TIME Bernie Sanders

Bernie Sanders Calls for Broader End to Deportations

Democratic Presidential candidate and U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) greets supporters during a visit to his Iowa campaign headquarters on June 13, 2015 in Des Moines, Iowa.
Scott Olson—2015 Getty Images Democratic Presidential candidate and U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) greets supporters during a visit to his Iowa campaign headquarters on June 13, 2015 in Des Moines, Iowa.

White House hopeful says he would expand protections to include parents of those in the United States illegally.

Democratic White House hopeful Bernie Sanders on Friday called for ending deportations for not just the children who were brought to the United States as young children but also their parents who are in the country illegally. It was an effort to outflank Sanders’ chief rival for the Democrats’ leading contender for President, Hillary Clinton.

Speaking to Latino elected and appointed officials in Las Vegas, the Vermont Senator delivered a rousing sermon about economic populism and social justice a day after Clinton offered remarks to the same crowd. While there were fewer reporters crowded on the press riser, Sanders still drew a full ballroom on the glitzy Vegas Strip and brought the crowd to its feet several times.

“Brothers and sisters, there is a lot of work to be done,” said Sanders, a political Independent who caucuses with the Democrats. “But when we stand up to those people on top whose greed has done so much damage to this country … there is no limit to what this great country can accomplish.”

Sanders said he backs President Barack Obama’s policy that spared some younger immigrants in the country illegally deportation. It was particularly helpful to children whose parents were brought them to the country as children, occasionally known as Dreamers.

Sanders he would expand the program to “parents of citizens, parents of legal permanent residents and parents of Dreamers.”

“We cannot and we should not be talking about sweeping up millions of men, women and children, many of whom have been in this country for years,” Sanders said to applause. He said splitting up families—leaving children in the United States while parents or cousins were sent home—was against the country’s values.

Sanders, for sure, is running behind Clinton in polling and fundraising. But he has been workmanlike in building a campaign. His slow-and-steady approach has captured the imagination of Democrats’ most liberal corners, who are skeptical if not hostile to a second Clinton being President.

Sanders has been tapping into that sentiment, all the while avoiding any direct criticism of the former Secretary of State and Senator. Clinton remains the party’s favorite candidate and has a far larger political machine behind her.

“American kids who deserve the right to be in the country they know as home,” said Sanders, whose father came to the United States from Poland. “We are a nation of immigrants. That is, in fact, the strength of America.”

As Sanders made his way toward the exit, conference participants rushed toward him, cell phones held overhead to snap pictures and arms stretched out to shake his hand. He may not win the Democrats’ nomination but he certainly spoke to the party’s base.

TIME global trade

House Democrats Derail ‘Fast Track’ Trade Measure in Blow to Obama

US-POLITICS-TRADE-OBAMA
Mandel Ngan—AFP/Getty Images Anti-trade protestors hold banners outside of the Cannon House Office Building as US President Barack Obama arrived on Capitol Hill to lobby House Democrats on June 12, 2015 in Washington, DC.

The path forward for Obama’s trade agenda, his top legislative priority, is hardly clear

President Obama suffered a stunning defeat Friday when fellow Democrats in the House hobbled his push for a legacy-defining Pacific Rim trade deal.

House Democrats used a tactical maneuver to deny Obama the fast-track negotiating authority he needs to finalize that pact, sinking a worker assistance program that’s become a precondition for Democratic support of such agreements. The vote was 126-302.

The path forward for Obama’s trade agenda, his top legislative priority, is hardly clear. “I don’t think anybody knows,” Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.), a member of House Democratic leadership, said after the vote.

Complicating the outlook, House Republicans managed to eek out a majority for the fast-track power itself following the implosion on the worker assistance funding. But procedural rules prohibit GOP leaders from taking only part of the package, which already passed the Senate, and sending it along to the White House for the president’s signature.

Republicans indicated Friday afternoon that they are looking to bring the legislation back up for another vote early next week, and the Obama administration needs to use the weekend to change scores of minds among the Democratic ranks.

In the meantime, Republican leaders appeared happy to heap blame on the White House for botching a key priority they shared. “The president has not only faded, he’s irrelevant, and he proved it again today,” Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas) said.

The setback also marks a humbling blow to the corporate lobby, which marshaled all its muscle — including a multi-million dollar media campaign and a newly organized program to enlist workers’ voices in the debate — to try to overcome a raucous, bruising effort by labor unions to turn Democrats against the White House.

But the loss comes with a personal sting for Obama, considering he launched a rare, last minute blitz to twist arms in his own ranks. He made an unannounced appearance at Nationals Park baseball stadium on Thursday night to buttonhole lawmakers there for an annual Congressional game, and then he trekked up to the Capitol on Friday morning to make a final appeal to Democrats in a closed-door meeting.

The program that Democrats voted down — officially, Trade Adjustment Assistance — provides extended unemployment benefits and job retraining for workers laid off as a result of expanded trade. Most Republicans view it as welfare and oppose it. But with the trade agenda’s fate hinging on the worker assistance funding, the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce — two of the most powerful business lobbies, both of which typically lean right — put lawmakers on notice that groups will be factoring how they voted into the scorecards they use to determine their election-season support.

The pressure evidently didn’t change many minds, though it highlighted again how the odd politics of the issue scramble traditional allegiances. That dynamic was on display Friday morning in the subterranean room in the Capitol Visitors Center where Obama delivered a final appeal to House Democrats. The president made an impassioned case that the economic benefits of his trade program will be widely shared, attendees said, and he argued that his record of sticking up for working families should earn him some good faith from members of his own party. But walking out, Obama telegraphed to reporters that he knew he hadn’t closed the sale. “I don’t think you ever nail anything down around here. It’s always moving,” he said.

For one, the president undercut his cause by appearing to question the integrity of Democrats who’d line up against a worker assistance program they otherwise support to take down the broader package. “There were a number of us who were insulted by the approach,” Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) told reporters after the meeting. “He said you’re not playing it straight if you vote against TAA but you supported in the past and you’ll support it in the future. That’s questioning someone’s integrity. We’re legislators, and it’s the only legislative tool we have to stop something that is otherwise inevitable.”

Likewise, Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) said he didn’t consider the Democratic move a legislative maneuver, “but even if it was, we engage in legislative maneuvers all the time.” One giveaway about the stakes, he said: “Every lobbyist here in Washington whose job it is to increase profits is for this deal. And every lobbyist in town whose job it is to increase wages is against this deal.”

Democratic objections run deep, a fact that may make it impossible for the White House to salvage the package in just a few days. Rep. Sander Levin (D-Mich.)—the top Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee, which overseas trade—stood off the House floor on Friday afternoon surrounded by reporters and ran through a litany of substantive problems with the Trans Pacific Partnership, the 12-nation pact that Obama wants the negotiating ability to finalize. Fast-track authority would allow him to wrap up the deal and submit it to Congress for a simple up-or-down vote, meaning lawmakers would not be able to amend it. Levin said from what he’s seen of the trade deal’s language, the administration has retreated from some critical priorities—and he views the wrangling over the negotiating package as leverage to force the administration’s hand on those matters.

Wherever the debate leads, the collapse of the administration’s agenda at the hands of its erstwhile Congressional foot soldiers was historic. Compounding Obama’s abasement, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi—a typically reliable lieutenant — remained publicly uncommitted in the weeks leading up the vote only to announce her opposition on the House floor moments before it began. “Our people would rather have a job than trade adjustment assistance,” she said. “Today, we have an opportunity to slow down.”

This article originally appeared on Fortune.com.

TIME 2016 Campaign

‘Run Warren Run’ to Disband

Sen. Elizabeth Warren listens to Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen testify, at a Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee hearing on "Semiannual Monetary Policy Report to Congress" on Capitol Hill in Washington, Feb. 24, 2015.
Kevin Lamarque—Reuters Sen. Elizabeth Warren listens to Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen testify, at a Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee hearing on "Semiannual Monetary Policy Report to Congress" on Capitol Hill in Washington, Feb. 24, 2015.

Six months after launching “Run Warren Run,” a quixotic campaign to draft Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren into the 2016 presidential race, the two progressive organizations behind it will call it quits and focus more broadly on a populist agenda in the 2016 presidential race, according to a spokesman.

Democracy for America and MoveOn.org, which together spent $1.25 million dollars launching the campaign last December, plan to visit Warren’s Washington, DC office on June 8 and deliver a petition with 365,000 signatures asking the senator to run.

The organizations will then pivot to more issue-specific advocacy, including thwarting the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an enormous, 12-nation free trade pact that liberals argue will kill jobs and reduce labor and environmental standards worldwide. Warren, who has said repeatedly that she has no intention of running for the White House, has been a staunch critic of the trade pact.

Despite their lack of success at convincing Warren to run, both DFA and MoveOn.org described the short-lived campaign as a victory for liberal populists. “Even without her in the race, Elizabeth Warren and the Run Warren Run campaign she inspired have already transformed the 2016 presidential election by focusing every single Democratic candidate on combatting our country’s income inequality crisis,” Charles Chamberlain, the executive director of DFA, said in a statement. Ilya Sheyman, the executive director of MoveOn.org Political Action, said the campaign helped bring issues of inequality and corporate dominance to the fore.

The two organizations cited as “key accomplishments” an extensive, multi-column March op-ed in the Boston Globe urging Warren to run, as well as public statements of support from prominent figures in the progressive movement, including Van Jones and Lawrence Lessig. More than 60 state legislators in the early-voting state of New Hampshire joined the Run Warren Run campaign by this spring.

Run Warren Run, which opened field offices and hired staff in the early-voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire, ran a traditional, grassroots campaign. Volunteers hosted house parties and organized roadside “honk and waves.”

It was a effort defined largely by blind optimism. Even as Warren said publicly, time and again, that she was not running for president, and had no intention to do so, the campaign consistently urged her to reconsider. Its unraveling was no different. At the end of a statement announcing the dissolution of Run Warren Run, Chamberlain sent up one last flare: “We still think there’s plenty of time,” he said, “for Sen. Warren to change her mind.”

TIME 2016 Election

Martin O’Malley Looks to Future But Can’t Escape the Past

Hecklers appear at the former Baltimore Mayor's presidential campaign launch

Former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, who plays guitar in a rock band and regularly emerges shirtless from the frigid water of Polar Bear plunges, maintained his reputation for youthful vigor Saturday morning. An American flag the size of a parachute billowed behind him, and the Baltimore harbor glimmered in the hot morning sun. O’Malley rolled up his shirtsleeves to announce his candidacy for President. He also repeated the word “new” nearly a dozen times.

“For over 200 years we’ve been the architects of our own future. And now we must build anew today,” O’Malley said to cheers. “All of us are included,” the former governor and mayor continued. “Women and men. Black and white people.”

O’Malley’s crowd in this majority-black city, however, was populated mostly by affluent white supporters of the two-term governor and friends, many of them from Washington D.C.’s suburbs. Dozens of men wearing the purple shirts of O’Malley’s all-boys Jesuit high school Gonzaga filled in the audience. He chose Baltimore’s Federal Hill Park as his stage, miles from the neighborhoods struck by rioting after the death of Freddie Gray while in police custody.

And outside the rallying area, small groups of mostly black Baltimoreans heckled the former mayor and two-term Maryland governor. “100,000 arrests under your watch, O’Malley!” shouted one man, referring to the number of arrests by the Baltimore police department in 2005 while O’Malley was mayor of the city. “You’re going to leave them homeless, you’re going to leave them out of a job, you’re going to leave them hungry!” said another. “Stop Killer Cops,” read one sign.

The split-screen quality of O’Malley’s campaign launch—an energetic candidate speaking above the glistening harbor he rebuilt, and the scattering of angry black Baltimore residents in the crowd—reveal the challenges in the campaign ahead. Even as O’Malley seeks to look to the future by drawing on a progressive record and his relative youth, the recent riots in Baltimore threaten to chip away at his legacy as mayor.

Read more: Martin O’Malley Phoned Hillary Clinton Ahead of His Presidential Launch

At his rally, the self-appointed emissary of newness was surrounded by the youth he hopes to project: toddlers ran around in the audience before his speech, and three of the introductory speakers were millennial Marylanders. At 52, O’Malley is 15 years younger than former secretary of state Hillary Clinton and 21 years younger than Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, his two competitors for the Democratic nomination.

O’Malley points to his deep-blue Democratic record: as governor, he pushed to raise the minimum wage, pass gay marriage legislation, and end capital punishment in the state. He spoke out early against President Obama’s deportation of children who crossed the Mexican border in 2014. He spoke out on Saturday against what he calls the excesses of Wall Street and talks about his platform like a populist.

“We cannot rebuild the American Dream here at home by catering to the voices of the privileged and the powerful,” O’Malley said on Saturday. “Let’s be honest. They were the ones who turned our economy upside-down in the first place. And they are the only ones who are benefiting from it.”

His aggressive policing policies in Baltimore have earned him a mixed reputation in the city, especially among the non-privileged. While crime rates in Baltimore dropped by over 40% when he was mayor, clearing the way for some economic revitalization, police-community relationships worsened during his tenure by some accounts. The more than 100,000 arrests in 2005 during his second-to-last year as mayor led to a lawsuit by the ACLU and an $870,000 settlement with the city. Years later, Freddie Gray’s death at the hands of the Baltimore Police unleashed a wave of rioting, and many blamed the former mayor’s policies.

In his speech, O’Malley addressed the riots directly, attributing the unrest to poverty and unemployment in American cities like Baltimore. What happened in Baltimore, he said, was “not only about race” and “not only about policing.”

“Conditions of extreme and growing poverty create conditions for extreme violence,” O’Malley said. “We have work to do. Our economic and political system is upside down and backwards and it is time to turn it around.”

Read more: What Martin O’Malley Hopes to Learn from Gary Hart

Whatever the reasons for the riots, the unrest has shaken some of O’Malley’s support in his home base.

“Had the riots not happened, O’Malley would have been a golden boy and an adopted black son,” said Rev. Ron Owens, a prominent black Baltimore minister who helped organize the funeral for Freddie Gray. “He had a ‘black card,’ and it was taken from him.”

“I don’t know what could possibly be his platform,” said Rev. Jamal Bryant, another influential Baltimore minister. “The schools are in disrepair, he is the father of mass incarceration in Baltimore city, and there was no great economic upswing for minorities during his time.”

Despite the hecklers on Saturday, O’Malley enjoyed enthusiastic support from many of his allies in the audience. “We had a Catholic guy who supported gay marriage. He took a stand against the death penalty when that was not popular,” said Alice McDermott, a supporter and acquaintance of the governor who teaches at Johns Hopkins University. “That says a lot about him.”

O’Malley recycled many familiar tropes from his campaigning in Iowa and New Hampshire, as well as cable television green rooms. “I’ve got news for the bullies of Wall Street,” O’Malley said, digging at the Clintons, the Bushes and the big banks all in one familiar swing. “The presidency is not a crown to be passed back and forth by you between two royal families.”

On paper, O’Malley is a candidate ready-made for Democratic caucus-goers. But in a year dominated by Hillary Clinton, he is struggling to establish clean policy distinctions with her on make-or-break issues. “He’ll have to find something where he and Clinton have a different position,” said Craig Varoga, a top consultant on O’Malley’s 2010 reelection campaign for governor. “In order to win he’d have to be a perfect candidate, and then get very lucky.”

Read more: Martin O’Malley Prepares to Launch Campaign

By any measure, O’Malley faces a long uphill battle for the Democratic nomination. He is polling nationally among Democrats at around 1% compared with Clinton’s near-60%. The other underdog Democratic candidate in the race, Bernie Sanders, has taken some of the attention from O’Malley’s launch by occupying a position further to the left. Sanders is at 15% in the polls.

O’Malley’s distance behind Clinton may liberate his campaign to try to catch up with bold strokes, like a perennial Iowa and New Hampshire campaign and pointed attacks on the former secretary’s record. “It’s like Janis Joplin said: ‘Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose,’” said Ned Parrott, a Virginia attorney and friend of the governor who attended the rally.

The real freedom trick for O’Malley, though, may be shaking free of his Baltimore hecklers.

-With reporting by Zeke J. Miller

TIME Bernie Sanders

The Radical Education of Bernie Sanders

bernie-sanders-chicago-university-sit-in
Special Collections Research Center/University of Chicago Library Bernie Sanders (R), member of the steering committee, stands next to George Beadle, University of Chicago president, who is speaking at a Committee On Racial Equality meeting on housing sit-ins. 1962.

Bernie Sanders was a prominent local activist in college, and not much has changed

Bernie Sanders won the first election he ever lost.

It was the late 1950s, and Sanders was still a teenager, running to be class president at James Madison High School in Brooklyn, New York. His platform promised to raise scholarship money for kids in Korea orphaned during the recent war. “It was an unusual thing for a person so young to be involved in,” remembers Larry Sanders, Bernie’s older brother. When the votes were tallied, the future Senator from Vermont fell short and lost, but the outcome set a precedent he would love to repeat on the national stage. The winner adopted the Korean scholarship idea and made it happen.

Half a century later, the populist and self-proclaimed socialist is now 73 years old, and he’s running for president of the United States with a solid shot at second place in the Democratic nomination fight. Win or lose, he will force the frontrunner, Hillary Clinton, to take a serious look at his progressive platform, which resonates with a big chunk of the party’s base. “Today, we stand here and say loudly and clearly, enough is enough!” said Sanders on Tuesday evening at his official campaign kickoff in Vermont. “This great nation and its government belong to all of the people, and not to a handful of billionaires.”

“Here is my promise to you for this campaign,” Sanders continued. “Not only will I fight to protect the working families of this country, but we’re going to build a movement of millions of Americans who are prepared to stand up and fight back.”

For Sanders, who maintains he is running to win, pushing Clinton to the left would be fitting capstone to a lifetime spent agitating from the sidelines of powerful American institutions. As a teenager, he read Karl Marx, and as a college student he organized sit-ins against segregation, worked for a union, protested police brutality and attended the 1963 March on Washington. Throughout that time, the central theme of his life has never wavered. “We were concerned obviously about economic injustice,” says Sanders of his college days. “And we were concerned with the question, ‘How do you make change?’”

Sanders’ education in socialism began at home, in a three-and-a-half room apartment in Flatbush, Brooklyn. His father was a paint salesman from Poland and a high school dropout, and the family lived paycheck-to-paycheck. When Sanders’ father went with his wife to see the play The Death of a Salesman, his father so identified with the underemployed Willy Loman that he broke down in tears. “The lack of money caused stress in my family and fights between my mother and father,” Sanders explained to TIME in an interview this month. “That is a reality I have never forgotten: today, there are many millions of families who are living under the circumstances that we lived under.”

Bernie’s older brother, Larry, was a student at Brooklyn College who would come home and discuss Marx and Freud with the high school kid. They talked about democracy in ancient Greece, and Larry took the young Bernie to local Democratic Party meetings. Bernie followed his older brother to Brooklyn College, but when his mother died unexpectedly young, he left Brooklyn and transferred to the University of Chicago.

In Chicago, Sanders threw himself into activism—civil rights, economic justice, volunteering, organizing. “I received more of an education off campus than I did in the classroom,” Sanders says. By his 23rd birthday, Sanders had worked for a meatpackers union, marched for civil rights in Washington D.C., joined the university socialists and been arrested at a civil rights demonstration. He delivered jeremiads to young crowds. The police called him an outside agitator, Sanders said. He was a sloppy student, and the dean asked him to take a year off. He inspired his classmates. “He knows how to talk to people now,” said Robin Kaufman, a student who knew Sanders in 1960s Chicago, “and he knew how to do it then.” He was a radical before it was cool.

He also met regularly with the Young Peoples Socialist League in the student center, where students talked about nuclear disarmament, former Socialist Party Presidential candidate Eugene V. Debs, the lessons of the Russian revolution, and how to implement socialism, though his vision did not match up with the already faltering Soviet experiment. He talks today about expanding government programs like social security and Medicare, and tuition-free college. “Should the government be running the restaurant across the street?” says Sanders today. “Obviously not!”

The civil rights movement also became a home for him. He became leaders of an NAACP ally called the Congress of Racial Equality at a time when most civil rights activists were black. He was arrested while demonstrating for desegregated public schools in Chicago. (No big deal, says Sanders: “You can go outside and get arrested, too!” he jokes. “It’s not that hard if you put your mind to it.”) He once walked around Chicago putting up fliers protesting police brutality. After half an hour, he realized a police car was following him, taking down every paper he’d up, one by one. “Are these yours?” he remembers the officer telling him, holding up the stack of the fliers.

In his second year at college, Sanders made national news. On a frigid Tuesday afternoon in January, 1962 the 20-year-old from Brooklyn stood on the steps of University of Chicago administration building and railed in the wind against the college’s housing segregation policy. “We feel it is an intolerable situation, when Negro and white students of the university cannot live together in university owned apartments,” the young bespectacled student told the few-dozen classmates gathered there. Then he led them into the building in protest, and camped the night outside the president’s office. It was Chicago’s first civil rights sit-in.

Decades later, Sanders rarely raises his past activism in public. In fact, he generally hates talking about his own story. During a recent interview with TIME, the senator from Vermont sunk deep into a sofa in his office and resigned himself to doing just that. “Too much of media looks at politics as a soap opera,” Sanders said in a deep bass. “I have my views, Ted Cruz has his views, that’s fine: let’s lay them out and let the American people decide.”

That aversion to storytelling is part of what makes Sanders a long shot for the Democratic nomination. He polls at around 15% in the early primary states compared with Hillary Clinton’s 60%. And his longtime aversion to the Democratic Party, which he only just formally joined, will be a headwind, as will explaining his identification with “socialism,” a virtual epithet in American politics. “Don’t underestimate me,” Sanders likes to tell reporters.

People who know Bernie best say that beneath the grumpy prognostications about social inequality and climate change is a softy at heart. A few months after he arrived at the University of Chicago, Sanders went to a center in a rough Chicago neighborhood run by a Quaker service group, the American Friends Service Committee. He ventured out to local apartments, painting walls. Back at the house, the 19-year-old was fascinated by the 2-month-old daughter of the home’s caretakers. His friends say he brings that spirit to politics. “His feeling for people is something he had back then, and it’s something he still has,” says Jim Rader, a friend of Sanders’ who ran the Quaker house in Chicago. “He always had a sympathy for the underdog.”

Sanders has lost six major elections since his race for high school class president. But persistence has brought him to his current post, and he’s seeking to be the oldest candidate ever to go to the White House. His goal, at the very least, is to foist his ideas in the Democratic primary. Now, as before, victory can be seen broadly: He can win the nomination himself, or embed his ideas with the person who does.

TIME Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton Unloads on GOP Over Export Bank

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks at a business roundtable at the Smuttynose Brewery with co-owner Peter Egelston May 22, 2015 in Hampton, New Hampshire.
Darren McCollester—Getty Images Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks at a business roundtable at the Smuttynose Brewery with co-owner Peter Egelston May 22, 2015 in Hampton, New Hampshire.

Hillary Clinton is out of patience for her Republican rivals and their opposition to an export-assistance program. But she still isn’t taking a position on a Pacific trade deal that has become politically linked to the Export-Import Bank’s renewal.

The Democratic Presidential candidate on Friday unloaded on her GOP foes, calling them cowards who do not make up their own minds and default to the loudest and most extreme voices in the party. The former Secretary of State told an invite-only crowd in Hampton, N.H.. that Americans’ jobs are in the balance, and Republicans would rather scuttle workers’ paychecks than to tell the truth about the Export-Import Bank, which provides financing for U.S. exports.

Clinton said the bank’s opponents are looking to score political points and are shameless panderers “who really should know better.” She did not single out any of her GOP rivals by name, but Sens. Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Rand Paul have all opposed keeping the agency around.

“Across our country, the Export-Import Bank supports up to 164,000 jobs,” Clinton said. “It is wrong that Republicans in Congress are trying to cut off this vital lifeline for American small businesses. … They would rather threaten the livelihoods of those 164,000 jobs rather than stand up to the tea party and talk radio.”

The agency is a favorite target of small-government tea party activists, who claim it is corporate welfare for giant corporations like Boeing. The bank has been a flashpoint for conservatives and it almost lost its charter in 2012 and again last year. Lawmakers secured a nine-month extension for the bank last year, but conservatives are pushing to let the lender’s authority expire this summer.

But complicating the delicate negotiations is a trade deal with Pacific nations that President Obama is seeking. Some Democrats—especially those in the party’s liberal wing—oppose the measure.

Clinton backed the trade deal when she was at the State Department but has remained uncommitted on the issue since she entered the presidential race. She says she wants to see the final terms of the deal before deciding to endorse it or not.

“We don’t yet know all the details,” Clinton told reporters on Friday. “I have some real concerns.”

She said she would need to be assured that currency manipulation is blocked, that the standards would be enforceable and that labor and environment protections are adequate.

“I’ve been for trade agreements. I’ve been against trade agreements. I’ve voted for some. I’ve voted against others,” she said. “I want to judge this when I see what exactly is in it.”

TIME White House

Why Obama’s Visit to Nike Bothers Liberals

President Barack Obama arrives at the Oregon Air National Guard Base ahead of a fundraiswer at Nike, in Portland on May 7, 2015.
Brendan Smialowski—AFP/Getty Images President Barack Obama arrives at the Oregon Air National Guard Base ahead of a fundraiswer at Nike, in Portland on May 7, 2015.

If there’s one thing the liberal, activist base can agree on, it’s that they hate President Obama’s proposed trade deal, the Trans-Pacific Partnership. They argue that it would transfer hundreds of thousands of decent American jobs to developing countries, like Vietnam, where workers, laboring under poor conditions, make pennies an hour.

And if there’s a second thing that liberal can agree on, it’s that the multinational sports outfitter, Nike, which conducts virtually all of its manufacturing in Asia and Mexico, is perhaps the world’s most powerful symbol, fairly or not, of precisely this kind of exploitation of cheap overseas labor, to the detriment of the American worker.

So Obama’s decision to visit Nike to promote the trade deal Thursday has liberals completely baffled.

“It’s crazy,” said Neil Sroka, the communications director of Democracy for America, a liberal advocacy group. “It would almost be funny on its face, if it weren’t such a sad indication of how out of touch the White House is on this issue with the lived experience of the American people.”

T.J. Helmstetter of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee added that “President Obama’s position on the TPP is misguided, as evidenced by his visit to Nike, which pays workers overseas so little they can’t afford to buy the shoes they’re making.”

Campaign for America’s Future, another liberal group opposed to the trade deal, is organizing a protest outside of Nike’s headquarters on Friday.

The White House, for its part, is making the case that visiting Nike — famous precisely because of its embrace of globalization — makes perfect sense. The president is expected to argue that the trade deal will reduce prices for American consumers by cutting tariffs on things like imported Nike sportswear.

“By allowing our trading partners to produce the goods in which they are relatively more efficient, the United States can import at lower prices than would prevail if we were to use our scarce resources to produce the goods ourselves,” economic advisers at the White House wrote in a report this month.

The trade deal, the advisers explained, would set new, higher standards for labor conditions, environmental protections and copyright. In exchange, lower tariffs at the U.S. border would make it easier to import Asian-made products — including Nike clothing and shoes. The U.S. imported $987.41 billion in goods and services from the Asia-Pacific region in 2012, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.

It’s an argument that is no doubt music to the ears of the corporate leadership at Nike, where 56% of the company’s revenue comes from outside Mexico, the United States and Canada, according to the company’s filings.

But labor groups, environmentalists, liberals, and some Tea Party Republicans say that argument doesn’t take into account the reality of average Americans.

“The argument doesn’t make any sense for struggling workers and their families,” said Sroka. “If you can’t get a job because companies like Nike are shipping their jobs to Vietnam where they’re can pay workers less, then it matters very little to you that your shoes are going to be two bucks less.”

Dave Johnson, a senior fellow at the progressive Campaign For America’s Future, made a more populist argument. “Phil Knight, head of Nike, is now worth $23 billion because America’s trade policies encourage companies like Nike to create and move jobs outside of the U.S.,” he wrote. “The 23rd-richest American is one more symbol of the kind of inequality that results from outsourcing enabled and encouraged by these trade policies. Workers here lose (or never get) jobs; workers there are paid squat; a few people become vastly, unimaginably wealthy.”

For the last two decades, Nike has come under consistent fire from civil rights and anti-globalization groups for operating sweatshops that exploit weak labor laws and employ children. As recently as last year, the company was criticized for abusing workers in Indonesia and underpaying workers in China.

Nike says it now operates all its factories above board. “Nike fully supports the inclusion of strong labor provisions” in trade deals, the company said in a statement. “We’ve made significant improvements and driven positive change for workers in contract factories that make Nike product.”

If the TPP is approved it will include 12 nations, including Japan, Australia, New Zealand and Chile, and oversee 40% of the world’s total GDP. Obama’s trip this Friday comes just as Congress is debating the passage of “fast track” legislation, which would give Congress only an up-or-down vote on the trade deal, with no ability to tinker with the details.

Obama and his allies on trade, which include Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden and the vast majority of the Republican establishment, have argued that “fast track” legislation is necessary to smooth the way for the TPP. Congress is expected to vote on the fast track next week.

TIME Crime

Support for the Death Penalty in America Has Hit a 40-year Low

Anti-Death Penalty Activists Hold Fast And Vigil Outside Supreme Court
Chip Somodevilla—Getty Images Abolitionist Action Committee member Bo Chamberlin of Columbus, Ohio, fasts with other death penalty opponents in front of the U.S. Supreme Court June 29, 2009 in Washington, DC.

Only a slim majority of Americans agree with it

Public backing for capital punishment in the U.S. has dipped to its lowest in 40 years, according to a new report, although a small majority of Americans still believe in it.

According to a study released by the Pew Research Center, just 56% of U.S. citizens support the death penalty — a decline of 6% since 2011. During the 1980s and 1990s, in comparison, that number often crossed 70%.

The study, which surveyed 1,500 adults across the U.S., found that the decline has come mainly among Democrats — 40% of Democrats support the death penalty while 56% oppose it, a sharp contrast from the 1996 survey that showed 71% of them for and just 25% against.

Overall, 71% of Americans say the risk of an innocent person being put to death is high, and 61% say the death penalty does not deter individuals from committing serious crimes.

TIME Congress

This Brothel Offered to Host Harry Reid’s Retirement Party

Harry Reid
Pablo Martinez Monsivais—AP Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nev. adjusts his glasses as he speaks to reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, March 24, 2015.

The brothel says a party there could be good for Democrat/Republican relations

A brothel in Nevada has offered to host Harry Reid’s retirement party, promising that it would be a “big hit” with the attendees.

In an open letter to the Senate Minority Leader, Sheri’s Ranch lists the policy initiatives Reid has supported that have benefitted the legal prostitutes in Nevada, Reid’s home state. The letter mentions Reid’s support for the Affordable Care Act, under which the prostitutes, who operate as independent contractors, can now have health coverage. It also talks about Reid’s support for LGBT rights and his opposition to a proposed nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain, which is in a neighboring county to the brothel.

But along with championing Reid’s politics, the letter also pitches Sheri’s as an ideal party spot.

“Many of your colleagues are intimately aware of our offerings, but we may have added new options since they last visited,” it says. “In addition to our VIP sex bungalows, BDSM chamber, and numerous Jacuzzi rooms popular with our friends from the political arena, Sheri’s has recently added a new massage room where your guests can receive full-body nude massages from one (or more) of the two dozen legal prostitutes on the property at any given time.”

“Heck, a retirement party at Sheri’s may even help lessen the animosity between you and your Republican acquaintances,” the letter adds.

Reid recently announced he would retire at the end of 2016.

TIME People

Dick Cheney: Obama Is ‘Playing the Race Card’

Dick Cheney Slams Obama in Playboy
Brendan Hoffman—Getty Images Former Vice President Dick Cheney is interviewed by SiriusXM Patriot host David Webb at SiriusXM studios on Oct. 25, 2011 in Washington, DC.

The former VP discussed everything from Ferguson to Obama's "damage" in a new Playboy interview

Former Vice President Dick Cheney has never been one to mince his words about current U.S. President Barack Obama.

Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder are “playing the race card” when they suggest that their critics may be partially driven by race, Cheney told Playboy in an interview for its April issue, which was published online Tuesday.

Cheney also reaffirmed his view that the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., while tragic, has been overblown by the Obama administration.

“It seems to me it’s a clear-cut case that the officer did what he had to do to defend himself,” Cheney said. “I don’t think it is about race. I think it is about an individual who conducted himself in a manner that was almost guaranteed to provoke an officer trying to do his duty.”

Read the full interview at Playboy.

Your browser is out of date. Please update your browser at http://update.microsoft.com