Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Uncategorized

Democrats plan more pressure on Trump to reopen government

Published

5 minute read

WASHINGTON — With no weekend breakthrough to end a prolonged partial government shutdown, President Donald Trump is standing firm in his border wall funding demands and newly empowered House Democrats are planning to step up pressure on Trump and Republican lawmakers to reopen the government.

Trump showed no signs of budging on his demand for more than $5 billion for a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, though on Sunday he did offer to build it with steel rather than concrete, a concession Democrats panned.

With the shutdown lurching into a third week, many Republicans watched nervously from the sidelines as hundreds of thousands of federal workers went without pay and government disruptions hit the lives of ordinary Americans.

White House officials affirmed Trump’s funding request in a letter to Capitol Hill after a meeting Sunday with senior congressional aides led by Vice-President Mike Pence at the White House complex yielded little progress. The letter from Office of Management and Budget Acting Director Russell Vought sought funding for a “steel barrier on the Southwest border.”

The White House said the letter, as well as details provided during the meeting, sought to answer Democrats’ questions about the funding request. Democrats, though, said the administration still failed to provide a full budget of how it would spend the billions requested for the wall from Congress. Trump campaigned on a promise that Mexico would pay for the wall, but Mexico has refused.

The letter includes a request for $800 million for “urgent humanitarian needs,” a reflection of the growing anxiety over migrants travelling to the border — which the White House said Democrats raised in the meetings. And it repeats some existing funding requests for detention beds and security officers, which have already been panned by Congress and would likely find resistance among House Democrats.

Trump sought to frame a steel barrier as progress, saying Democrats “don’t like concrete, so we’ll give them steel.” The president has already suggested his definition of the wall is flexible, but Democrats have made clear they see a wall as immoral and ineffective and prefer other types of border security funded at already agreed upon levels.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi intends to begin passing individual bills to reopen agencies in the coming days, starting with the Treasury Department to ensure people receive their tax refunds. That effort is designed to squeeze Senate Republicans, some of whom are growing increasingly anxious about the extended shutdown.

Among the Republicans expressing concerns was Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell should take up bills from the Democratic-led House.

“Let’s get those reopened while the negotiations continue,” Collins said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Adding to concerns, federal workers might miss this week’s paychecks. Acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that if the shutdown continues into Tuesday, “then payroll will not go out as originally planned on Friday night.”

Trump reaffirmed that he would consider declaring a national emergency to circumvent Congress and spend money as he saw fit. Such a move would seem certain to draw legal challenges.

Incoming House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., said on ABC’s “This Week” that the executive power has been used to build military facilities in Iraq and Afghanistan but would likely be “wide open” to a court challenge for a border wall. Speaking on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff called the idea a “nonstarter.”

Trump also asserted that he could relate to the plight of the hundreds of thousands of federal workers who aren’t getting paid, though he acknowledged they will have to “make adjustments” to deal with the shutdown shortfall.

___

Associated Press writer Julie Walker in New York, Jill Colvin in Washington and Elliot Spagat in San Diego contributed to this report.

Catherine Lucey And Lisa Mascaro, The Associated Press

Before Post

Storytelling is in our DNA. We provide credible, compelling multimedia storytelling and services in English and French to help captivate your digital, broadcast and print audiences. As Canada’s national news agency for 100 years, we give Canadians an unbiased news source, driven by truth, accuracy and timeliness.

Follow Author

Uncategorized

Poilievre on 2025 Election Interference – Carney sill hasn’t fired Liberal MP in Chinese election interference scandal

Published on

From Conservative Party Communications

Yes. He must be disqualified. I find it incredible that Mark Carney would allow someone to run for his party that called for a Canadian citizen to be handed over to a foreign government on a bounty, a foreign government that would almost certainly execute that Canadian citizen.

 

“Think about that for a second. We have a Liberal MP saying that a Canadian citizen should be handed over to a foreign dictatorship to get a bounty so that that citizen could be murdered. And Mark Carney says he should stay on as a candidate. What does that say about whether Mark Carney would protect Canadians?

“Mark Carney is deeply conflicted. Just in November, he went to Beijing and secured a quarter-billion-dollar loan for his company from a state-owned Chinese bank. He’s deeply compromised, and he will never stand up for Canada against any foreign regime. It is another reason why Mr. Carney must show us all his assets, all the money he owes, all the money that his companies owe to foreign hostile regimes. And this story might not be entirely the story of the bounty, and a Liberal MP calling for a Canadian to be handed over for execution to a foreign government might not be something that the everyday Canadian can relate to because it’s so outrageous. But I ask you this, if Mark Carney would allow his Liberal MP to make a comment like this, when would he ever protect Canada or Canadians against foreign hostility?

“He has never put Canada first, and that’s why we cannot have a fourth Liberal term. After the Lost Liberal Decade, our country is a playground for foreign interference. Our economy is weaker than ever before. Our people more divided. We need a change to put Canada first with a new government that will stand up for the security and economy of our citizens and take back control of our destiny. Let’s bring it home.”

 

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Canada Needs A Real Plan To Compete Globally

Published on

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Marco Navarro-Génie 

Ottawa’s ideological policies have left Canada vulnerable. Strategic action is needed now

As Canada navigates an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape, the next federal government must move beyond reflexive anti—Americanism regardless of its political leanings. Instead, Canada should prioritize national interests while avoiding unnecessary conflict and subservience.

The notion that Canada can stand alone is as misguided as the idea that it is only an economic appendage of the United States. Both perspectives have influenced policy in Ottawa at different times, leading to mistakes.

Rather than engaging in futile name-calling or trade disputes, Canada must take strategic steps to reinforce its autonomy. This approach requires a pragmatic view rooted in Realpolitik—recognizing global realities, mitigating risks, governing for the whole country, and seizing opportunities while abandoning failed ideologies.

However, if Washington continues to pursue protectionist measures, Canada must find effective ways to counteract the weakened position Ottawa has placed the country in over the past decade.

One key strategy is diversifying trade relationships, notably by expanding economic ties with emerging markets such as India and Southeast Asia. This will require repairing Canada’s strained relationship with India and regaining political respect in China.

Unlike past Liberal trade missions, which often prioritized ideological talking points over substance, Canada must negotiate deals that protect domestic industries rather than turning summits into platforms for moral posturing.

A more effective approach would be strengthening partnerships with countries that value Canadian resources instead of vilifying them under misguided environmental policies. Expand LNG exports to Europe and Asia and leverage Canada’s critical minerals sector to establish reciprocal supply chains with non-Western economies, reducing economic reliance on the U.S.

Decades of complacency have left Canada vulnerable to American influence over its resource sector. Foreign-funded environmental groups have weakened domestic energy production, handing U.S. industries a strategic advantage. Ottawa must counter this by ensuring Canadian energy is developed at home rather than allowing suppressed domestic production to benefit foreign competitors.

Likewise, a robust industrial policy—prioritizing mining, manufacturing, and agricultural resilience—could reduce dependence on U.S. and Chinese imports. This does not mean adopting European-style subsidies but rather eliminating excessive regulations that make Canadian businesses uncompetitive, including costly domestic carbon tariffs.

Another key vulnerability is Canada’s growing military dependence on the U.S. through NORAD and NATO. While alliances are essential, decades of underfunding and neglect have turned the Canadian Armed Forces into little more than a symbolic force. Canada must learn self-reliance and commit to serious investment in defence.

Increasing defence spending—not to meet NATO targets but to build deterrence—is essential. Ottawa must reform its outdated procurement processes and develop a domestic defence manufacturing base, reducing reliance on foreign arms deals.

Canada’s vast Arctic is also at risk. Without continued investment in northern sovereignty, Ottawa may find itself locked out of its own backyard by more assertive global powers.

For too long, Canada has relied on an economic model that prioritizes federal redistribution over wealth creation and productivity. A competitive tax regime—one that attracts investment instead of punishing success—is essential.

A capital gains tax hike might satisfy activists in Toronto, but it does little to attract investments and encourage economic growth. Likewise, Ottawa must abandon ideological green policies that threaten agri-food production, whether by overregulating farmers or ranchers. At the same time, it must address inefficiencies in supply management once and for all. Canada must be able to feed a growing world without unnecessary bureaucratic obstacles.

Ottawa must also create an environment where businesses can innovate and grow without excessive regulatory burdens. This includes eliminating interprovincial trade barriers that stifle commerce.

Similarly, Canada’s tech sector, long hindered by predatory regulations, should be freed from excessive government interference. Instead of suffocating innovation with compliance mandates, Ottawa should focus on deregulation while implementing stronger security measures for foreign tech firms operating in Canada.

Perhaps Ottawa’s greatest mistake is its knee-jerk reactions to American policies, made without a coherent long-term strategy. Performative trade disputes with Washington and symbolic grandstanding in multilateral organizations do little to advance Canada’s interests.

Instead of reacting emotionally, Canada must take proactive steps to secure its economic, resource, and defence future. That is the role of a responsible government.

History’s best strategists understood that one should never fight an opponent’s war but instead dictate the terms of engagement. Canada’s future does not depend on reacting to Washington’s policies—these are calculated strategies, not whims. Instead, Canada’s success will be determined by its ability to act in the interests of citizens in all regions of the country, and seeing the world as it is rather than how ideological narratives wish it to be.

Marco Navarro-Génie is the vice president of research at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. With Barry Cooper, he is co-author of Canada’s COVID: The Story of a Pandemic Moral Panic (2023).

Continue Reading

Trending

X