My slate of the most sweeping set of anti-corruption plans since Watergate.

 

Here's the way I see it: The American people should have complete confidence that government officials are making decisions with only one factor in mind: the public interest. Not their own pocketbooks. Not their future job prospects in the private sector. Not the wishes of big donors and giant corporations. The public interest. So I’ve got a whole bunch of plans to root corruption out of Washington. Some are more specific, like my Department of Defense Ethics and Anti-Corruption Act, which would limit the influence of contractors on the military, constrain foreign influence on retired senior military officers, and require greater transparency from contractors in their interactions with the Pentagon. Or my Judicial Ethics and Anti-Corruption Act, which would strengthen ethical standards up and down our judiciary, impose an enforceable code of conduct on the Supreme Court, and ban federal judges from owning individual stock. Or my Presidential Conflicts of Interest Act, which would require the president and vice president to disclose and divest from any potential financial conflicts of interest. That’s a standard that President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris have already cleared — and that all their successors should be held to. Especially after we saw Donald Trump run the most corrupt administration in modern history. Or my bipartisan legislation to reform the Federal Reserve, which would bar big bank executives from serving on Reserve Bank boards of directors, subject directors to ethics and financial conflict of interest rules, and bring increased transparency and accountability to the Fed. And then I’ve got my big plan: the Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act. It’s the most sweeping set of reforms since Watergate. And it would fundamentally change the way Washington does business, including… Banning all individual stock ownership by members of Congress, Cabinet secretaries, senior congressional staff, federal judges, White House staff, and other senior agency officials while in office. Prohibiting all federal officials from holding or trading stock if its value might be influenced by their agency, department, or actions. Tightening conflict of interest and recusal requirements. Padlocking the revolving door between industry and government. Creating a new, independent anti-corruption agency dedicated to enforcing federal ethics laws. Expanding an independent and empowered Congressional ethics office. All of these plans have two things in common. They’re about putting our government on the side of the people — not the powerful special interests. And they’re only possible if we grow and strengthen our grassroots movement. That’s how we beat Big Money. Every donation is another signal that the American people are demanding real change and calling for a country that works for everyone, not just the rich and powerful. I’m deeply grateful to fight by your side. Thanks for being a part of this, Elizabeth

Paid for by Warren for Senate All content © 2024 Warren for Senate, All Rights Reserved PO Box 171375, Boston, MA 02117

RSN: FOCUS: Masha Gessen | Putin's Unchanging, Unthinking Response to Alexey Navalny

 

26 January 21

It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News

STAYING ALIVE ON READER DONATIONS AIN’T EASY — You don’t get rich this way. That’s not the question on the table. The question on the table is can you to make a donation you can afford? Yes that works and always has. In Peace and Solidarity. / Marc Ash, Founder Reader Supported News

Sure, I'll make a donation!

---

FOCUS: Masha Gessen | Putin's Unchanging, Unthinking Response to Alexey Navalny

Masha Gessen, The New Yorker
Gessen writes: "Alexey Navalny's latest video report has been viewed more than eighty-eight million times in the seven days since it was posted. Navalny, who has been in jail for the past week, bills the film as his anti-corruption organization's biggest investigation to date."
READ MORE

---

Contribute to RSN

Update My Monthly Donation

 

Elizabeth Warren slams Justice Alito over 'nakedly partisan' speech

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) on Friday condemned Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito over a speech he gave Thursday at the Federalist Society’s annual meeting, which Warren called a “nakedly partisan” address. 

“Supreme Court Justices aren't supposed to be political hacks,” the former 2020 Democratic presidential candidate wrote on Twitter. “This right-wing speech is nakedly partisan.

“My bill to #EndCorruptionNow restores some integrity to our Court by forcing Justices to follow the ethics rules other federal judges follow,” Warren added, referring to her proposed Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act aimed at preventing corruption in politics and political partisanship in the justice system. 

In Alito’s Thursday remarks given via video, the justice claimed that the coronavirus pandemic has caused "previously unimaginable" restrictions on liberty, according to Reuters. 

Alito specifically pointed out the effect of the restrictions on religious events, such as Easter Sunday and Yom Kippur.

Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D) also took aim at Alito, tweeting Friday morning that the justice was a “full-on partisan crusader.” 

It is generally considered the norm for Supreme Court justices and federal judges to refrain from commenting on politically partisan issues, with many believing that the legal professionals have a responsibility to be fair adjudicators of the law, rather than political advocates.

LGBT rights groups also criticized Alito after he said in Thursday’s remarks: “You can’t say that marriage is a union between one man and one woman. Until recently, that’s what the vast majority of Americans thought. Now, it's considered bigotry.” 

“That this would happen after our decision in Obergefell should not have come as a surprise,” he added, referencing the landmark 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision that guaranteed gay marriage rights across the country. 

On Thursday, Alito cited his dissent in the case, in which he argued that the majority opinion would lead to those who “cling to traditional views on marriage” being “labeled as bigots and treated as such by governments, employers and schools.”

In response, Alphonso David, president of the Human Rights Campaign, argued on Twitter that Alito “shed any pretense of impartiality in a politically charged speech, again attacking the Obergefell decision.”

“Justice Alito: our love and our marriages are valid,” David added. “There is no tension between full equality and religious liberty.”

LINK