Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Seattle blocks foreign spending in elections

Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan

Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan is expected to sign the legislation, which was unanimously approved by the city council Monday.

Karen Ducey/Getty Images

The Seattle City Council unanimously approved legislation Monday that would ban most spending on local politics by foreign-influenced corporations.

The measure would prevent corporations owned in whole or in significant part by foreign entities from spending money in local elections. Seattle is the second city to enact such a measure. The other is St. Petersburg, Fla.

Seattle's legislation was advanced in response to corporations led by Amazon — which is headquartered in the city and is the region's biggest tech employer — spending millions to influence the city's election last year. Although it's based in the United States, Amazon could still be barred from future political spending in Seattle if its foreign investors own a considerable portion of the company.


Mayor Jenny Durkan has signaled support for this legislation and is likely to sign it soon. Once enacted, businesses will be prohibited from election spending if any foreigner has more than a 1 percent stake, if two or more foreigners have holdings worth at least 5 percent, or if any foreigner is involved in the corporation's political activity.

Maryland, Massachusetts and New York City are considering similar measures. In November, the Center for American Progress unveiled proposed legislation that would implement these provisions at the federal level.

Ellen Weintraub, commissioner on the Federal Election Commission, praised Seattle for passing this bill in an opinion piecefor The New York Times. The former FEC chair said she believes it would survive a potential court challenge.

"If even a very conservative Supreme Court is asked to rule that the government is powerless to stop hostile foreign interests from surreptitiously acting to influence our elections, I have difficulty believing it will do so," Weintraub wrote. "It is one thing to find that the First Amendment bars a campaign-finance law from applying to citizens. It is quite another to hold that the First Amendment requires unconditional national surrender to foreign attempts to undermine our democracy. No judge should have an appetite for the latter."

Read More

Communication concept with multi colored abstract people icons.

Research shows that emotional, cognitive, and social mechanisms drive both direct and indirect contact, offering scalable ways to reduce political polarization.

Getty Images, Eoneren

“Direct” and “Indirect” Contact Methods Likely Work in Similar Ways, so They Should Both Be Effective

In a previous article, we argued that efforts to improve the political environment should reach Americans as media consumers, in addition to seeking public participation. Reaching Americans as media consumers uses media like film, TV, and social media to change what Americans see and hear about fellow Americans across the political spectrum. Participant-based efforts include dialogues and community-based activities that require active involvement.

In this article, we show that the mechanisms underlying each type of approach are quite similar. The categories of mechanisms we cover are emotional, cognitive, relational, and repetitive. We use the terms from the academic literature, “direct” and “indirect” contact, which are fairly similar to participant and media consumer approaches, respectively.

Keep ReadingShow less
Millions Could Lose Housing Aid Under Trump Plan

Photo illustration by Alex Bandoni/ProPublica. Source images: Chicago History Museum and eobrazy

Getty Images

Millions Could Lose Housing Aid Under Trump Plan

Some 4 million people could lose federal housing assistance under new plans from the Trump administration, according to experts who reviewed drafts of two unpublished rules obtained by ProPublica. The rules would pave the way for a host of restrictions long sought by conservatives, including time limits on living in public housing, work requirements for many people receiving federal housing assistance and the stripping of aid from entire families if one member of the household is in the country illegally.

The first Trump administration tried and failed to implement similar policies, and renewed efforts have been in the works since early in the president’s second term. Now, the documents obtained by ProPublica lay out how the administration intends to overhaul major housing programs that serve some of the nation’s poorest residents, with sweeping reforms that experts and advocates warn will weaken the social safety net amid historically high rents, home prices and homelessness.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump’s Ultimatums and the Erosion of Presidential Credibility

Donald Trump

YouTube

Trump’s Ultimatums and the Erosion of Presidential Credibility

On Friday, October 3rd, President Donald Trump issued a dramatic ultimatum on Truth Social, stating this is the “LAST CHANCE” for Hamas to accept a 20-point peace proposal backed by Israel and several Arab nations. The deadline, set for Sunday at 6:00 p.m. EDT, was framed as a final opportunity to avoid catastrophic consequences. Trump warned that if Hamas rejected the deal, “all HELL, like no one has ever seen before, will break out against Hamas,” and that its fighters would be “hunted down and killed.”

Ordinarily, when a president sets a deadline, the world takes him seriously. In history, Presidential deadlines signal resolve, seriousness, and the weight of executive authority. But with Trump, the pattern is different. His history of issuing ultimatums and then quietly backing off has dulled the edge of his threats and raised questions about their strategic value.

Keep ReadingShow less