Georgia judge invalidates more controversial election rules
(GEORGIA) — One day after a Georgia judge invalidated the state’s controversial “hand count” rule, a separate judge Wednesday evening invalidated even more rules that were passed by the Republican-led state election board, declaring them “unlawful and void.”
Fulton County Judge Thomas Cox ruled after an hours-long hearing to invalidate seven rules total, including the hand count rule, finding in part that the board did not have the authority to enact them.
Cox made clear that the State of Georgia and the State Election Board “are hereby DIRECTED TO IMMEDIATELY REMOVE THESE RULES FROM THEIR ROLES AND OFFICIAL REPORTING” and to “IMMEDIATELY INFORM ALL STATE AND LOCAL ELECTION OFFICIALS THAT THESE RULES ARE VOID AND ARE NOT TO BE FOLLOWED,” in his decision.
The rules now invalidated include a rule calling county officials to certify election results after “reasonable inquiry.”
Cox wrote in his order that rule “adds an additional and undefined step into the certification process” and that it is “inconsistent with and unsupported” by state law.
He also invalidated a rule that “requires that a person delivering an absentee ballot provide a signature and photo ID at the time the absentee ballot is delivered.”
The judge said in his ruling that state provisions don’t require that.
“The SEB thus has no authority to require such presentment as a condition of accepting and counting an otherwise properly delivered ballot,” Cox wrote.
(WASHINGTON) — A highly-anticipated economic agenda to be unveiled by Vice President Kamala Harris on Friday will include a federal ban on price gouging for food and groceries, the Harris campaign announced.
The proposal will be presented to voters alongside other plans to address elevated inflation, such as bolstered antitrust enforcement in the grocery sector and greater latitude to investigate corporate practices, the campaign said in a press release.
A ban on price gouging would in theory disallow food and grocery companies from hiking prices an excessive amount over a set period of time, economists told ABC News. They disagreed, however, on whether the measure could control the rise of food prices or if such an outcome is desirable.
Inflation remains a top issue for voters and a potential vulnerability for Harris, since rapid price increases emerged during the Biden administration. While inflation has fallen dramatically from its peak, consumers still face prices roughly 20% higher than where they stood before Biden took office.
In response to ABC News’ request for comment, the Harris campaign provided a statement outlining its economic proposals.
“Vice President Harris knows that rising food prices remain a top concern for American families. Many big grocery chains that have seen production costs level off have nevertheless kept prices high and have seen their highest profits in two decades. While some food companies have passed along these savings, others still have not,” the statement said.
Here’s what to know about how this federal ban on price gouging would operate and whether it would be effective:
How would a federal price-gouging ban work?
The Harris campaign said the measure would set “clear rules of the road to make clear that big corporations can’t unfairly exploit consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and groceries.”
Details on the policy remain limited, however. Economists told ABC News that the Harris proposal may end up resembling similar bans currently on the books in 37 states. Those bans prohibit companies from exploiting a sudden imbalance between supply and demand by significantly hiking prices.
“The typical example is a natural disaster. If a water company comes and sells water at double, triple or five times the price of what people can get it at five miles away, just to be able to take advantage of the situation – that’s price gouging,” Niko Lusiani, director of the corporate power program at progressive advocacy group Roosevelt Forward, told ABC News.
State bans define “price gouging” in various ways. Some measures establish a subjective set of criteria, such as a sudden and significant spike in prices; while others detail a specific numerical amount of price growth necessary to violate the law, Luis Cabral, a professor of economics at New York University who studies price gouging, told ABC News.
“It’s not easy to measure,” Cabral said, noting that qualitative definitions risk being overly vague while quantitative ones struggle to set the boundaries around what constitutes price gouging.
Many of the state-level bans on this practice set a condition that an emergency is necessary to trigger application of the law. The Harris proposal would likely omit such a stipulation, Lusiani said, since we are years removed from the outbreak of COVID-19.
“It’ll clearly be different because now we’re on the other side of the pandemic,” Lusiani added, but he noted that current price hikes could be viewed as a result of that disruption.
The Harris campaign said it would enforce a ban by slapping offenders with financial penalties.
Most state price-gouging bans punish violators with civil penalties enforced by the state attorney general, while other measures impose criminal penalties, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, a group that tracks state laws.
“Enforcement will be critical,” Lusiani said. “A ban by itself won’t stand on its own legs.”
Would this type of ban help control inflation?
Economists disagreed sharply about whether a federal price-gouging ban would help control price increases and, if so, to what extent that outcome would benefit the economy.
The stark divide owed in part to a difference of opinion about the role of corporate profiteering in the pandemic-era bout of inflation, as well as a clash over the effectiveness of government intervention in addressing it.
Experts who faulted corporate price gouging for a portion of the price increases said it arose from market concentration that allowed a handful of dominant companies in a given industry, including the food and grocery sector, to raise prices without fear of competitors undercutting them with lower-priced alternatives.
Grocery retailer profit margins surged in 2021 and rose even higher two years later, even after price increases had begun to cool, a Federal Trade Commission study in March showed.
A price-gouging ban would help police corporations that otherwise would be tempted to leverage their market power by excessively raising prices, the experts said.
“Large, incumbent corporations that control a large share of a sector, including grocery companies, have way too much power to control prices,” Lusiani said. “That’s an underlying cause of the inflation.”
Some economists who spoke to ABC News attributed the acceleration of price increases over recent years to a textbook example of imbalance between supply and demand. The pandemic snarled global supply chains and triggered lockdowns, causing shortages of goods and workers. Meanwhile, government stimulus boosted demand, sending too many dollars after too few products.
“It’s economics 101 that if you stimulate demand while simultaneously deterring supply, your equilibrium will be significantly higher prices,” Michael Faulkender, a professor of finance at the University of Maryland’s Robert H. Smith School of Business, told ABC News.
In turn, Faulkender dismissed any potential benefit from a federal price-gouging ban. “It just sounds to me that we’re creating even more burdensome regulations that will actually raise prices for consumers,” Faulkender said.
Joe Brusuelas, chief economist for the accounting firm RSM US, said he opposes an outright ban but supports moderate measures that could deter price hikes, such as expanded government oversight of corporate practices.
Bruseulas pointed to data released this week showing food prices had risen 2.2% in July compared to a year ago. That level of inflation essentially stands at normal levels, Brusuelas said, suggesting that price increases had been reined in without a federal price-gouging ban in place.
“I’m concerned when I hear the federal government use the word ‘ban,’ but I’m not concerned about an exercise in oversight,” Brusuelas said.
(CHICAGO) — The four-day gathering of Democrats in Chicago came to a historic end when Vice President Kamala Harris formally accepted the party’s nomination for president.
The final night of the Democratic National Convention focused on patriotism, featured heartrending stories on hot-button policy issues and showcased Republicans who say they are voting for Harris this November.
Here’s a look at some of highlights and key takeaways from Thursday’s program.
Harris on ‘fight for America’s future’
In what was the biggest speech of her political career, Harris told her story to the American people and said they are all in a “fight for America’s future” as she accepted the nomination.
She started by paying tribute to her late mother, who passed away before she was elected California’s attorney general, U.S. senator and vice president.
“My mother was a brilliant five-foot-tall brown woman with an accent. And as the eldest child, I saw how the world would sometimes treat her,” Harris said. “But my mother never lost her cool. She was tough, courageous, a trailblazer in the fight for women’s health and she taught Maya and me a lesson … she taught us to never complain about injustice but do something about it. Do something about it.”
What followed was a run-through of her professional career as a prosecutor and her focus on the future, including calls to protect reproductive freedom, America’s security and democracy.
“You can always trust me to put country above party and self, to hold sacred America’s fundamental principles, from the rule of law to free and fair elections, to the peaceful transfer of power,” she said in appeal to those with different political affiliations watching her remarks.
“I will be a president who unites us around our highest aspirations, a president who leads us and listens, who is realistic, practical and has common sense and always fights for the American people from the courthouse to the White House. That has been my life’s work.”
Emphasis on patriotism
Patriotism was an overall theme throughout the night, seen in the scores of American flags waved throughout the United Center as Democrats worked to show that they are the party of American values.
Rep. Ruben Gallego, an Iraq War veteran, brought on stage Democratic veterans who are serving their county and in elected offices at every level.
“These veterans represent the best of our country,” he said. “We stand united as veterans, Democrats and patriots to fight for everyone who serves.”
“But politicians like Donald Trump. They don’t stand with us,” he continued. “They call patriots like Sen. McCain ‘losers.’ John McCain was an American hero. Show some respect.”
In one sign of how Democrats are trying to turn Republican’s long association with patriotism and national security on its head this cycle, Leon Panetta — the secretary of defense under former President Barack Obama — told the story about giving the order that led to the death of Osama bin Laden during a prime-time speaking slot.
Americans share personal stories on hot-button political issues
In two powerful moments, everyday Americans took to the stage to share how politics has had an impact on their lives.
One woman, Anya Cook, recounted how she suffered a miscarriage in a bathroom that nearly killed her due to her state’s strict laws on reproductive health care.
Four people impacted by gun violence later shared their stories with the crowd in moving statements.
Abbey Clements of Newtown, Connecticut, a teacher at Sandy Hook Elementary, said she carries that “horrific day” with her. “The should be here,” she said of the 20 children and six of her colleagues shot to death.
Kim Rubio of Uvalde, Texas, whose daughter was one of 19 children killed in the Robb Elementary School shooting, recounted that day through tears.
“I reach out for the daughter I will never hold again,” she said, as the crowd yelled out her daughter’s name.
Another Republican makes the case for Harris
Former Rep. Adam Kinzinger also spoke in primetime in support of Harris — rounding out a slate of Republicans who have spoken at the DNC this week, including former Georgia Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan, Mayor John Giles of Mesa, Arizona, former Trump White House national security official Olivia Troye and former Trump White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham.
Kinzinger sat on the House’s Jan. 6 select committee that investigated the attack on the U.S. Capitol. He was also one of the 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump on a charge of inciting the violence.
He revisited the insurrection during his speech Thursday and the “profound sorrow” of that day while urging conservatives to vote blue.
“Democracy knows no party. It is a living, breathing ideal that defines us as a nation. It is the bedrock that separates us from tyranny — and when that foundation is fractured, we must stand united to strengthen it,” he said, calling on people to “vote for our bedrock values” and elect Harris.
Trump takedowns
Like much of this week, speakers balanced pushing the Democratic Party’s optimistic vision for the nation while also taking time to cast Donald Trump as a threat to those principles.
Rep. Veronica Escobar, who kickstarted the program on Thursday, also pit what Democrats were trying to accomplish against the actions of Trump.
“I just want to say this week our energy, hope and joy have inspired the nation,” she said. “Meanwhile, Donald Trump has been a small man, speaking in small venues, talking about small ideas.”
Harris called him an “unserious man” who if put back in the White House would have “extremely serious” consequences.
“Consider not only the chaos and calamity when he was in office, but also the gravity of what has happened since he lost the last election,” she said, going on to discuss the insurrection and his fraud conviction.
New York City Council member Yusef Salaam, one of the five men exonerated in the “Central Park Five” case, called Trump a “hateful man” during his DNC appearance.
“He wanted us dead,” Salaam said alongside the other men wrongfully convicted in the case. “Today, we are exonerated because the actual perpetrator confessed. And DNA proved it.”
Others who took shots at Trump include prosecutor Tristan Snell, who spoke on stage about taking on Trump University fraud.
“Kamala Harris fought scammers like him. And as president, she will continue to fight for you, for us, for the people,” Snell said.
(NEW YORK) — Authorities are looking for a man in connection to a burglary at the Trump for President 2024 campaign office in Ashburn, Virginia, the Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office announced Monday.
Sheriff’s deputies said they were alerted to the break-in at approximately 9:00 p.m. ET, but the suspect was gone before officials arrived on the scene.
Surveillance video provided by officials showed the suspect — an adult male — wearing dark clothing, a dark cap and a backpack.
The investigation is ongoing and the sheriff’s office did not indicate if anything was taken or left at the scene.
“It is rare to have the office of any political campaign or party broken into,” Sheriff Mike Chapman said in a news release. “We are determined to identify the suspect, investigate why it happened, and determine what may have been taken as well as what may have been left behind.”
The campaign office, which is leased, also serves as the headquarters of the Virginia 10th District Republican Committee, officials said.