the firm of John Sauer, his attorney leading an appeal of a federal judge’s decision that rejected Mr Trump’s claim of “presidential immunity” to evade prosecution in his election conspiracy case. The filings also show payments to the firm that represented former Trump-allied attorney Kenneth Chesebro in the Fulton County election interference case – before he pleaded guilty.

Pumping small-dollar donors to pay lawyers and legal fees

After Mr Trump’s mugshot was released last August in the Georgia RICO case, his campaign raised more than $4.2m in online donations – his largest single-day haul of 2023, records show.

Mr Trump’s campaign has largely been powered by an aggressive fundraising operation relying on a long list of potential contributors, with only 6 per cent of his campaign cash coming in from donors who hit the $6,600 limit.

Campaign messages routinely use his mugshot and frame his legal challenges as a political attack to cast him as a victim of a Democratic conspiracy against him. He continues to baselessly cast the consequences of his alleged actions as “election interference” under President Joe Biden, who is “weaponizing” the judicial system against him.

The House select committee investigating the events surrounding the attack on the US Capitol on 6 January 2021 reported that Mr Trump’s fundraising arms collected more than $100m in the first week after Election Day in 2020 alone.

His campaign and allies raised $250m from baseless claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him, the committee found.

Donald Trump speaks to supporters in Nevada on 27 January. (REUTERS)
Donald Trump speaks to supporters in Nevada on 27 January. (REUTERS)

As his campaign pivoted to his criminal cases and lawsuits, fundraising messages remind supporters of his legal fights and courtroom appearances to tell his supporters that their contributions help “defend our movement” against “witch hunt” trials.

His mugshot appears on “signed” posters with the words “never surrender”, $47 T-shirts, $35 mugs, and Trump-branded Christmas wrapping paper.

Last week, a jury determined he owes more than $83m in damages to E Jean Carroll, whom he repeatedly smeared after a separate jury found him liable for sexual abuse and defamation.

The attorney general of New York also is seeking $370m from Mr Trump and his co-defendants in a separate civil case targeting his Trump Organization for fraud.

In a deposition last year, the former president described his cash stockpile as “substantially in excess” of $400m, while Bloomberg listed his liquid assets at roughly $600m, though the actual state of his financial affairs is unclear, and he won’t be able to tap PAC cash to pay civil damages.

Dave Aronberg, the state attorney in Florida’s Palm Beach County, home of Mr Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, explained to MSNBC on Monday that Mr Trump has to post a bond just to appeal the jury verdict in Ms Carroll’s case within 30 days of the decision, “so E Jean Carroll will get her money at some point”.

“He can try to get money from his supporters, but he’s got to tell them what it’s for … He can’t say, ‘Help me with my re-election fund’ and then divert the money to E Jean Carroll,” he said. “That would be a crime.”

Competing for megadonor cash with Haley

In the final months of 2023, Mr Trump’s campaigns took in roughly $19m – less than 60 per cent of Mr Biden’s $33m haul – while paying out more than $23m.

The president’s campaign ended 2032 with $46m cash on hand, records show. By the end of the year, Biden-supporting super PAC Future Forward had roughly the same amount in the bank as MAGA Inc – $24m to MAGA’s $23.3m.

Mr Biden also can tap funding from the Democratic National Committee, while Mr Trump will have to wait until he is the Republican party’s nominee before he can formally access the Republican National Committee’s reserves.

But the RNC had its worst fundraising year in a decade, and its worst year in 30 years in inflation-adjusted figures, according to FEC filings.

Last year, the RNC raised $87.2m, spent $93.5m, and had roughly $8m on hand by the end of the year.

Mr Trump, meanwhile, is competing with Nikki Haley for a pool of campaign cash from billionaire Republican megadonors that could keep Mr Trump’s PACs afloat.

Robert Bigelow, formerly Ron DeSantis’s largest donor, told Reuters on Tuesday that he gave Mr Trump $1m to support his legal fees and agreed to donate another $20m to a Trump-aligned super PAC for campaign purposes.

“I gave him $1m towards his legal fees a few weeks ago. I made a promise to give him $20m more, that will be to the super PAC,” he told the outlet.

Taylor Swift, Travis Kelce and a MAGA Meltdown

The fulminations surrounding the world’s biggest pop icon — and girlfriend of Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce — reached the stratosphere after Kansas City made it to the Super Bowl.

By Jonathan Weisman – January 31, 2024

Travis Kelce, left, wearing football pads with an AFC Champion T-shirt and hat that says Super Bowl, kisses Taylor Swift on the field after a game.
Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce after the Chiefs’ victory on Sunday. They are the focus of right-wing vitriol and conspiracy theories. Credit…Julio Cortez/Associated Press

For football fans eager to see a new team in the Super Bowl, the conference championship games on Sunday that sent the Kansas City Chiefs and San Francisco 49ers back to the main event of American sports culture were sorely disappointing.

But one thing is new: Taylor Swift. And she is driving the movement behind Donald Trump bonkers.

Listen to This Article

Open this article in the New York Times Audio app on iOS.

The fulminations surrounding the world’s biggest pop icon — and girlfriend of Travis Kelce, the Chiefs’ star tight end — reached the stratosphere after Kansas City made it to the Super Bowl for the fourth time in five years, and the first time since Ms. Swift joined the team’s entourage.

The conspiracy theories coming out of the Make America Great Again contingent were already legion: that Ms. Swift is a secret agent of the Pentagon; that she is bolstering her fan base in preparation for her endorsement of President Biden’s re-election; or that she and Mr. Kelce are a contrived couple, assembled to boost the N.F.L. or Covid vaccines or Democrats or whatever.

“I wonder who’s going to win the Super Bowl next month,” Vivek Ramaswamy, the conspiratorial presidential candidate, turned Trump surrogate, pondered on social media on Monday. “And I wonder if there’s a major presidential endorsement coming from an artificially culturally propped-up couple this fall.”

The pro-Trump broadcaster Mike Crispi led off on Sunday by claiming that the National Football League is “rigged” in order to spread “Democrat propaganda”: “Calling it now: KC wins, goes to Super Bowl, Swift comes out at the halftime show and ‘endorses’ Joe Biden with Kelce at midfield.”

Other detractors of Ms. Swift among Mr. Trump’s biggest fans include one of his lawyers, Alina Habba, one of his biggest conspiracy theorists, Jack Posobiec, and other MAGA luminaries like Laura Loomer and Charlie Kirk, who leads a pro-Trump youth organization, Turning Point USA.

The right has been fuming about Ms. Swift since September, when she urged her fans on Instagram to register to vote, and the online outfit Vote.org reported a surge of 35,000 registrations in response. Ms. Swift had embarked on a world tour that helped make her a billionaire. Gavin Newsom, the California governor, praised her as “profoundly powerful.” And then Time magazine made her Person of the Year in December, kicking off another round of MAGA indignation.

The love story that linked her world with the N.F.L. has proved incendiary. Mr. Kelce’s advertisements promoting Pfizer’s Covid vaccine and Bud Light — already a target of outrage from the right over a social media promotion with a transgender influencer, Dylan Mulvaney — added fuel to that raging fire.

Taylor Swift onstage, middle, while she is projected onto two screens at left and right, in the middle of a stadium.
Ms. Swift embarked on a worldwide stadium tour last year, which included a May stop at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey. Credit…Jutharat Pinyodoonyachet for The New York Times

The N.F.L.’s fan base is huge and diverse, but it includes a profoundly conservative element that cheered on the star quarterback Aaron Rodgers’s one-man crusade against Covid vaccines and jeered Black players who knelt during the national anthem. The league has long battled charges of misogyny, from the front offices of the Washington Commanders to multiple cases of sexual and domestic assault and abuse.

The Swift-Kelce story line, for some, has delivered a bruising hit to traditional gender norms, with a rich, powerful woman elevating a successful football player to a new level of fame.

Some of the Monday morning quarterbacking has been downright silly, including speculation that Ms. Swift is after Mr. Kelce for his money. (Her net worth exceeds $1 billion, a different universe than the athlete’s merely wealthy status.)

Other accusations appear to be driven by fear and grounded in some truth, or at least in her command of her 279 million Instagram followers: that she has enormous influence, and has supported Democrats in the past. For much of her extensive music career, Ms. Swift avoided politics, but in 2018, she endorsed two Democrats in Tennessee, where she owns two homes: former Gov. Phil Bredesen, who was running for the Senate against then-Representative Marsha Blackburn, and Jim Cooper, a House member who has since retired.

“I always have and always will cast my vote based on which candidate will protect and fight for the human rights I believe we all deserve in this country,” she wrote on social media. “I believe in the fight for L.G.B.T.Q. rights, and that any form of discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender is WRONG.”

She added, “I believe that the systemic racism we still see in this country towards people of color is terrifying, sickening and prevalent.”

The alarm bells were loud enough to pull Mr. Trump into loudly backing Ms. Blackburn: “I’m sure Taylor Swift doesn’t know anything about her,” he said at the time, knowing all too well how influential Ms. Swift could be. “Let’s say that I like Taylor’s music about 25 percent less now, OK?”

He probably liked her even less in 2020 when she criticized his pandemic response, and then endorsed Mr. Biden.

While her early pop music may have mainly attracted teens and preteens, those fans have reached voting age, and her music has grown more sophisticated with the albums “Evermore” and “Folklore” to match her millennial roots and her fans’ taste.

Taylor Swift fans taking selfies outside a merchandise booth before a concert.
In September, Ms. Swift urged her fans on Instagram to register to vote, yielding a surge of 35,000 registrations on the website Vote.org. Credit…Jutharat Pinyodoonyachet for The New York Times

Much of the Swift paranoia has lurked on the MAGA fringes, with people like Ms. Loomer, the conspiracy theorist from Florida who declared in December that “2024 will be MAGA vs Swifties” and Mr. Kirk, who declared in November that Ms. Swift would “come out for the presidential election” after Democrats had another strong showing in an election that demonstrated the issue of abortion motivated voters to the polls.

“All the Swifties want is swift abortion,” he said.

Then Swift-bashing reached Fox News in mid-January. The host Jesse Watters suggested the superstar was a Defense Department asset engaging in psychological warfare. He tied Ms. Swift’s political voice with her boyfriend’s Pfizer endorsement to the remarkable success of her Eras tour, which bolstered local economies and landed her on the cover of Time.

“Have you ever wondered why or how she blew up like this?” Mr. Watters wondered on air. “Well, around four years ago, the Pentagon psychological operations unit floated turning Taylor Swift into an asset during a NATO meeting.”

Andrea Hailey, the chief executive of Vote.org, made the most of the Fox News criticism, saying the organization’s partnership with Ms. Swift “is helping all Americans make their voices heard at the ballot box,” adding that the star is “not a psy-op or a Pentagon asset.”

But her appearance on the field with Mr. Kelce in Baltimore after the Chiefs beat the Ravens on Sunday, complete with a kiss and a hug, appears to have sent conservatives into a fit of apoplexy that may only grow in the run-up to Super Bowl LVIII in Las Vegas Feb. 11.

The feelings are so strong that Fox News ran a segment on Sunday lamenting that Ms. Swift’s private “jet belches tons of CO2 emissions,” showing a sudden awareness of the leading cause of global warming.

Mr. Ramaswamy said his Super Bowl conjecture was dead serious.

“What your kind of people call ‘conspiracy theories,’ I simply call an amalgam of collective incentives hiding in plain sight,” he said.

The White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre stoked speculation still more by invoking the Hatch Act, which prohibits political actions by civil servants, in declining to answer whether Mr. Biden would be appearing with Ms. Swift.

“I’m just going to leave it there,” she said Monday. “I’m not going to get into the president’s schedule at all from here, as it relates to the 2024 elections.”

The Trump campaign, which had initially planned to ignore the frenzy, dispatched Karoline Leavitt, a campaign spokeswoman, to dismiss concerns about a potential Biden endorsement.

“I don’t think this endorsement will save him from the calamity” of his record, she said.

Audio produced by Parin Behrooz.

Jonathan Weisman is a politics writer, covering campaigns with an emphasis on economic and labor policy. He is based in Chicago. 

Half of US tenants can’t afford to pay their rent. Here’s what’s ahead

CNN

Half of US tenants can’t afford to pay their rent. Here’s what’s ahead

Anna Bahney, CNN – January 30, 2024

Gabby Jones/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Half of renters in the United States have found themselves paying more than they can afford, following years of surging rents. But an increase in the construction of multiple-unit buildings has boosted the supply of apartments, which is slowly beginning to rein in runaway rents.

Nationally, rents declined annually in December for the eighth straight month, according to Realtor.com’s monthly report. The median asking rent was $1,713, which was down $4 from November and down $63 from the July 2022 peak.

However, median rent is still $309 higher than the same time in 2019, before the pandemic. That’s a 22% increase.

And people have been feeling it. In some places, rents aren’t dropping at all. Rent is just increasing at a slower pace.

Still, even if rents aren’t dropping like a rock, they aren’t expected to be skyrocketing in the same way this year.

This may come as some relief to the 22.4 million households who, according to Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies, pay more than a third of their income in rent.

Paying anything above the standard 30% threshold is commonly considered a cost burden.

What’s more, 12 million of those renters are severely cost burdened, which means they are spending more than half their income on housing.

The report reveals several disturbing records, including the record-high number of renters in housing they cannot afford and a record-high number of people who are homeless, said Chris Herbert, managing director of the Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies.

In addition, the report found that evictions are rising as pandemic protections have expired and a record-high number of income-eligible renters can’t get assistance as rental support falls short.

Rents are cooling off but affordability remains untenable

“Rental conditions are softening, but affordability conditions are worse than ever before,” said Whitney Airgood-Obrycki, senior research associate at the Harvard center, who presented some of the report’s findings.

Following changes in housing needs during the pandemic and an already existing low supply of multifamily housing in some markets, rents surged in 2021 and 2022. But that has changed in 2023 thanks to increased supply, the report showed.

Rent growth peaked at a record breaking 15% annually in the first quarter of 2022, before starting to slow. By the end of 2023, rents were growing by just 0.4% annually.

Even cities with the most intractable rents are seeing some cooling.

In November rents dropped in Manhattan for the first time in 27 months. The median rent fell to $4,000, down 4.6% from October and down 2.3% from the year before, according to a report from the brokerage firm Douglas Elliman and Miller Samuel Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants.

“We’re seeing supply and demand switch places in real time,” said Anthemos Georgiades, chief executive of Zumper, an online rental marketplace. “Pandemic-fueled migrations have slowed just as new multifamily buildings are coming online in many markets.”

He added that winter is a slow time for renters to move, which is driving demand even lower right now.

“Renters have more leverage right now than anytime in recent memory,” Georgiades said.

New supply helps, but may not last long

Multifamily building has been booming at a pace not seen in decades.

About 436,000 multifamily units were completed in the third quarter of last year, on a seasonally adjusted basis, which was the highest level since 1988, and up about a third from pre-pandemic levels, according to the Harvard report.

And there are more in the pipeline.

The number of multifamily units under construction peaked in July at over 1 million, the highest level on record, according to the US Census Bureau. While the number has stayed at a historically higher level since then, it has been ticking down on a seasonally adjusted annualized basis.

Builders are facing higher costs due to interest rates on their loans, material costs and land costs, and are already pulling back on building. As a result, the National Association of Home Builders forecasts that multifamily construction will decrease by about 20% next year.

While the increase in new construction and available apartments has been a boon to the market, there may not be new units coming at the same pace in the future. That’s despite large demand from Baby Boomers and Millennials, and also Gen Z aging into apartment renting.

Without continued new supply in addition to enhanced rental support, the Harvard report concludes affordability will remain a critical concern for many renters.

‘Smoking gun proof’: fossil fuel industry knew of climate danger as early as 1954, documents show

The Guardian

‘Smoking gun proof’: fossil fuel industry knew of climate danger as early as 1954, documents show

Oliver Milman – January 30, 2024

<span>Composite: The Guardian/Special Collections & Archives, UC San Diego/Lyndon B Johnson Library</span>
Composite: The Guardian/Special Collections & Archives, UC San Diego/Lyndon B Johnson Library

The fossil fuel industry funded some of the world’s most foundational climate science as early as 1954, newly unearthed documents have shown, including the early research of Charles Keeling, famous for the so-called “Keeling curve” that has charted the upward march of the Earth’s carbon dioxide levels.

Related: ‘How to greenwash’: propane industry tries to rebrand fuel as renewable

A coalition of oil and car manufacturing interests provided $13,814 (about $158,000 in today’s money) in December 1954 to fund Keeling’s earliest work in measuring CO2 levels across the western US, the documents reveal.

Keeling would go on to establish the continuous measurement of global CO2 at the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii. This “Keeling curve” has tracked the steady increase of the atmospheric carbon that drives the climate crisis and has been hailed as one of the most important scientific works of modern times.

The fossil fuel interests backed a group, known as the Air Pollution Foundation, that issued funding to Keeling to measure CO2 alongside a related effort to research the smog that regularly blighted Los Angeles at the time. This is earlier than any previously known climate research funded by oil companies.

In the research proposal for the money – uncovered by Rebecca John, a researcher at the Climate Investigations Center, and published by the climate website DeSmog – Keeling’s research director, Samuel Epstein, wrote about a new carbon isotope analysis that could identify “changes in the atmosphere” caused by the burning of coal and petroleum.

“The possible consequences of a changing concentration of the CO2 in the atmosphere with reference to climate, rates of photosynthesis, and rates of equilibration with carbonate of the oceans may ultimately prove of considerable significance to civilization,” Epstein, a researcher at the California Institute of Technology (or Caltech), wrote to the group in November 1954.

Experts say the documents show the fossil fuel industry had intimate involvement in the inception of modern climate science, along with its warnings of the severe harm climate change will wreak, only to then publicly deny this science for decades and fund ongoing efforts to delay action on the climate crisis.

“They contain smoking gun proof that by at least 1954, the fossil fuel industry was on notice about the potential for its products to disrupt Earth’s climate on a scale significant to human civilization,” said Geoffrey Supran, an expert in historic climate disinformation at the University of Miami.

“These findings are a startling confirmation that big oil has had its finger on the pulse of academic climate science for 70 years – for twice my lifetime – and a reminder that it continues to do so to this day. They make a mockery of the oil industry’s denial of basic climate science decades later.”

Previous investigations of public and private records have found that major oil companies spent decades conducting their own research into the consequences of burning their product, often to an uncannily accurate degree – a study last year found that Exxon scientists made “breathtakingly” accurate predictions of global heating in the 1970s and 1980s.

Related: US oil lobby launches eight-figure ad blitz amid record fossil fuel extraction

The newly discovered documents now show the industry knew of CO2’s potential climate impact as early as 1954 via, strikingly, the work of Keeling, then a 26-year-old Caltech researcher conducting formative work measuring CO2 levels across California and the waters of the Pacific ocean. There is no suggestion that oil and gas funding distorted his research in any way.

The findings of this work would lead the US scientist to further experiments upon the Mauna Loa volcano in Hawaii that were to provide a continual status report of the world’s dangerously-rising carbon dioxide composition.

Keeling died in 2005 but his seminal work lives on. Currently, the Earth’s atmospheric CO2 level is 422 parts per million, which is nearly a third higher than the first reading taken in 1958, and a 50% jump on pre-industrial levels.

This essential tracking of the primary heat-trapping gas that has pushed global temperatures to higher than ever previously experienced in human civilization was born, in part, due to the backing of the Air Pollution Foundation.

A total of 18 automotive companies, including Ford, Chrysler and General Motors, gave money to the foundation. Other entities, including banks and retailers, also contributed funding.

Separately, a 1959 memo identifies the American Petroleum Institute (API), the US’s leading oil and gas lobbying body, and the Western Oil and Gas Association, now known as the Western States Petroleum Association, as “major contributors to the funds of the Air Pollution Foundation”. It’s not clear exactly when API started funding the foundation but it had a representative on a research committee from mid-1955 onwards.

A policy statement of the Air Pollution Foundation from 1955 calls the problem of air pollution, which is caused by the emissions of cars, trucks and industrial facilities, “one of the most serious confronting urban areas in California and elsewhere” and that the issue will be addressed via “diligent and honest fact finding, by wise and effective action”.

Related: Big oil ‘fully owned the villain role’ in 2023, the hottest year ever recorded

The unearthed documents come from the Caltech archives, the US National Archives, the University of California at San Diego and Los Angeles newspapers from the 1950s, and represent what may be the first instance of the fossil fuel industry being informed of the potentially dire consequences of its business model.

The oil and gas industry was initially concerned with research related to smog and other direct air pollutants before branching out into related climate change impacts, according to Carroll Muffett, chief executive of the Center for International Environmental Law.

“You just come back to the oil and gas industry again and again, they were omnipresent in this space,” he said. “The industry was not just on notice but deeply aware of the potential climate implications of its products for going on 70 years.”

Muffett said the documents add further impetus to efforts in various jurisdictions to hold oil and gas firms legally liable for the damages caused by the climate crisis.

“These documents talk about CO2 emissions having planetary implications, meaning this industry understood extraordinarily early on that fossil fuel combustion was profound on a planetary scale,” he said.

“There is overwhelming evidence the oil and gas industry has been misleading the public and regulators around the climate risks of their product for 70 years. Trusting them to be part of the solutions is foolhardy. We’ve now moved into an era of accountability.”

API and Ralph Keeling, Charles’s son who is also a scientist, were contacted for comment about the documents but did not respond.

Iconic lake once known for its crystal-clear waters is on the verge of extinction: ‘The damage done … cannot be compensated’

The Cool Down

Iconic lake once known for its crystal-clear waters is on the verge of extinction: ‘The damage done … cannot be compensated’

Jeremiah Budin – January 30, 2024

Anchar Lake, located in the Kashmir region, is on the verge of disappearing entirely, despite calls for action from environmentalists that have been going unheeded for more than a decade.

What is happening?

Once a major tourist destination, Anchar Lake has fallen victim to the same forces that have negatively impacted so many bodies of water and parts of nature throughout the world — pollution, overdevelopment, and governments that prioritize protecting profits over the environment.

“The lake was once a beautiful tourist attraction, but over the past many years, it has turned into a polluted wasteland,” one nearby resident told Rising Kashmir.

Why is this concerning?

A century ago, the lake encompassed 7.5 square miles. Today, it has been reduced to 2.6 square miles, with more than half of that area comprised of marshland. Contributing factors include unregulated development around the area that has pushed silt and sediment into the lake.

Improper sewage and drainage systems have filtered waste into the lake, making its waters toxic and inhospitable to the bird and fish species that once thrived there.

“The lake is under tremendous anthropogenic pressures, which have resulted in deterioration of its water quality. The entire liquid and solid wastes generated on the peripheral areas situated at higher contours where people live find its way into the lake. Even the agricultural waste of the above area is disposed of in it,” Ajaz Rasool, an environmentalist and hydraulic engineer, told Greater Kashmir.

What is being done about it?

Greater Kashmir laid out several steps that need to be taken to ensure that Anchar Lake does not become extinct, which would be devastating for local wildlife that has already seen its habitat harmed dramatically.

These steps include officially making the conservation of the lake the responsibility of the Lake Conservation and Management Authority, erecting fences around the area to prevent further development and encroachment, plugging drains that filter waste into the lake, and rebuilding the sewage system.

“It is the responsibility of the Government and people to join hands to restore the glory of Anchar, as both are responsible for its deterioration. Damage done to the environment is irreparable and cannot be compensated in any form,” the piece concluded.

Join our free newsletter for cool news and cool tips that make it easy to help yourself while helping the planet.

In Biden’s pledge to ‘shut down’ border, a stunning political shift

CNN

In Biden’s pledge to ‘shut down’ border, a stunning political shift

Analysis by Zachary B. Wolf, CNN – January 29, 2024

President Joe Biden’s evolution on the key election issue of immigration entered a new phase when he promised to “shut down the border right now” if given new powers by Congress.

The deeper policy context of the comments, delivered at a campaign event in South Carolina Saturday and in a statement from the White House on Friday, is that Biden wants to resuscitate a bipartisan deal to pair new border powers with additional military aid for Ukraine and Israel.

But the Trump-like rhetoric from the Democratic president – and the fact that Democrats are not even talking about a pathway to legal status for undocumented immigrants currently in the country – is also an important political admission as immigration-focused Donald Trump zeroes in on the Republican presidential nomination and the border crisis reverberates through the country and into Washington, DC.

Biden is willing to offer concessions so he can make deals, and Trump wants to keep this as a campaign issue.

Trump wants to kill bipartisan deal

“As the leader of our party, there is zero chance I will support this horrible, open-borders betrayal of America,” Trump said in Nevada on Saturday, although future Republican presidents would also benefit from the new power Biden is seeking.

Trump doesn’t think the president needs new power to shut the border. He has promised that, if elected, he will act as “dictator for one day” to do it, and he’s actively working against the bipartisan effort even though parts of it are straight out of his policy playbook.

“The reality is that this includes many provisions that when Donald Trump was president, he hoped would be made into law,” said CNN’s Lauren Fox, appearing Monday on “Inside Politics.” These Trump-friendly priorities, she said, include making it much more difficult for migrants to seek asylum in the US and increasing the speed at which asylum cases can be processed in immigration courts.

Biden’s acknowledgment

CNN’s Priscilla Alvarez, a White House reporter who is also an expert on the issue of immigration, documents Biden’s shift.

“Biden took office pledging to restore asylum and manage the border in a ‘humane’ way,” Alvarez writes. “But his administration has faced the harsh realities and challenges at the US-Mexico border amid record migration across the Western Hemisphere — making it a political vulnerability seized on by Republicans.”

A man crosses the Rio Grande River from Mexico to collect clothing and other items left on the Texas banks of Shelby Park at the US-Mexico border in Eagle Pass, Texas, on January 12, 2024. - Kaylee Greenlee Beal/Reuters
A man crosses the Rio Grande River from Mexico to collect clothing and other items left on the Texas banks of Shelby Park at the US-Mexico border in Eagle Pass, Texas, on January 12, 2024. – Kaylee Greenlee Beal/Reuters
Permanent power for the president

The new permanent power pushed by Biden and Senate negotiators is in line with temporary, Covid-era restrictions originally put in place during Trump’s administration, but which lapsed last year on Biden’s watch.

Following Trump’s lead, rather than work with the president to secure the border, House Republicans have rejected even the idea of a Senate compromise and are gearing up to impeach Biden’s secretary of Homeland Security, Alejandro Mayorkas, for not applying current law to turn away more people at the border.

Still no deal in writing

The framing of this issue may end up being more important than the policy itself. The bipartisan group of senators has not released text for their compromise, but they insist it does exist.

“We do have a bipartisan deal. We’re finishing the text right now,” Sen. Chris Murphy, the Connecticut Democrat who is a key negotiator on the deal, said on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday.

“The question is whether Republicans are going to listen to Donald Trump, who wants to preserve chaos at the border because he thinks that it’s a winning political issue for him,” said Murphy, adding the proposal would give the president, Republican or Democrat, permanent new emergency powers.

What we know

While the text of the bill has not been finalized, Biden ticked off the major points during that appearance in South Carolina:

  • “It includes an additional 1,300 Border Patrols — we need more agents on the border;
  • 375 immigration judges to judge whether or not someone can come or not come and be fair about it;
  • 1,600 asylum officers;
  • and over 100 cutting-edge inspection machines to help detect and stop fentanyl coming in.”
GOP negotiator censured by his own party

Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma, the top Republican negotiator, is already facing blowback even though the deal has not been publicly released.

The Oklahoma Republican Party voted over the weekend to censure Lankford and demanded that he abandon the bipartisan talks.

Appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” Lankford was pressed about the new authority for Biden, which would be triggered if there’s an average of 5,000 migrant crossings per day over the course of a full week. Lankford said this would not normalize 5,000 migrant crossings per day. And for context, border officials were dealing with more than 10,000 crossings per day for most of December.

“This is set up for if you have a rush of people coming at the border, the border closes down – no one gets in,” he said. “This is not someone standing at the border with a little clicker, saying, ‘I’m going to let one more in, we’re at 4,999 and then it has to stop.’ It is a shutdown of the border, and everyone actually gets turned around.”

Democrats waiting for details too

Rank-and-file Democrats would surely be frustrated with such a compromise, which does not address their long-term immigration priorities, like giving permanent legal status to the children of undocumented immigrants who were raised in the US or paving a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants who have built lives and paid taxes in the US.

“We have milestones and we have a path to get there, but we were never going to get a path to citizenship in this bill,” former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told CNN’s Dana Bash on Sunday.

Frustration in US cities

Meanwhile, mayors of Democratic cities continue to raise the alarm about an untenable wave of migrants bused north from border states and draining their infrastructure.

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson plans to begin evicting some asylum-seekers from shelters in his city later this week. Next week, Denver Mayor Mike Johnston plans to follow suit. In strapped New York City, CNN visited a tent city on Randall’s Island.

The public view of the current immigration situation has shifted

Nearly half – 45% of Americans in a CBS News poll released early this month – said the situation at the border is a crisis.

And a strong majority of the public – 63% now compared with 55% in September – said the Biden administration should be tougher on immigrants crossing at the border. More than two-thirds, 68%, said they disapproved of Biden’s handling of the border, although that does not translate into support for Republicans. Sixty-five percent of Americans said they disapproved of congressional Republicans’ handling of the issue.

Americans are still broadly supportive of immigration, however. In a Gallup poll released last July, 68% said the overall effect of immigration was a good thing for the US, compared with just 27% who said it was a bad thing.

After publication, White House spokesperson Angelo Fernandez Hernandez provided this statement:

“The American people overwhelmingly agree with what President Biden underlined in his Day One reform plan: that our immigration system is broken and we have an imperative to secure the border and treat migrants with dignity,” Fernandez Hernandez said in an email. “After opposing the record border security funding President Biden has delivered every year of his administration, House Republicans are blocking the border security resources President Biden is fighting for in order to hire more Border Patrol officers and invest in cutting edge technology to detect fentanyl.”