General Strike Brings Argentina to a Halt Over Milei Austerity Program

The unions blasted President Javier Milei’s attacks on labor rights, social security, public health and education.

By Jessica Corbett

May 12, 2024

Source: Truthout

First general strike against Milei, January, 2024 (Credit: Santiago Sito / Flickr)

Argentina’s primary trade union federation on Thursday held another nationwide general strike, the second called since President Javier Milei, a far-right economist, took office in December and began pursuing sweeping austerity and deregulation.

The South American nation’s unions organized the strike “in defense of democracy, labor rights, and the living wage,” according to a statement from the General Confederation of Labor (CGT), the Argentine Workers’ Central Union (CTA), and the Autonomous CTA.

“It is a day of resistance and demand,” the groups said, blasting the Milei government’s “brutal” attacks on labor rights, social security, public health, education, science, and “our cultural identity.” The policies of austerity, say opponents, have disproportionately impacted working people and retirees.

The labor groups called out the government for promoting “dangerous policies for the privatization of public enterprises” and pushing for “a phenomenal transfer of resources to the most concentrated and privileged sectors of the economy.”

CGT celebrated the 24-hour strike’s success on Friday, declaring that “Argentina stopped,” and sharing photos of sparsely populated roads, transit hubs, and other public spaces.

As the Buenos Aires Times reported:

In the nation’s capital, streets were mostly empty, with very little public transport. Many schools and banks closed their doors while most shops were shuttered. Garbage was left uncollected.

Rail and port terminals were closed, while the industrial action forced the cancellation of hundreds of flights, leaving airports semi-deserted. Some buses—from firms that did not take part in the strike—were running in the morning, although with few passengers. Cars were circulating, but traffic levels were similar to that seen on weekends.

The port of Rosario, which exports 80% of the nation’s agro-industrial production, was all but paralysed in the midst of its busiest season.

A spokesperson for Milei, Manuel Adorni, claimed the nationwide action was “an attack on the pocket and against the will of the people” by those “who have curtailed the progress of Argentines over the last 25 years,” the newspaper noted.

Meanwhile, union leaders stressed that the strike was the result of “a government that only benefits the rich at the expense of the people, gives away natural resources, and seeks to eliminate workers’ rights,” as CTA secretary general Hugo Yasky put it.

As the action wound down Thursday, Yasky described it as a “display of dignity of the Argentine people” that sent “a strong message” to Milei’s government as well as the International Monetary Fund “that intends to govern us” and the country’s senators.

Argentina’s Senate is now debating an “omnibus” bill that contains some of Milei’s neoliberal economic policies — including making privatization easier — after the package was approved last week by the Chamber of Deputies, the lower congressional body.

Rubén Sobrero, general secretary of the Railway Union, signaled that more strikes could come if lawmakers continue to advance the president’s policies, telling The Associated Press that “if there is no response within these 24 hours, we’ll do another 36.”

From Europe to North America, trade groups around the world expressed solidarity with Thursday’s strike.

“Milei’s policies have not tackled the decadence of the elites that he decries, instead he has delivered daily misery for millions of working people. Plummeting living standards, contracting production, and the collapse of purchasing power means some people cannot even afford to eat,” said International Trade Union Confederation general secretary Luc Triangle in a statement.

Triangle noted that “the government is targeting the rights of the most vulnerable sectors of the population and key trade union rights, such as collective bargaining, that support greater fairness and equality in society, while threatening those who protest with police repression and criminalization.”

“In this context, the work of the trade unions in Argentina is extraordinary. They have emerged as the main opposition to the government’s dystopian agenda, uniting resistance and building a coalition in defense of workers’ rights and broader democratic principles,” he added. “The demands of the trade unions in Argentina for social justice, democracy, and equality are the demands of working people across the world. Their fight is our fight and that is why the global trade union movement stands with them.”

 them.”

Frances Fox Piven Remembers Columbia, 1968

“You can only take collective action where the collectivity is. And where are students collected together except on campus? The kind of protests they’re doing—building occupations, gatherings on campus, critiquing the university administration—follow logically from their situation.”

By Frances Fox Piven, Stephanie Luce 

May 11, 2024Z 
Source: Convergence

Tom Hayden helping Frances Fox Piven and her daughter Sarah into the occupied math building, Columbia University, 1968.



As the war on Gaza enters its seventh month of unrelenting destruction, students around the world are setting up encampments and occupying buildings to press their institutions to cut financial and academic ties with Israel. Their peaceful and passionate protests are bringing a new level of intensity to the multi-sided movement supporting Palestine. They also recall and build on a living history of similar student actions, from those demanding an end to the Vietnam War in the late 1960s on. In this series, Convergence’s Stephanie Luce interviews people who have been engaged in different generations of campus protests. They share reflections on the organizing they were involved in and the lessons it might offer for today. Here, scholar-activist Frances Piven shares some reflections on the 1968 strike at Columbia University.

Piven is professor emeritus of political science and sociology at the City University of New York (CUNY), a renowned scholar on social movements, and a lifetime activist for welfare rights and other social justice issues. She had been a professor at Columbia University in the 1960s and while her main political commitments were with the welfare rights movement, she had some engagement with antiwar organizing, and knew a number of student activists.

Students at Columbia occupied five buildings on the New York City campus between April 23 – 30, 1968. They demanded that the school cut ties with the Institute for Defense Analyses, which supported military research, and drop plans to build a gymnasium on Morningside Park, city-owned land in the predominantly Black and Puerto Rican neighborhood of Harlem. Police violently busted the occupations, but the university ended up meeting those demands.

Stephanie Luce: How did you get involved in the events at Columbia?

Frances Fox Piven: I had been in a meeting in Washington when the buildings were occupied. I came home from Washington, got my daughter Sarah, and then we walked up Amsterdam Avenue, and we got into the campus at about 117th street.

When we approached the math building, Tom [Hayden] leaned out the window and yelled, “Hey Fran! come on up.” I did. I hoisted Sarah up and all these arms reached out to help her get into the second-floor window. And then I scaled the building. And when we got upstairs, Sarah leaned out a window looking onto Broadway. And the jocks were there and they threw some eggs at her. And the Red Cross–the student operation–was there; everybody was fussing over Sarah and wiping the eggs off her face. Meanwhile John and Tom were giving me an assignment. I was supposed to get the sympathetic faculty to agree to a set of demands, to give to the Administration, which would require a kind of peace and the students would leave the occupied building. It was not my idea. It was their idea.

I went to the student headquarters at Clare Booth Hall and with the left faculty I drafted the plank that the students wanted the administration of Columbia to agree to before they left the building. Those demands were: they had to get rid of the really silly idea that Harlem people had to enter the gym from the basement door; Columbia had to disassociate from the Institute of Defense Analysis; and they had to commit not to punish any of the students. That’s what I remember off the top of my head. I circulated that petition and I couldn’t get anybody to sign it.

By nightfall, most of the faculty had gone home and you could tell the police were getting ready for their assault on the building. They assembled in sort of a battalion, and then they stormed first, the library. And then the Fayerweather building. And I was worried about the math building, not only because I knew some of the people there, but that was the place by reputation that the really radical people were holed up. So I thought that I should go there to bear witness on what they were doing. And I found a guy I knew who was wandering around campus who was a lawyer. And I asked him to come to the math building with me. So we went and stood in front of the math building, and the police assembled in front of it. And they had their bullhorn, and they ordered the students to leave. And every time they ordered the students to leave, the students would yell, “Up against the wall, motherfucker.”

The cops moved on the building. I can’t say exactly what happened then because somebody lifted me up and threw me. And I momentarily lost consciousness. When I regained consciousness, I was out on Broadway. I wasn’t on campus anymore. But I stayed. And I picked up the petition of demands and now I got a few more people to sign it.

Stephanie Luce: So the police attacks helped gain sympathy—which seems to be what’s happening right now today, where the campus encampments have grown larger each time the police make arrests. It seems like for a long time college administrators learned that they don’t call the police. They just wait it out. And they let summer come and the protest dies down. So it seems shocking that Columbia kind of made this mistake again because that mobilizes a whole other level of support.

But so back then, after the police attacked, the petition got more support?

Frances Fox Piven: It got some support. I mean, it wasn’t overwhelming. The next day, or a few days after, there was a faculty meeting called and the first speaker got up and said, “A lot of you don’t know what’s going on here, but I do. I recognize the politics of disruption.” He basically accused the protestors of being Bolsheviks. He had told me already that he was a Menshevik. What he did—what he was trying to do—was to avert a faculty strike. It would have just been the left-liberal faculty, but it still would have been important. But he dissuaded that by saying they were all just stooges. Those were not his words but that is what he meant.

Stephanie Luce: So there wasn’t a faculty strike. And then how did it resolve?

Frances Fox Piven: With a whimper. There were a few little eruptions in the days that followed but basically, they just sputtered.

Stephanie Luce: It is interesting how the Columbia crackdown today has helped spark this wave of encampments. How does this situation today compare to 1968?

Frances Fox Piven: Columbia is more prominent now. But you know, movement action spreads. People get the idea. They get enthused about the possibility, and they imitate each other. That’s not a criticism; people are always imitating each other. That’s how they learn.

I think it was a whole year after the Columbia occupation that the protests at City College (CUNY) erupted, though those protests at CUNY were not about the Vietnam War. They were about incorporating Black and Puerto Rican students. But they were influenced by Columbia.

But before the Columbia occupation, campuses across the country had protests, and they often took the form of building occupation, or at least occupy the Office of the President, or something like that.

Stephanie Luce: Do you see similarities in the reactions to the protest then and now?

Frances Fox Piven: A lot of people said, at the time, “Why are the students attacking the university? The university is on their side, it’s almost the last place they should attack.” But this greatly ignores the exigencies of collective action. You can only take collective action where the collectivity is. So, it was inexperienced people looking for something to criticize. The students had to attack the university. And that’s true now!

The kind of protests they’re doing—building occupations, gatherings on campus, critiquing the university administration—follow logically from their situation. They can be doing other things as well. But there’s a reason that they protest on campus. Protests have to be collective! And where are students collected together except on campus? It’s ridiculous, the critique, that this is not where they should protest. It is the dynamics of movements. And I must say that these stupid university presidents didn’t see how they are making the university a logical target—not just a logistical target.

Stephanie Luce: Some people today are arguing that the Columbia protests today have nothing in common with the 1968 occupation—that the causes were totally different, and that the 1968 ones were justified because they were about American soldiers being killed and coming home in body bags, which isn’t the case today.

Frances Fox Piven: They are completely related. Both are protesting American involvement in a war that is taking place around the globe. We should not be supporting that! At the very least, we should not be supporting it. I mean, it is inevitably different in some ways but it is exactly the same issue.

Stephanie Luce: And our universities are complicit in certain ways. And there was a similar occupation at Columbia in the 1980s, in support of ending apartheid in South Africa. That too called out the ways in which the US government, and our universities, were complicit in oppressive regimes.

So we have a long history of student occupation and protest, and a lot of times they fizzle out and sometimes they’re crushed. These kinds of struggles are hard to win—certainly on big issues like foreign policy. Can you think of examples where they are successful or what might it might take for a campus mobilization to be successful?

Frances Fox Piven: Well, I think that foreign policy is hard. It’s not the same as issues that are campus-based. I haven’t done this, but I think that if you looked at the whole span of student protests over the Vietnam war, would find that there was an impact. You would find greater and greater concern about the war, more public awareness about how it was understood.

And you would find a wariness of the kind of situation at Columbia—and this was a big one for the Administration—which was, they did not want to provoke Harlem. Some of the Black students were the first to leave the occupied building, Hamilton Hall. When I saw those students leave with boxes of groceries, I was very worried that a deal had been made, because those students were the connection to Harlem. And Columbia was very afraid of Harlem.

And after the student occupation, the Ford Foundation gave Columbia $10 million to improve relations with the community. And what did Columbia, in all of its wisdom, do with that money? It created three Chairs in Urban Studies. Herb Gans got one of them. He’s my friend. They also created an urban research institute—that’s not what it was called but that’s what it was. And they pointed my cousin, XX Gunier, Lani Gunier’s father, to be associate head of the Urban Center. It was all cosmetic.

Stephanie Luce: The other critique they are facing today is that the movement itself is anti-Semitic.

Frances Fox Piven: That critique is a problem, and they may need some more help with that problem. One organization that emerges for me right now with a halo is HAIS—the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society. They have worked for every immigrant group that tries to come into the United States, all those people at the border can get advice, counseling, services, from the Hebrew immigrant Aid Society. Given the intensity of the crisis, I think that is so great.

I am Jewish, and that’s what I thought it always meant to be the chosen people: that social justice was very important. HAIS is an example of that. Also, Jews for Racial and Economic Justice, they are as well.

Stephanie Luce: Yes, and groups like Jewish Voice for Peace and Not in Our Name. I just participated in a giant seder in the streets that was also protesting Chuck Shumer’s support for sending more aid to Israel. It was very moving, since I was raised in the same kind of Judaism that you were, that it’s about social justice. Though we were raised to be very pro-Israel, because we didn’t have the real story; we didn’t know what the real history was.

Frances Fox Piven: My mother and father were political socialists. They were not political people at all, but their political socialization came from the Bolsheviks. They were not at all religious. I remember my mother being at the ironing board when the radio was on and the announcer said that UN recognized Israel and my mother slammed the iron down on the board and said, “If they wanted a homeland, what was wrong with Birobidzhan?” Stalin’s strategy for dealing with the nationalism that seems to be a part of human nature, and of course, the Soviet Union was an empire, which included many nationalities—his strategy for dealing with that was to give every nationality a little homeland within the Soviet Union. And the Jewish homeland was Birobidzhan. But nobody would go.

Stephanie Luce: That’s a funny story.

So this moment feels a bit like 1968 in a number of ways, including how the movements are divided in terms of how to relate to the Democrats, but also facing a horrible Republican candidate. What are you thinking about this situation?

Frances Fox Piven: It isn’t perfect. This is the first uprising against Biden. Biden is probably a nice enough guy. But he’s promoting war, maybe World War 3. You can’t just go to war for a little while. It corrodes the humanity of people and it lasts forever.


ZNetwork is funded solely through the generosity of its readers.

DONATE

Frances Fox Piven

Frances Fox Piven is an American professor of political science and sociology at The Graduate Center, City University of New York, where she has taught since 1982. Piven is known equally for her contributions to social theory and for her social activism. A veteran of the war on poverty and subsequent welfare-rights protests both in New York City and on the national stage, she has been instrumental in formulating the theoretical underpinnings of those movements. Over the course of her career, she has served on the boards of the ACLU and the Democratic Socialists of America, and has also held offices in several professional associations, including the American Political Science Association and the Society for the Study of Social Problems. Previously, she had been a member of the political science faculty at Boston University.

 

 

 

Bank of Montreal cuts more U.S. investment bankers in drive for savings

Carmen Arroyo, Gillian Tan and Paula Sambo, Bloomberg News

Bank of Montreal is reducing staff in its U.S. investment banking unit again, including at least two managing directors, as the Canadian lender continues to trim costs, according to people with knowledge of the matter.

The recent layoffs include a number of bankers in the health-care division, said the people, who spoke on condition they not be identified because the details are private. A Bank of Montreal spokesperson declined to comment.

The bank cut about 100 positions at BMO Capital Markets last June, Bloomberg reported at the time. In August, it announced a broader restructuring program with a goal of $400 million (US$293 million) in annual savings. 

The lender is on track to get there by the end of 2024, Chief Executive Officer Darryl White said during the bank’s fiscal first-quarter earnings call in February. “We’ve reduced expenses by 4 per cent from last quarter and remain focused on returning to positive operating leverage beginning next quarter,” he said.

Bank of Montreal’s capital markets division reported a 19 per cent drop in net income to $393 million in the quarter ended Jan. 31, with results dragged down by lower trading revenue. The U.S. segment accounted for a little less than half of that profit. Executives said at the time that activity levels were improving. 

Trans Mountain pushed to alter specifications to help oil value

Robert Tuttle and Lucia Kassai, Bloomberg News

Oil companies including Chevron Corp., Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. and Suncor Energy Inc. are pressing the operators of the expanded Trans Mountain pipeline to change certain key specifications to improve the value of the crude the conduit is carrying.

The drillers are asking Trans Mountain to lower the vapor pressure and acid levels of the crude it will allow to pass through the line, saying that the current limits are reducing the value of the oil that’s shipped and restricting where it can be refined. Trans Mountain, which is owned by the Canadian government, didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking comment.

The complaints are marring the startup of the pipeline’s long-delayed expansion, which almost triples the volume of crude that can be shipped from Alberta to the Pacific Coast. Oil producers already had been upset by the high tolls they’re being charged to use the line — partly a result of construction setbacks that caused the project’s price tag to balloon sixfold to US$34 billion — and are arguing the shortcomings should allow them to pay less.

Chevron, a buyer of crude off the line, said in a letter filed with the Canada Energy Regulator Friday that the vapor pressure limit exceeds U.S. Environmental Protection Agency caps on storage tanks at California refineries. Chevron operates two refineries in the Golden State, and a failure to amend the pressure and acid limits may prevent it from purchasing or processing crude from Trans Mountain for those facilities.

Oil-sands giant Suncor said in a regulatory filing that the high vapor pressure limit means companies will blend lower value hydrocarbons with the crude that is injected into Trans Mountain, reducing the value of the oil shipped on the line, . 

The pressure specifications carry the “real potential of altogether eliminating entire markets for Suncor,” the Calgary-based company said.

SPACE

NASA Inspector Alarmed by Extensive Damage to Heatshield of Astronaut Moon Vehicle

Victor Tangermann
Sat, May 11, 2024



In November 2022, NASA launched its first uncrewed Moon-orbiting mission, Artemis I — kicking off the agency's greater ambitions to return humans to the lunar surface.

The journey, which saw an Orion spacecraft launch atop the agency's Space Launch System (SLS) rocket, largely went as planned, with the capsule orbiting around the Moon and making its return over the course of three weeks.

Unfortunately, the Orion capsule took a beating during the trip, according to a recent report by NASA's Office of Inspector General watchdog, which could jeopardize the space agency's upcoming crewed follow-up mission, dubbed Artemis II.


According to the report, engineers found extensive cracks in Orion's heat shield across more than 100 locations. And that's just one out of six issues outlined by the Inspector General, suggesting NASA has its work cut out before it can launch a crew of four to the Moon and back no earlier than September 2025.

"The Artemis I test flight revealed critical issues that need to be addressed before placing crew on the Artemis II mission," the report reads.

Things could've gone much worse during Artemis I. Fragments breaking off of the heat shield, visible in camera footage recorded by the capsule, "created a trail of debris rather than melting away as designed."

"While there was no evidence of impact with the crew module, the quantity and size of the debris could have caused enough structural damage to cause one of Orion’s parachutes to fail," the watchdog added. "Should the same issue occur on future Artemis missions, it could lead to the loss of the vehicle or crew."

"The team is currently synthesizing results from a variety of tests and analyses that inform the leading theory for what caused the issues," NASA spokesperson Rachel Kraft told Ars Technica, adding that an independent team will evaluate the situation, a process that's "scheduled to be complete this summer."

Other than problems with the heatshield, engineers also discovered "anomalies" with the spacecraft's separation bolts and power distribution.

Fortunately, NASA is "taking action to address these issues," adding thermal protection to close any gaps caused by melting and eroding material and stop the bolts from heating up.

Engineers also reportedly addressed persistent "power distribution anomalies" likely caused by space radiation by "making software changes."

Finally, the launch of the SLS rocket did a number on the launch platform, requiring upwards of $26 million in repairs, five times the original budget set aside for such a purpose.

In short, whether the mission will actually launch in the second half of next year remains to be seen. Making any significant changes to the heatshield — which is already installed on Orion — at this stage could delay the launch considerably.

NASA is also considering different reentry trajectories to minimize damage upon the crew's eventual return, including spinning the vehicle or performing a "skip" maneuver on top of the Earth's atmosphere.

Despite some considerable risks, NASA astronaut and Artemis II crew member Victor Glover is unperturbed.

"We’ve got a lot of folks involved that we trust," Glover told Ars. "We’ve got the right people. If there is a solution, we’ll figure it out."

More on the mission: NASA's New Artemis II Graphics Are So Freaking Awesome, Y'all

 

Shares of MDA Space fall after posting Q1 profit down from year ago

The Canadian Press

Space technology firm MDA Ltd. says it earned $13.8 million in net income in its first quarter, down from $16.1 million a year earlier, as its revenue edged higher.

The company, which has rebranded as MDA Space, says its profit amounted to 11 cents per diluted share for the quarter ended March 31, down from a profit of 13 cents per diluted share in the same quarter last year.

Revenue for the quarter totalled $209.1 million, up from $201.9 million in the first quarter of 2023.

The company says its robotics and space operations business had $70.6 million in revenue, up from $62.9 million a year ago, while its satellite systems business had $87.0 million, down from $87.7 million. Geointelligence revenue totalled $51.5 million, up from $51.3 million.

On an adjusted basis, MDA Space says it earned 15 cents per diluted share in its latest quarter, down from 22 cents per diluted share a year earlier.

MDA Space shares were down $1.17 or about eight per cent at $13.72 in mid-morning trading on the Toronto Stock Exchange on Thursday.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 9, 2024.

UK
Adam Boulton: No one likes a turncoat, but Labour is gambling Tory MP's defection shows which way political wind is blowing

Sky News
Updated Sun, May 12, 2024

The Labour Party is in shock over the leadership's decision to welcome the defection of the right-wing former Conservative MP Natalie Elphicke.

The day before she literally "crossed the floor" before Prime Minister's Questions to sit on the opposition benches, Elphicke distributed a leaflet in her Dover constituency attacking Sir Keir Starmer.

On Wednesday, as MPs looked on aghast on both sides, he reached back from the front bench to shake her hand, and later posed for smiling photographs with her.

Elphicke is the second Tory MP in a fortnight to switch to Labour. Both she and Dr Dan Poulter have said that they will stand down at the general election and will not fight for re-election in their old constituencies or, at the time of writing, in another seat.

Labour insists that neither of them has been promised elevation to the House of Lords in an upcoming honours list.

Lee Anderson, another recent defector who shifted rightward from the Conservatives, is currently an independent but has suggested that he intends to stand for Reform UK in his Ashfield, Nottinghamshire, constituency.

The saying goes that "nobody likes a turncoat". That has never stopped some MPs switching their party allegiances.

Whatever party activists and the voters make of the changes, the switchers take a risk with their own careers. Their political fortunes after the change often sink.

Since 1979, when Margaret Thatcher came to power, a total of 202 sitting members of parliament have changed their party allegiance.

More than half of these resigned the party whip or had it withdrawn because of personal grievances or disciplinary procedures.

The real number of those who may be classed as genuine "defectors", active campaigners intent on making an awkward political point, is much smaller.

👉 Listen above then tap here to follow Electoral Dysfunction wherever you get your podcasts 👈

In this parliament, a remarkable total of 39 MPs have changed allegiance. Twenty-four had the whip taken away from them, six have been suspended and nine resigned.

Of these only half a dozen are classic defectors. They are Elphicke, Poulter and Anderson plus Kenny MacAskill and Neale Hanvey who crossed the floor from the SNP to Alba, and Christian Wakeford.

Wakeford was the first switcher from the Conservatives to Labour in January 2022, disgusted by partygate.

He has been selected to stand for Labour in his marginal constituency of Bury South. All the indications are that he has a better chance of re-election there this year than under his old blue banner.

Not many defectors go on to enjoy prominent political careers after making the move.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, ideological civil war raged in the Labour Party.

Twenty-eight Labour MPs (and one Conservative) switched to join Roy Jenkins and Shirley Williams in the newly formed, centrist, Social Democratic Party.

Only half a dozen of them made it back into parliament at the 1983 General Election.

The SDP split five years later when party leaders Robert Maclennan and Charles Kennedy were technically defectors again, moving to merge with the Liberals in the new Liberal Democrat Party.

Kennedy was scarred by years of vicious harassment by those who chose to remain with David Owen in the rump SDP, which, in turn, disbanded in 1990 after being overtaken by the Monster Raving Loony Party in the Bootle by-election.

In 2017, centrists were involved in another upheaval in the wake of the EU membership referendum.

Eight Labour MPs and three Conservatives, who all opposed Brexit, resigned their whips. The newly formed Change Party did not prosper.

None of those involved are currently MPs or members of the House of Lords. Two Labour MPs, John Woodcock and Ian Austin, who jumped ship in protest at Jeremy Corbyn's leadership, were subsequently awarded peerages by the Tories.

Elphicke is one of the relatively few female defectors. Two women who left their parties have now circled back to them after dalliances with the Lib Dems.

Emma Nicholson has rejoined the Conservatives and Luciana Berger is campaigning for Sir Keir Starmer.

Read more:
What happens when an MP defects to another party?
Lord Cameron accuses Labour of standing for nothing after taking in Tory MP Natalie Elphicke

Very few turncoats make it back into ministerial office.

Reg Prentice was a Labour cabinet minister in the 1970s, as both education and overseas development secretary. But Trotskyist members of the Militant Tendency forced his deselection as Labour candidate in Newham North East.

He was elected as a Conservative in Daventry in the 1979 election and served under Margaret Thatcher as a health minister.

Until this parliament the last time when an MP crossed the floor from one main party to the other was three decades ago in the run-up to Tony Blair's landslide election victory in 1997.

Defections then, from the Conservatives to Labour, are reminiscent of the moves going on now in anticipation of a Tory defeat.

Alan Howarth and Shaun Woodward, two Tory MPs who flipped straight to Labour, were selected to stand in other safe Labour seats in 1997 and went on to become ministers.

Howarth had previously been a minister in the Conservative government. Woodward had been the Conservative party's director of communications.

Nicholson, Prentice, and Howarth ended up in the House of Lords along with Peter Temple-Morris, who resigned the Conservative whip in sympathy with New Labour and Hugh Dykes who switched to the Liberal Democrats.

Woodward and Peter Thurnham, another Conservative resigner, remain un-ennobled.

There have been two other significant groups of rebels in recent Conservative history, who were suspended or kicked out of the party.

In 1994, a dozen hardcore Eurosceptics, known as Whipless Wonders to their friends or "bastards" waiting for "the men in white coats" to prime minister John Major, had the whip removed for voting against part of Kenneth Clarke's budget.

The whip was restored a few months later. These temporarily enforced defectors failed to bring down Major and most have since died.

They will be remembered however for lighting the fuse on the anti-EU bomb which subsequently blew the Tory party apart.

In his push to "get Brexit done" prime minister Boris Johnson brutally withdrew the whip from 21 leading Conservative MPs who were opposed his policy.

Those purged included Rory Stewart, Ken Clarke, David Gauke, Justine Greening, Dominic Grieve, Nicholas Soames and Philip Hammond.

Amber Rudd resigned in protest. The whip was offered back to some of them but only a handful stood for the Commons in 2019. Only two, Greg Hands and Caroline Nokes, plan to run in the next general election. Nicholas Soames, Ed Vaizey and Ken Clarke were awarded peerages.

New defectors are usually rubbished by the party which they are leaving and praised by members of the one they are joining.

That has not been Natalie Elphicke's experience. Tories are mocking Labour for adopting a right-winger out of sympathy with Labour values.

Labour MPs are professing bewilderment and annoyance. Some female Labour MPs are further outraged that she attempted to excuse her husband, and predecessor as Dover MP, "naughty Tory" Charlie Elphicke, who was imprisoned for sexual assault. The couple subsequently divorced.

Sir Keir Starmer says he is "delighted" to sign her on. He wants former Tory voters to know that his Labour party is a safe harbour for them, especially those most concerned, like Elphicke, by immigration.

She also has an established interest in housing and will be a consultant to Labour on that, we are told.

Most importantly in her resignation letter 43-year-old Elphicke berated Rishi Sunak as "unelected" and the Conservative party of government as "a byword for incompetence and division".

Labour is gambling that her move to their party will confirm to all who care which way the political wind is blowing - as many defectors have done in the past.

Slugs for Nenshi, hugs for rivals at NDP leadership's Calgary debate

CBC
Sat, May 11, 2024

Alberta NDP leadership candidate Naheed Nenshi, centre, makes his closing statement at a Calgary forum as fellow candidates, left to right, Gil McGowan, Jodi Calahoo Stonehouse, Sarah Hoffman, and Kathleen Ganley look on. (Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press - image credit)


When there are reports of physical contact among participants at a political debate, it's typically because something ugly has happened.

Unless, that is, it's an NDP leadership debate.

At the Alberta party's candidate forum on Saturday, rivals Jodi Calahoo Stonehouse and Gil McGowan weren't sure which one was supposed to speak first, nervously giggling about it. Once the confusion was resolved, they hugged, before profusely agreeing with each other about raising Alberta's minimum wage and the importance of unions.


These are, as Calahoo Stonehouse explained afterwards, all members of the same party, who broadly share the same progressive values.

They all oppose most of what the Danielle Smith-led UCP does, and after a successor to longtime NDP Leader Rachel Notley is chosen, they'll all remain prominent senior members of the same team — barring the sort of major party fracture that pundits often speculate about in the wake of a new leader's selection, but seldom materializes.

The niceties and touchy-touchy good vibes can go away when there's disagreement over who really belongs in the party or is well-suited to lead it. Take, for example, one testy exchange between former health minister Sarah Hoffman and Naheed Nenshi about the ex-mayor's past.

The battle of Midfield

Hoffman reached back more than six years to hit Nenshi over the closure of the city-owned Midfield Mobile Home Park last decade, to make way for a larger residential community.

"What I need to know from you Naheed: why you closed that park, why you evicted those folks," Hoffman said. She added that she'd spoken to some former residents, and they're still dealing with mortgages and one former mobile home-owner had to move in with his in-laws.

It was a departure from the question about expanding the party while remaining true to its values. Or was it?

Nenshi replied by calling them "so-called affordable homes," and said the residents were prioritized for Calgary Housing Company affordable rentals. He said Hoffman was "fear mongering."

"As the minister of health, Sarah, you should know that sometimes the easy answers are not the easy answers," he said.

NDP leadership candidate Sarah Hoffman criticized Nenshi for the closure of a city-owned mobile home park that occurred when he was Calgary mayor last decade.

NDP leadership candidate Sarah Hoffman criticized Naheed Nenshi for the closure of a city-owned mobile home park that occurred when he was Calgary mayor last decade. (Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press)

The sense Nenshi is the front-runner gets amplified when nobody is dredging up controversial decisions from Hoffman's past, or former justice minister Kathleen Ganley's, or McGowan's as a labour leader. (Calahoo Stonehouse is a first-term MLA.)

McGowan used one of his debate segments to bring up the 2019 letter Nenshi sent the UCP government about altering the city union's collective agreement, which several candidates used to attack the ex-mayor as anti-union earlier in the week. Nenshi bid to be more genial in this defence, saying that he was only bringing forth the position of what he called a "super-right-wing council" five years ago, and that he's a strong supporter of organized labour.

A question bubbling underneath this leadership race: how passionate about organized labour is the NDP base in 2024, newly enlarged by the race itself?

On Sunday, the party will reveal the number of members eligible to vote for leader, and sources have told CBC that it surpasses 85,000 — several times greater than what it was at the point Notley announced her resignation in January.

Insiders also say that the lion's share of members are Calgarians, the town of Nenshi and Ganley. That's a massively new orbit for the Alberta NDP, which had its core in Edmonton in the Notley years and in the decades before it.

"You have two camps actively selling memberships in Calgary, and they are doing a very good job of that — and I think it means something phenomenal for our party," Ganley told reporters after the debate.

She tried to differentiate herself from her fellow Calgarian by saying the party needs a leader who does more than hurl insults at Smith's party. (Nenshi drew UCPire Saturday for calling them the "monkeys on the other side" during a discussion about question period in the legislature.)

More than 1,000 people attended the debate at Stampede Park, and Nenshi consistently garnered the most applause.

McGowan, who's led the labour movement for more than two decades, said he's not sure the newly enlarged NDP membership will be as passionate about organized labour rights as it used to be.

Gil McGowan took aim at a past letter Nenshi wrote as Calgary mayor about weakening the city unions' rights. After the debate, the longtime Alberta Federation of Labour president said he's not sure if the new membership of the party is as ardent on labour rights as it traditionally has been.

Gil McGowan took aim at a letter Naheed Nenshi wrote as Calgary mayor about weakening the city unions' rights. After the debate, the longtime Alberta Federation of Labour president said he's not sure if the new membership of the party is as ardent on labour rights as it traditionally has been. (Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press)

In past Alberta NDP eras, the slightest whiff of union-busting posturing would be fatal to the party's card-holders, especially for a leadership hopeful.

McGowan also wonders, he said, how well this party will do with the province's blue-collar and non-university-educated voters, a group that the UCP has won over.

At the outset of the forum, he asked attendees to stand if they had university degrees. The vast majority did — leading him to stress the uphill battle the NDP has with people who aren't like that crowd.

In the last election, 44 per cent of voters gave the New Democrats a proverbial hug, more than voted for them in their 2015 victory. But they fell 8.5 percentage points and 11 seats behind Smith's UCP.

It's undeniable that the next NDP leader's key task will be to make up that gap in the 2027 election. It's not clear at this point how easily the contest's victor will become part of the party's hugging brigade, but that may depend on which priorities this party's membership is keen to wrap their arms around.

Alberta NDP debate marked by agreement, until it came to Nenshi's record

The Canadian Press
Sat, May 11, 2024 




EDMONTON — The second official Alberta NDP leadership debate saw five candidates eagerly agreeing with each other, until Naheed Nenshi was forced to defend against more attacks on his record as the mayor of Calgary.

Alberta Federation of Labour President Gil McGowan, who is among the candidates vying for the helm of Rachel Notley's Opposition party, asked why the former mayor signed a letter in 2019 asking the United Conservative Government to sidestep union agreements.

The unearthed letter drew fire this week from Nenshi's rivals who suggested it signalled the presumed frontrunner was anti-union.

"How is this not a trust-buster?" McGowan asked during the event at BMO Centre in Calgary on Saturday.

Nenshi, who served as Calgary's mayor from 2010 until 2021 when he announced he would not seek another term, reiterated that he was at odds with a right-wing council at the time and his efforts actually subverted the privatization of city services.

"I would never rip up a collective agreement. Collective bargaining is sacrosanct," he told the crowd.

Calgary MLA Kathleen Ganley, Edmonton MLAs Sarah Hoffman and Jodi Calahoo Stonehouse round out the list of candidates seeking to replace Notley, who announced in January she would step aside when a new leader is chosen.

Nenshi's status as the newcomer to the party, and relatively vague platform promises, have opened the door to questions about where he stands on key issues.

Meanwhile, the former mayor has been presenting a case to broaden the party's appeal to beat Premier Danielle Smith's United Conservatives in the 2027 election.

Shortly after Nenshi threw his hat in the ring, former candidate Rakhi Pancholi said she saw the memberships Nenshi had attracted, and dropped out of the race to join his team.

Hoffman, the former health minister and deputy premier during Notley's government, has appealed to the party's roots, and trumpeted herself as an “unapologetic" New Democrat.

On Saturday, Hoffman asked Nenshi why people were "evicted" without proper compensation from affordable housing units in Calgary during his tenure in 2017.

Nenshi said Hoffman didn't know the details, and suggested she was fearmongering.

"We ensured that every single tenant who was there had the opportunity to move into a Calgary Housing home with priority and every single one of them who needed to be rehoused in a better place got that better place," he said.

"Sometimes you've got to sit with people and find solutions for each individual rather than relying only on your ideology," he said.

Hoffman also took aim at Nenshi's stance in 2015 when he warned then-NDP premier Notley's move to bump wages could impact non-profit agencies and small businesses.

"There was at least one candidate on this stage who actually fought against the increased minimum wage, and that breaks my heart," Hoffman told the crowd.

Because of the debate format, Nenshi was unable to immediately respond.

Ganley, the former justice minister, focused on the importance of winning the next election with better economic policy platforms than the ruling UCP.

"Without them, all we are left with is anger and big personalities -- and we know that won't be enough," said Ganley.

Calahoo Stonehouse has been focusing her campaign on strengthening water protection, and said the province needs to renegotiate its oil and gas royalties.

McGowan capped his debate performance off in his closing statement with a plea for donations.

"If I don't raise another $50,000 soon, I'm toast."

The party counted just over 16,000 members as of Dec. 31, but sources have told The Canadian Press the total number could now be more than 85,000.

Another debate is scheduled for Edmonton next month, and the party will announce the new leader June 22.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 11, 2024.

Lisa Johnson, The Canadian Press

India poll watchdog's inaction lets PM Modi commit 'brazen' violations, opposition says

Krishn Kaushik
Updated Sat, May 11, 2024 

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - India's opposition said the nation's election commission was allowing Prime Minister Narendra Modi to continue "unchecked and brazen" violations by not taking action on opposition complaints of religious hate speech and misrepresentation.

More than halfway through India's six-week national elections, the world's biggest, the Congress party-led opposition complained in a letter to the Election Commission of India on Friday that "no meaningful action has been taken to penalize those who are guilty in the ruling regime".

This was a "complete abdication" of the commission's duty, it said. "As a result there has been an unchecked and brazen continuation of these violations, which are now committed with impunity and utter disregard."

The watchdog is responsible for ensuring political parties do not violate election rules against promoting division along religious, caste or linguistic lines in the multiethnic South Asian nation.

In his campaign speeches, Modi, seeking a rare third consecutive term, has targeted the Congress, claiming it wants to help minority Muslims at the expense of other socially disadvantaged groups.

Representatives for the commission and Modi's Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) did not respond to requests seeking comment.

Election results in the world's most populous nation are to be announced on June 4.

The commission on Tuesday ordered social media platform X to take down a video posted by a BJP state unit that accused Congress leaders of planning to extend welfare benefits to Muslims at the cost of other disadvantaged tribal and Hindu caste groups.

While not making any rulings on the complaints, the commission has sought a response from BJP chief J.P. Nadda for an April 21 speech in which Modi said the Congress planned to redistribute wealth from Hindus among Muslims, whom he called "infiltrators" and "those with many children".

The commission has also sent a notice to the Congress regarding complaints by the BJP, which says it has filed three complaints.

"The delay puts a question mark on the credibility of the election commission and therefore on the election process," said S.Y. Qureshi, a former head of the three-member election commission. "Any damage to its reputation will cause incalculable harm to the legitimacy of India's democracy."

The opposition letter mentions 10 complaints the Congress had lodged since April 6 against Modi and key aides for what it calls "divisive", "false" and "provocative" statements that sow sectarian division and misrepresent Congress' positions.

"We are not told what is the response, what is the action being taken," Congress lawmaker Abhishek Manu Singhvi told reporters after meeting commission officials on Friday.

"This is an irreversible window," Singhvi said. "If they don't act promptly it would be a complete abdication of constitutional duty."

Ashok Lavasa, who was an election commissioner during the 2019 general election, said the process from receiving a complaint to deciding on it "should not take more than three to four days because otherwise it loses purpose", as the campaign phase is quite short.

(Reporting by Krishn Kaushik; Additional reporting by Rupam Jain; Editing by William Mallard)

CHRISTIAN ZIONISM
Mace on Gaza war: ‘The promised land’ is Israel’s; ‘Biblical warfare, plain and simple’

Lauren Irwin
Sat, May 11, 2024 



Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) weighed in on the ongoing conflict in Gaza between Israel and Hamas, dubbing it “Biblical warfare.”

“Israel doesn’t occupy the land, they own it. The promised land is theirs,” Mace posted on social media platform X. “It’s Biblical warfare, plain and simple.”

Mace, like many other Republican lawmakers, has been supportive of Israel’s right to defend itself after Hamas attacked on Oct. 7.

In a December interview, Mace sharply criticized her Democratic colleagues in the House for not speaking out against the acts of sexual violence that Hamas inflicted on Israelis that day.

“I can’t think of anything more shameful to see these women’s groups, to see woman on the left, women in the House, my colleagues on the left who refuse to say what this is, which is shameful. It’s disgusting. It’s barbaric,” she said. “And we ought to be condemning it from every corner of our country. Every woman should be condemning this. And I think it’s shameful.”

Mace is an outspoken advocate against sexual violence, having been a victim of rape herself. She used her own experience in expressing grief about the violence Israeli women suffered.

“I mean, we know now —we know now that Hamas in their battle plan was to go in and systematically rape, mutilate, and murder these Israeli women,” Mace said. “And I’m — I’m a survivor of rape, but the difference is that I survived. But many of these Israeli women didn’t, and they were mutilated, and murdered while it was happening.”

The Hill has reached out to Mace’s office for further comment about her post and the war.

Progressive Rep. Jamaal Bowman’s reelection race

Politics of Gaza war threatens to oust New York Democrat who sharply criticizes Israel

Edward-Isaac Dovere and Manu Raju, CNN
Sun, May 12, 2024 

The war in Gaza is reverberating all the way through north Bronx and Westchester County, defining the most competitive primary an incumbent House Democrat is facing anywhere in the country.

That’s where Rep. Jamaal Bowman of New York, who got to Washington four years ago by winning a primary against one of Israel’s then-most adamant defenders in Congress, is now facing a major challenger of his own, driven in part because of criticism of Israel that opponents say has put “Squad”-aligned politics ahead of what his district wants.

Bowman became a central figure in taking on Israel from the first days after October 7, almost immediately supporting a resolution calling for a ceasefire that made no mention of Hamas or the return of Israeli hostages. By December, he was standing with hunger strikers outside the White House, upping his criticism of the actions in Gaza. He has called Israel an apartheid state, and in a video that surfaced of him speaking at a demonstration in November, said it was “propaganda” and a “lie” that Hamas raped Israeli women in the October 7 attacks, though he later attempted to clean up that remark. (A United Nations report in March found “convincing” evidence that Hamas raped hostages.)

He’s gone far enough out that even the left-leaning Israel advocacy group J Street withdrew its endorsement of Bowman in January, complaining that he had crossed a line in putting the blame for the conflict too much on Israel and not on Hamas.

Now even many of Bowman’s fellow New York Democrats in Congress say privately they doubt he will win – but more than that, when asked by CNN, several pointedly refused to say that they want Bowman to win, or that they would support him as the race enters its final month ahead of the June 25 primary.

While Bowman says antisemitism is “abhorrent” and that his criticism is targeted at the way Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is conducting a war he believes could constitute genocide, in some parts of his district, his response to October 7 is top of mind. Even Bowman supporters acknowledge he was already in deep trouble holding on to his seat by October 6.

With national and international politics mixing into the race – and the situation only becoming more fraught as President Joe Biden distances himself from Netanyahu and a likely mass casualty invasion of Rafah looms – several leading Democratic operatives in Washington groaned at the mention of Bowman’s name, upset that the situation has come to this.

Shelley Mayer, a state senator whose district largely overlaps with the congressional district, initially backed Bowman. Bowman’s response to the Hamas attack convinced her to switch to endorse Westchester County Executive George Latimer.

New York state Sen. Shelley Mayer at a state Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in April 2023, in Albany. - Hans Pennink/AP/File

“I believe that effective representation requires developing a bridge of trust and respect for all your constituents, even when there are disagreements,” Mayer told CNN. “After October 7, it was extremely evident that our congressman had failed to develop that relationship with almost every part of our large Jewish community, and I could not accept that.”

“Both personally as a Jew and as an elected official,” Mayer added, “I knew we deserved better.”

Bowman’s response to the war crystallizes larger problems, including pulling a fire alarm in a House office building last fall and public shouting matches with Republican colleagues, who say he has gotten caught up in “Squad”-style politics.

It’s a reaction, though, that has made him so identified with the opposition to Israel that, within the space of three minutes last week on Capitol Hill, Bowman was first pressed by a Fox News reporter to call people who broke into university buildings “domestic terrorists” (“Do better,” he scolded), and then praised by a young protester with a keffiyeh wrapped around her shoulders as one of the few members who gives her hope.

Bowman said he knows people have called him anti-Israel because of moments like these, but, “what they don’t understand is us being critical of an ally, makes our allies stronger and safer in the long term.”

“If we are not critical in a healthy way, it leads to the cycle of violence that we’re in right now,” he added, telling CNN, “It’s not criticism for criticism’s sake, it’s about how do we govern from the perspective of human rights and diplomacy and justice and … a free Palestine?”

“We’ve been talking about a two-state solution for how long, man, where’s the Palestinian state?” Bowman asked. “Let’s do the work.”

Rep. Jamaal Bowman, left, speaks alongside, Reps. Rashida Tlaib, Jonathan Jackson and Cori Bush during a vigil with state legislators and faith leaders outside the White House in November. - Nathan Howard/AP/File
Bowman’s mixed history on Israel support

Bowman voted for Iron Dome funding in 2021 and took a trip to Israel once in office, which led to the Democratic Socialists of America’s New York chapter to consider expelling him, and the congressman in frustration let his membership lapse.

The group did not return a request for comment on whether members would support him this time.

Bowman is also supporting Biden for reelection, in contrast to Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib, who ducked the question and walked away last week when asked by CNN whether she would vote for him. But the congresswoman, a Palestinian American who is arguably the most publicly identified Israel opponent in Washington, has formed a joint fundraising committee with Bowman to support him.

Explaining how his response to the Israel-Hamas war fits his district, Bowman cited a poll conducted by his campaign that he claimed showed an overwhelming majority in his district support a permanent ceasefire.

Bowman has proudly been critical of Netanyahu’s handling of the war, noting that his home state’s senior senator, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, has also called for new Israeli elections down the line.

“The people of the district do not want taxpayer money and weapons going to Israel to continue to bomb children and support famine in Gaza,” Bowman said. “They want that money to come to their community so they can afford child care and health care and workforce development and all those things.”

Bowman argued that while he’s more interested in talking about guns, education and climate justice, Israel is being made into a major issue in this race because the super PAC of the pro-Israel lobbying group American Israel Public Affairs Committee is planning to spend millions against him – and that much of its money comes from MAGA Republican donors who he says are trying to destroy democracy.

“It’s a district issue because many Jews in the district care about the issue, and there’s a large percentage of Jewish people in the district,” he said. “It’s a local issue to other people because people are tired of being in war and they’re tired of watching US dollars go overseas to whatever country, and US weapons go overseas to kill Black and brown vulnerable people, mostly.”

Some Bowman allies have warned Democrats that progressive voters would be deflated headed into November by seeing the incumbent New Yorker lose in a primary.

“President Biden needs Jamaal Bowman voters more than he needs George Latimer voters,” said Usamah Andrabi, the communications director for the “Squad”-supportive Justice Democrats, which is also spending money to support the incumbent.

Westchester County Executive George Latimer in White Plains, New York, on December 12, 2023. - Jeenah Moon/The Washington Post/Getty Images

Bowman’s challenger says Israel support is important but not the point

Bowman and Latimer are two very different men who have both spent their lives in a district that has some of the steepest contrasts of any in the country, from inner city to suburbia, from people on food stamps to people picking out tile patterns for their third and fourth homes. Bowman is 48, Black, lives in Yonkers and was a middle school principal before he made his first run for office four years ago to unseat an incumbent who had been representing the area since Jimmy Carter was president. Latimer is 70, white, lives in Rye and has spent 35 years moving up in local politics from city council to the state legislature to Westchester County executive.

Most of Bowman’s endorsements are from other members of the so-called Squad and from House Democratic leaders such as Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, who is from Brooklyn, rather than from local elected officials in his district.

But among his supporters is Kevin Riley, a city councilman from the Bronx, who said he has never spoken with Latimer, but that on local issues, Bowman has been a “great partner.”

In the northeast Bronx, Riley said, Israel doesn’t come up much with voters. That it’s showing up in other parts of the district is another demonstration of how disparate the constituents are.

“It shouldn’t be,” he said, “but a lot of times when you’re running for office, it does seem like it happens.”

Latimer insists he’s not running against Bowman so much as he is running against Bowman’s approach to being in the House, promising that his pitch is not “I’m going down there to lead a movement, or I’m going to be speaking truth to power on behalf of an identity or demographic.”

Asked about how October 7 and the aftermath have influenced his candidacy, Latimer said it was a factor but quickly redirected the conversation to flooding concerns in Westchester, which he said he hoped to address in a House bill.

Latimer entered the race in December, but he said that local leaders had been encouraging him to run for a year and that he’d been in touch with AIPAC since the summer. He blames Bowman for making Israel a big factor in the race, both through his own actions and by invoking AIPAC as the reason why he has a primary.

Latimer would not directly answer when asked about Bowman’s accusation that he is fine with Netanyahu staying in power, or about specifics on policy related to the conflict, while pointing out that he believes in the two-state solution that Netanyahu does not, and that he finds many of the prime minister’s domestic policies “disagreeable.”

“For every member to give their opinion as if they were the secretary of state – ‘I think Biden should have done this,’ ‘I heard about this, and ‘I don’t think he should do that’ – I don’t think that’s productive,” Latimer said. “You need to have a president who pursues a policy that includes the ability to both reward and punish and use those as part of a negotiating strategy that is not seen by the world until you’ve come to some agreement.”

Running in his first race, Bowman also criticized his opponent for spending too much time talking about foreign policy at the expense of district issues. But in his interview last week, Bowman did not hesitate. He said he wanted to be clear that Israel has a right to exist, that “it looks that way to me” when asked whether he believes Israel has committed war crimes, and that Israel’s actions have increased antisemitism.

“It hurts our fight against antisemitism, because Israel claims to be the state for all Jewish people and people who perceive it from the outside looking in say, ‘What the hell is going on here? Israel’s bad, which means Jewish people are bad,’” Bowman said. “That’s what we need to fight against.”

Speaking to CNN on her drive home after leaving a gala at her synagogue in Scarsdale, longtime state Assemblywoman Amy Paulin said in her fairly liberal community, it was notable how many people lined up to meet Latimer, who is Catholic, likening it to a “worshipping of a hero.”

As for the race, “I don’t know if it’s a referendum on Israel, but I do know that the Jewish community – whether they’re Reform, Conservative, Orthodox or Reconstructionist – are unified about the importance of Israel to the Jewish community,” Paulin said, “and Jamaal has no understanding of that.”

Rep. Jamaal Bowman speaks during a news conference calling for a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, on November 13, 2023, in Washington, DC. - Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images/File

Arguing about AIPAC’s influence

Latimer hasn’t made any secret of the support he’s getting from AIPAC. He spoke at the group’s donor conference in Washington in January. He has an online portal through the group to raise money.

But AIPAC is far from the only group spending and activating in the district. The Democratic Majority for Israel (DMFI) has endorsed Latimer and is expecting to spend to boost him. A local group, Westchester Unites: Jewish Voters in Action, says it is spending six figures directly reaching out to thousands of Jewish voters and will amplify that with direct mail, digital ads, field organizers and grassroots events. The National Black Empowerment Action Fund is pledging six figures to mobilize Black voters against Bowman. AIPAC and DMFI are expected to be by far the biggest spenders.

Officials involved say much of their spending will be to attack Bowman for issues that have nothing to do with Israel, such as like his vote against the bipartisan infrastructure act – which some of the congressman’s defenders argue is itself a measure of how unpopular support for Israel is.

AIPAC affiliated super PAC United Democracy Project spokesman Patrick Dorton would not specify how much money the group plans to spend in the race, though he noted its many large Democratic donors are interested in defeating the congressman.

Wednesday afternoon outside the Capitol, Bowman ran into Jeremy Ben-Ami, the executive director of J Street, the left-leaning pro-Israel group. They greeted each other with a friendly hug, despite the dropped endorsement.

A few minutes later, Ben-Ami downplayed any greater significance for the outcome.

“The Republican donors who fund the AIPAC super PAC are really excited to drive a wedge into the Democratic Party over this issue,” Ben-Ami told CNN. “The majority of Democrats in the House, Democrats in the voting public, they’re aligned with J Street. And that’s going to be the majority position in the Democratic Party.”

Maryland Rep. Steny Hoyer, the former Democratic majority leader who is an ally of AIPAC, brushed aside the group targeting some fellow Democrats.

“AIPAC, it does what it does,” he said. “But I’m for our incumbents.”

While not mentioning Bowman specifically or calling out any members by name, Hoyer said some of his colleagues’ rhetoric has given him pause.

“I regret that there are members who really are in effect, I think, reflecting the views of Hamas, which are to kill Jews and eliminate Israel,” Hoyer said.

For more CNN news and newsletters create an account at CNN.com