Good morning! Here’s your daily digest of money-and-politics news and the headlines of the day, compiled by BillMoyers.com’s John Light. (You can sign up to receive Morning Reads daily in your inbox!)
Attacks in Paris –> We’re rounding up some of the stories we’re reading in a separate post at BillMoyers.com.
Democrats debate –> In response to the Paris attacks, Saturday’s Democratic debate shifted some of its focus at the last minute, and though the Sanders campaign initially objected to the switch — as leaked by rival campaigns to the media — the change actually seemed to end up hurting former Secretary of State Clinton most. Amy Chozick and Jonathan Martin at The New York Times: “Mr. Sanders and Mr. O’Malley unleashed pointed, yet polite, critiques of Mrs. Clinton’s foreign policy stances, including her 2002 vote to authorize the use of force in Iraq, which Mr. Sanders tied to the rise of the Islamic State, which officials in Paris have said was responsible for the attacks.”
ALSO: At Mother Jones, Pema Levy offers six key moments from the debate, and at The Nation, John Nichols writes that Saturday was a “great night” for remembering a more moderate time in the Republican Party, with candidates noting that just decades ago various policies they are offering would have been well within the GOP wheelhouse.
AND: Hillary Clinton’s assertion that campaign donations from Wall Street were in recognition of her role helping to rebuild lower Manhattan after 9/11, and not because she will be soft on banking and finance reform — is generating confusion and consternation from supporters. Caitlin MacNeal reports for TPM.
Last green Republican president –> The Clean Air Act turned 25 this weekend. At Washington Monthly, D.R. Tucker looks at George H.W. Bush’s climate change policy. Bush, Sr. was “the man who became President just months after the world finally began paying attention to the peril of carbon pollution” and “could have become one of our greatest Presidents had he led courageously on climate. He did some good… but it wasn’t good enough.”
Rolling back Roe? –> The Supreme Court announced Friday that it would hear a challenge to Texas’s restrictive abortion laws. Hannah Levintova at Mother Jones writes that should the court decide in Texas’s favor, it would be a considerable blow to Roe v. Wade.
Time for a new map –> A case brought by Democrats to redraw Virginia’s voting map, which has been heavily gerrymandered by Republicans, will also have its day before the Supreme Court. Democrats allege that Republicans took race too much into account when drawing the lines, effectively disenfranchising voters of color, and a lower court agreed. Greg Stohr reports for Bloomberg.
Effects of the broken FEC –> Those deadlocked FEC rulings that we told you about Friday will have real implications for the campaigns, FEC commissioner Ann Ravel tells Buzzfeed‘s Tarini Parti, allowing increased coordination between super PACs, dark money groups and candidates: “When the commission deadlocks, you can do what you want because it’s clear that there aren’t four votes for enforcement,” Ravel said. “That’s what the unfortunate outcome is. That’s not the law, but it’s the practicality.”
Ready-to-assemble –> Bruce Vail at In These Times: “A small group of IKEA workers in suburban Boston launched a union organizing campaign this week — and immediately attracted the support of Democratic Party presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley.”
When did we know it? –> At Politico Magazine, former CIA head George Tenet tells Chris Whipple that his team warned the George W. Bush administration in July 2001 that “There will be significant terrorist attacks against the United States in the coming weeks or months. The attacks will be spectacular. They may be multiple. Al Qaeda’s intention is the destruction of the United States.” In those weeks preceding 9/11, the administration didn’t take the steps to act on that information, Tenet says. BUT: At Esquire, Charlie Pierce is skeptical: “I don’t trust the CIA in general, or George Tenet and Cofer Black as far as I can throw a pound of yellowcake from Niger. This piece just reeks of score-settling.”
Should have kept it in the ground –> Damian Carrington at The Guardian: “The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation would have had $1.9bn (£1.3bn) more to spend on its lifesaving health projects if it had divested from fossil fuels and instead invested in greener companies, according to a new analysis.”
You can get our Morning Reads delivered to your inbox every weekday! Just enter your email address below…
