theintercept--2020-03-03--Once-Confident Bloomberg Campaign Retreats in Texas as Biden Surges

Sunday night at the historic Hangar 9 in San Antonio , Texas , former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg made the case to a crowd of close to 600 people that he ’ s the best candidate to beat President Donald Trump in November .
It was Bloomberg ’ s seventh trip to Texas since he entered the race in November , part of his campaign strategy to make gains in the delegate-rich state , where he ’ s spent upward of $ 50 million .
The billionaire , who has spent more than $ 460 million of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comfortably in the historic venue at the city ’ s former Brooks Air Force Base , referencing the city ’ s “ Military City USA ” moniker and its Latin roots .
“ I know I just missed the rodeo , and I ’ m too early for a fiesta , ” he said between rounds of laughter and applause from the crowd after an introduction from Democratic state Rep. Leo Pacheco .
Despite his campaign ’ s immense focus on Texas , where Bloomberg has won endorsements from a number of influential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Party ’ s vice chair , he enters Super Tuesday polling third in the state , with between 16 and 20 percent support .
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is in the lead , followed by former Vice President Joe Biden — the establishment consolidation behind Biden threatens to compromise Bloomberg ’ s Super Tuesday hopes .
His campaign has worked hard to control messaging in recent days , apparently realizing that an early assumption that spending a lot of money can be an effective substitute for a strong field operation was wrong — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ short in the state where his campaign has focused most of its efforts .
Bloomberg will appear at a rally in West Palm Beach , Florida , on Tuesday night , instead of in a Super Tuesday state .
In Texas , his campaign did not schedule any election night watch parties .
The decision was made due to a fear of a humiliating Bloomberg loss and low attendance , according to a senior campaign staffer , who was not authorized to speak about their employer .
“ A lot of high-profile supporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too , so they ’ re even more concerned , ” the staffer said .
Early this week , Bloomberg ’ s Texas campaign tightened its messaging around voter engagement efforts , directing staff not to conduct media interviews and canceling scheduled media requests to accompany canvassers on the ground .
After advising over the weekend that it would grant ample media access for interviews with staff and canvassers in Texas , staffers at Sunday ’ s rally were not permitted to be interviewed by members of the press without approval from leadership @ @ @ @ @ @ @ email to the Texas state team on Monday advising staff not to allow organizers or volunteers to conduct any media interviews , saying that they needed to focus on get-out-the-vote efforts and meeting as many voters as possible .
“ We will not be granting anymore interviews at staging locations or field offices , ” read the email .
“ Volunteers and organizers need to focus on GOTV and voter engagement.
” Indeed , after agreeing last week that The Intercept could interview staffers and shadow canvassers as they cut turf , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ canvassers had been less productive in recent days when media had accompanied them to knock doors .
( Victoria Yu , the campaign ’ s Texas deputy director for communications , also pointed to incidents of vandalism at Bloomberg offices around the country , including in Texas , as a reason they were limiting access to organizers and volunteers . )
One volunteer phone banker said her efforts were not yielding many results .
“ Out of like 30 … four people answered , one of them said no , and three of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 58-year-old volunteer named Griselda .
Still , she said she continued to believe that Bloomberg was the party ’ s best chance of beating President Donald Trump and that he would benefit from the shrinking field .
“ I think he ’ s probably the one that will go all the way , ” she said of Bloomberg , in an interview outside the campaign ’ s San Antonio field office during a smoke break .
The Bloomberg campaign has made a handful of other blunders in Texas .
According to the staffer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state campaign find employees , campaign workers were sent organizer training materials from staff in New York , some of whom previously worked for Hillary Clinton .
The slide deck was still printed with the logo from Clinton ’ s 2016 presidential campaign .
The campaign also made poor hiring decisions , said the staffer , who supports Biden but took a job with the Bloomberg campaign because it paid well .
“ The investment , it presents itself to be one thing , but the reality is another .
He ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ canvass in Texas alone , in addition to our field program , which is in essence a paid canvass because they have hired people who don ’ t know how to even spell organizing , ” they said .
“ In our training , it was very evident .
In one eight-hour training , I can ’ t turn someone with zero experience into the organizer we need at this stage .
We should have been doing ongoing training the whole time .
They ’ re onboarding staff at such a high rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Most of the 19 offices aren ’ t staffed or set up to be worked out of , they said .
“ It ’ s really a facade at this point.
” The winnowing of the Democratic field after Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar dropped out on Sunday is also a welcome development to Texas party officials , who said voters were worried that their primary votes wouldn ’ t matter given the size of the field .
“ While we were hitting the streets and hitting everybody at the polls , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make sure that their vote on Tuesday was gon na count .
And I think there was a lot of holdup , saying , Wait a minute , we need to wait and see who ’ s actually gon na be standing , ” said Bexar County Democratic Party Chair Monica Alcantara at Bloomberg ’ s Sunday rally .
( She noted that her presence at the rally was not an endorsement of Bloomberg . )
Still , Bloomberg is unlikely to be the beneficiary of the smaller field , as Buttigieg and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him at a rally in Dallas on Monday night .
After the rally on Sunday night , Bloomberg headed to Manassas , Virginia , another Super Tuesday state .
His departure from Texas came as a surprise to several of his supporters who came out to a Latino voter outreach event the campaign held at Lisa ’ s Mexican Restaurant off Bandera Road in a northwest San Antonio suburb on Monday evening .
Upon learning that Bloomberg would not be at the event , one supporter who had been waiting for him with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 “ ¡Ganamos !
” T-shirt and a matching button , left .
Jack Calderon , a 56-year-old union pipe-fitter from Chicago who has split his time between there and San Antonio since 2017 , said he attended Monday ’ s outreach event because he wanted someone in the White House other than Trump .
“ Just reaching out to different candidates and them reaching out to us , that ’ s what brought me here , I ’ ll see what it ’ s about.
” He ’ s registered to vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Bloomberg there .
He said he thought Bloomberg was a strong-arm to go against Trump .
“ Not so much the money , the other ones just tuck tail and run , ” he said .
“ I kind of like the way Mike goes tit for tat , you know .
They go back and forth with words , and he ’ s not afraid to fight him on Twitter.
” But Calderon said he would vote for any nominee .
“ I don ’ t even care if it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
His family and friends are supporting a variety of candidates .
Ramon Velasquez , a 72-year-old San Antonio resident who was invited to attend Monday night ’ s event , said he was supporting Bloomberg because he came to San Antonio , and would have considered other candidates if they had done the same .
( Biden , Sanders , and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren have all held rallies in San Antonio in recent months . )
“ I believe in what Mr. Bloomberg has to offer to the Hispanic community , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s sensible ; he ’ s not in there for the money , he ’ s in there for the people.
” He said he voted for Sanders in the 2016 primary , and for Clinton in the general , and said he thought the Vermont senator would eventually win the Democratic nomination , in which case he would vote for him too .
“ I think Bernie will take it , ” he said .

During a rally Sunday night at the historic Hangar 9 in San Antonio, Texas, former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg made the case to a crowd of close to 600 people that he’s the best candidate to beat President Donald Trump in November.
It was Bloomberg’s seventh trip to Texas since he entered the race in November, part of his campaign strategy to make gains in the delegate-rich state, where he’s spent upward of $50 million. The billionaire, who has spent more than $460 million of his own money on his campaign, spoke comfortably in the historic venue at the city’s former Brooks Air Force Base, referencing the city’s “Military City USA” moniker and its Latin roots. “I know I just missed the rodeo, and I’m too early for a fiesta,” he said between rounds of laughter and applause from the crowd after an introduction from Democratic state Rep. Leo Pacheco.
Despite his campaign’s immense focus on Texas, where Bloomberg has won endorsements from a number of influential Texas politicians and hired the state Democratic Party’s vice chair, he enters Super Tuesday polling third in the state, with between 16 and 20 percent support. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is in the lead, followed by former Vice President Joe Biden — the establishment consolidation behind Biden threatens to compromise Bloomberg’s Super Tuesday hopes. His campaign has worked hard to control messaging in recent days, apparently realizing that an early assumption that spending a lot of money can be an effective substitute for a strong field operation was wrong — and that Bloomberg may after all fall short in the state where his campaign has focused most of its efforts.
Bloomberg will appear at a rally in West Palm Beach, Florida, on Tuesday night, instead of in a Super Tuesday state. In Texas, his campaign did not schedule any election night watch parties. The decision was made due to a fear of a humiliating Bloomberg loss and low attendance, according to a senior campaign staffer, who was not authorized to speak about their employer.
“A lot of high-profile supporters have switched to Biden after South Carolina too, so they’re even more concerned,” the staffer said. Early this week, Bloomberg’s Texas campaign tightened its messaging around voter engagement efforts, directing staff not to conduct media interviews and canceling scheduled media requests to accompany canvassers on the ground. After advising over the weekend that it would grant ample media access for interviews with staff and canvassers in Texas, staffers at Sunday’s rally were not permitted to be interviewed by members of the press without approval from leadership.
Left/Top: Two staffers work in Bloomberg's San Antonio field office, located off Austin Highway in a strip mall between a Jimmy John's and a Mattress Firm. Right/Bottom: A turf map in Bloomberg's San Antonio field office shows Texas's Bexar County, which includes the city and its surrounding suburbs. Photos: Akela Lacy/The Intercept
Campaign spokesperson Lizzie Lewis sent an email to the Texas state team on Monday advising staff not to allow organizers or volunteers to conduct any media interviews, saying that they needed to focus on get-out-the-vote efforts and meeting as many voters as possible. “We will not be granting anymore interviews at staging locations or field offices,” read the email. “Volunteers and organizers need to focus on GOTV and voter engagement.” Indeed, after agreeing last week that The Intercept could interview staffers and shadow canvassers as they cut turf, the campaign cancelled the plan, saying that canvassers had been less productive in recent days when media had accompanied them to knock doors. (Victoria Yu, the campaign’s Texas deputy director for communications, also pointed to incidents of vandalism at Bloomberg offices around the country, including in Texas, as a reason they were limiting access to organizers and volunteers.)
One volunteer phone banker said her efforts were not yielding many results. “Out of like 30 … four people answered, one of them said no, and three of them said yes,” said the 58-year-old volunteer named Griselda. Still, she said she continued to believe that Bloomberg was the party’s best chance of beating President Donald Trump and that he would benefit from the shrinking field. “I think he’s probably the one that will go all the way,” she said of Bloomberg, in an interview outside the campaign’s San Antonio field office during a smoke break.
The Bloomberg campaign has made a handful of other blunders in Texas. According to the staffer and a local strategist who helped the state campaign find employees, campaign workers were sent organizer training materials from staff in New York, some of whom previously worked for Hillary Clinton. The slide deck was still printed with the logo from Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.
The campaign also made poor hiring decisions, said the staffer, who supports Biden but took a job with the Bloomberg campaign because it paid well. “The investment, it presents itself to be one thing, but the reality is another. He’s spending $11 million on a paid canvass in Texas alone, in addition to our field program, which is in essence a paid canvass because they have hired people who don’t know how to even spell organizing,” they said. “In our training, it was very evident. In one eight-hour training, I can’t turn someone with zero experience into the organizer we need at this stage. We should have been doing ongoing training the whole time. They’re onboarding staff at such a high rate that the quality control is not there.” Most of the 19 offices aren’t staffed or set up to be worked out of, they said. “It’s really a facade at this point.”
The winnowing of the Democratic field after Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar dropped out on Sunday is also a welcome development to Texas party officials, who said voters were worried that their primary votes wouldn’t matter given the size of the field.
“While we were hitting the streets and hitting everybody at the polls, people were concerned. They want to make sure that their vote on Tuesday was gonna count. And I think there was a lot of holdup, saying, Wait a minute, we need to wait and see who’s actually gonna be standing,” said Bexar County Democratic Party Chair Monica Alcantara at Bloomberg’s Sunday rally. (She noted that her presence at the rally was not an endorsement of Bloomberg.) Still, Bloomberg is unlikely to be the beneficiary of the smaller field, as Buttigieg and Klobuchar both endorsed Biden and appeared alongside him at a rally in Dallas on Monday night.
After the rally on Sunday night, Bloomberg headed to Manassas, Virginia, another Super Tuesday state. His departure from Texas came as a surprise to several of his supporters who came out to a Latino voter outreach event the campaign held at Lisa’s Mexican Restaurant off Bandera Road in a northwest San Antonio suburb on Monday evening. Upon learning that Bloomberg would not be at the event, one supporter who had been waiting for him with her young son, wearing a Bloomberg 2020 “¡Ganamos!” T-shirt and a matching button, left.
Photo: Mark Felix/AFP via Getty Images
Jack Calderon, a 56-year-old union pipe-fitter from Chicago who has split his time between there and San Antonio since 2017, said he attended Monday’s outreach event because he wanted someone in the White House other than Trump. “Just reaching out to different candidates and them reaching out to us, that’s what brought me here, I’ll see what it’s about.” He’s registered to vote in Chicago, and plans to vote for Bloomberg there. He said he thought Bloomberg was a strong-arm to go against Trump. “Not so much the money, the other ones just tuck tail and run,” he said. “I kind of like the way Mike goes tit for tat, you know. They go back and forth with words, and he’s not afraid to fight him on Twitter.”
But Calderon said he would vote for any nominee. “I don’t even care if it’s another Republican,” he said. His family and friends are supporting a variety of candidates.
Ramon Velasquez, a 72-year-old San Antonio resident who was invited to attend Monday night’s event, said he was supporting Bloomberg because he came to San Antonio, and would have considered other candidates if they had done the same. (Biden, Sanders, and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren have all held rallies in San Antonio in recent months.)
“I believe in what Mr. Bloomberg has to offer to the Hispanic community,” Velasquez said. “He’s sensible; he’s not in there for the money, he’s in there for the people.” He said he voted for Sanders in the 2016 primary, and for Clinton in the general, and said he thought the Vermont senator would eventually win the Democratic nomination, in which case he would vote for him too.
“I think Bernie will take it,” he said.


theintercept--2020-03-03--Congresswoman Joyce Beatty Gentrified Her Way Into Political Trouble

In 2013 , Rep. Joyce Beatty , D-Ohio , and her husband made a significant profit on a property sold to a developer , while her husband sat on the zoning board that approved the sale , according to public records and meeting minutes reviewed by The Intercept .
The buyer , developer Lifestyle Communities , purchased the property in Columbus from the Beattys one month after Otto Beatty voiced support for Lifestyle to turn the project into luxury condos at the city ’ s downtown zoning board , the Downtown Commission .
While Otto Beatty did not vote on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he was discussing the sale of the building to Lifestyle at the time — only that he was the owner of the land , and Lifestyle would do the developing .
Beatty abstained from another vote on alterations to the project , but voted on two other alterations to the project at the Downtown Commission over the years without disclosing his interest to the public .
“ I have spent time in this building every day for years , ” announced Otto Beatty to the commission in November 2013 .
“ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ buildings [ as they are ] .
It ’ s not there .
I ’ m concerned about what is good for downtown .
It would be bad for downtown to lose the opportunity of having this project.
” Otto Beatty has been the longtime vice chair of the Downtown Commission , a zoning board which has enabled a transformation of the city ’ s downtown .
The condos that were developed had no affordable housing requirements , despite an estimated shortage of 35,625 low-income rental units in Columbus .
The condos rent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bedroom to $ 2,600 a month for an 1,100-square-foot two-bedroom apartment in the rapidly gentrifying city .
Higher-end apartments are listed without a price .
The median rent for apartments in Columbus is $ 1,295 , according to Zillow .
Joyce and Otto Beatty have long been a power couple in Columbus .
Otto Beatty served 20 years in the Ohio House before resigning in 1999 immediately before being forced out due to term limits .
Joyce Beatty was appointed to take his seat , rising to become minority leader from 2007 to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the Ohio State University and , since 2012 , the city ’ s congressional representative .
The Beattys have been major players in the transformation of Columbus , as it emerges from its deindustrialization period and rapidly gentrifies .
Yet the very changes spurred by the Beattys have now put her own seat in jeopardy , as insurgent challenger Morgan Harper has given her the first competitive primary since Beatty was sworn into Congress .
The two are set to face off in the Ohio Democratic primary on March 17 , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pace .
“ This appears to be a classic case of self-dealing by a government official , ” said Craig Holman , an ethics lobbyist with the good government advocacy group Public Citizen .
“ As a member of the Downtown Commission , Otto Beatty is expected to recuse himself from taking official actions that provide direct and substantial personal enrichment to himself of his immediate family .
Recusal doesn ’ t mean you just don ’ t vote , it means you remove [ yourself ] from the whole process .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ project carries influence with his fellow colleagues .
He should have stated straightforwardly that he had a conflict of interest and removed himself from the discussion.
” The inflated price for the sale of the Beatty building contrasts with the price that the similar “ Trautman ” buildings immediately next door sold to Lifestyle Communities just six months earlier .
In June 2013 , the Columbus Business Journal reported that the Trautman parcels were sold by the Columbus Downtown Development Corporation , the city ’ s nonprofit development corporation , for $ 750,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ property was appraised at $ 770,000 — roughly equal to the sale price .
The Beatty building next door , however , sold for $ 800,000 despite being assessed at $ 510,000 .
( Rep. Joyce Beatty ’ s financial disclosure lists the sale proceeds at between $ 1,000,000 and $ 5,000,000 .
That may be an erroneous overestimate , or the developer may have also purchased her clothing shop , Pieces for Wear , at the same location .
Beatty did not respond to requests for comment or clarification , nor did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been purchased by the CDDC for $ 3.3 million in 2006 and 2007 .
The CDDC Board appears to have a close-knit relationship with Joyce Beatty .
Board members at the time , their spouses , and PACs affiliated with their companies have contributed over $ 280,000 to Beatty over her career .
The board and donors include Victoria ’ s Secret billionaires Abigail Wexner and her husband Les , who have generated controversy for their extremely close relationship with the late Jeffrey Epstein .
A close ally of Congresswoman Beatty , former @ @ @ @ @ @ @ subject of an FBI investigation over the sale of his real estate property in 2010 .
Coleman sold his house in 2010 to a Chinese businesswoman who was exploring using Columbus as a distribution hub .
Coleman sold the house to the businesswoman for $ 510,000 , who later resold the property for just $ 250,000 .
Coleman appointed Otto Beatty to the Downtown Commission .
facing an insurgent primary challenger whose viability is driven in significant part , ironically , by gentrification .
The high cost of living has fueled anger among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — the gentrifiers — have been harnessed in other races as a force to upend the status quo .
In 2018 , gentrifying neighborhoods provided Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ’ s margin of victory over incumbent Joe Crowley , and those types of neighborhoods are likely to side heavily in Columbus with the challenger , Morgan Harper , in the Columbus race .
During Rep. Joyce Beatty ’ s time as state House minority leader , the couple attracted controversy due to Otto Beatty ’ s work as a lobbyist for a payday lending firm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bipartisan reforms to payday lending .
Beatty opposed the reforms until her husband ’ s work was revealed by the Columbus Dispatch .
Then state Rep. Bob Hagan said to the Dispatch about the reform legislation : “ So I ’ m running into a roadblock — and it ’ s not a very comfortable roadblock because I have been around too long to not realize something else is behind it .
It ’ s disappointing that this is what has been happening .
I don ’ t know whether this legal work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I do find it disappointing.
” As the Cleveland Plain Dealer later reported , “ The revelation , which came after Joyce Beatty had puzzled political observers by staunchly opposing the payday lending legislation , shook up members of the House Democratic caucus who were unaware of Otto Beatty ’ s work in Virginia.
” Like Otto Beatty , Joyce Beatty was term-limited out of her state House seat , which represented the Ohio State University .
Beatty , after leaving office , went to work for OSU doing community outreach and engagement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ position made her one of the school ’ s leading voices in talks with the community around the question of gentrification , which OSU ’ s expansion drove considerably .
That position ’ s salary allowed her to inflate her pension from the State of Ohio to over $ 250,000 annually .
Beatty , ahead of winning the job at OSU , had claimed a Ph.D. from the University of Cincinnati/Pacific Western University , which was unaccredited and has since been forced to close by the state of Hawaii .
She no longer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her congressional bio that she “ completed all requirements but her dissertation for a doctorate at the University of Cincinnati.
” Observers and opponents of gentrification in Columbus have raised concern about the cost of living increases that accompany rampant development like the Beatty project .
“ One of the problems that I see is that powers that be want to control everything in these neighborhoods instead of empowering people to be involved , ” said Joe Motil , a community activist in Columbus .
“ With agencies like the CCDC and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they make the decisions , and they control the money to develop it .
They ’ re not empowering lower income people to purchase abandoned homes .
They are stacked with people with money who also contribute heavily to our electeds in city hall.
” Miranda Martinez is an associate professor at Ohio State who studies gentrification .
“ For me what has been interesting is how rapid the gentrification has been and how little public comment and input there ’ s been .
There often seems to be no provision for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Martinez .
“ Columbus is turning away from a place that had relatively plentiful cheap housing into a place where that ’ s not the case.
” After the 2010 tea party wave , the new census knocked down Ohio ’ s congressional delegation from 18 to 16 .
Republicans began gerrymandering the state , and entered into negotiations with Otto Beatty and Joyce Beatty over the contours of the district that Beatty now represents , according to testimony by Ray DiRossi , a Republican operative involved with the gerrymandering effort .
DiRossi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including myself who had worked with [ Joyce Beatty ] thought that she would be an ideal candidate ” for the new gerrymandered Democratic district .
Stuffing so many Democrats into one district — Republicans referred to Columbus as “ dog meat voting territory ” and a “ Franklin County Sinkhole ” — enabled Republicans to amass a 12-4 majority in the House delegation , despite the state being more evenly split between the parties .
The heavily Democratic Columbus district helped Republican Steve Stivers get reelected in a newly drawn and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ helped make another suburban district more Republican .
DiRossi , meanwhile , testified that Republicans helped clear the path for Beatty by drawing a potential opponent out of the new district .
Republican Ohio House Speaker William G. Batchelder III denied he had ever referred to Columbus voters as “ dog meat ” but admitted he “ intend [ ed ] to draw a district that [ Joyce Beatty ] could potentially win.
” He noted that he was close friends with Otto Beatty and had served with Joyce Beatty .
Troy Judy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , confirmed the arrangement , testifying that the “ relationship with Congresswoman Beatty and her husband Otto Beatty led him to have a priority to create a central district in Franklin County encompassing Columbus and having representation specifically for Congress [ wo ] man Beatty.
” There was a legal rationale for the admission .
Batchelder and other Republicans argued that they had drawn the district specifically for Beatty because of their close relationship with her and their earnest support for minority representation in Congress .
But the district court didn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In sum , even accepting all of Defendants ’ proffered justifications for drawing District 3 , we conclude that they were secondary to the map drawers ’ predominant intent : conferring Republican advantage by packing District 3 and facilitating the cracking of Districts 12 and 15 .
We also conclude that District 3 actually packed Democratic voters.
” The potential opponent Beatty drew out of the district was Mary Jo Kilroy , who had beaten Stivers in 2008 , but lost to him in 2010 and had been signaling a rematch .
Kilroy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a four-way primary , Beatty edged her out by 1,500 votes .
She then easily won the general election , and has served since .
While in Congress , Joyce Beatty ’ s estimated net worth has increased from $ 2.6 million to over $ 10 million , according to data collected by the Center for Responsive Politics .
As of 2016 , she was the 35th wealthiest member of the House .

In 2013, Rep. Joyce Beatty, D-Ohio, and her husband made a significant profit on a property sold to a developer, while her husband sat on the zoning board that approved the sale, according to public records and meeting minutes reviewed by The Intercept. The buyer, developer Lifestyle Communities, purchased the property in Columbus from the Beattys one month after Otto Beatty voiced support for Lifestyle to turn the project into luxury condos at the city’s downtown zoning board, the Downtown Commission.
Joyce and Otto Beatty have long been a power couple in Columbus. Otto Beatty served 20 years in the Ohio House before resigning in 1999 immediately before being forced out due to term limits. Joyce Beatty was appointed to take his seat, rising to become minority leader from 2007 to 2008, before becoming a top official at the Ohio State University and, since 2012, the city’s congressional representative. The Beattys have been major players in the transformation of Columbus, as it emerges from its deindustrialization period and rapidly gentrifies. Yet the very changes spurred by the Beattys have now put her own seat in jeopardy, as insurgent challenger Morgan Harper has given her the first competitive primary since Beatty was sworn into Congress. The two are set to face off in the Ohio Democratic primary on March 17, with early voting already underway at a fierce pace.
Otto Beatty has been the longtime vice chair of the Downtown Commission, a zoning board which has enabled a transformation of the city’s downtown. The condos that were developed had no affordable housing requirements, despite an estimated shortage of 35,625 low-income rental units in Columbus. The condos rent from $1,600 for a 700-square-foot one bedroom to $2,600 a month for an 1,100-square-foot two-bedroom apartment in the rapidly gentrifying city. Higher-end apartments are listed without a price. The median rent for apartments in Columbus is $1,295, according to Zillow.
“I have spent time in this building every day for years,” announced Otto Beatty to the commission in November 2013. “I’ve explored trying to keep these buildings [as they are]. It’s not there. I’m concerned about what is good for downtown. It would be bad for downtown to lose the opportunity of having this project.”
While Otto Beatty did not vote on the question, he did not disclose that he was discussing the sale of the building to Lifestyle at the time — only that he was the owner of the land, and Lifestyle would do the developing. Beatty abstained from another vote on alterations to the project, but voted on two other alterations to the project at the Downtown Commission over the years without disclosing his interest to the public.
Otto Beatty, Rep. Joyce Beatty, and Lifestyle Communities did not respond to requests for comment.
“This appears to be a classic case of self-dealing by a government official,” said Craig Holman, an ethics lobbyist with the good government advocacy group Public Citizen. “As a member of the Downtown Commission, Otto Beatty is expected to recuse himself from taking official actions that provide direct and substantial personal enrichment to himself of his immediate family. Recusal doesn’t mean you just don’t vote, it means you remove [yourself] from the whole process. The fact that he expressed support for the project carries influence with his fellow colleagues. He should have stated straightforwardly that he had a conflict of interest and removed himself from the discussion.”
The inflated price for the sale of the Beatty building contrasts with the price that the similar “Trautman” buildings immediately next door sold to Lifestyle Communities just six months earlier. In June 2013, the Columbus Business Journal reported that the Trautman parcels were sold by the Columbus Downtown Development Corporation, the city’s nonprofit development corporation, for $750,000. Franklin County records indicate that the property was appraised at $770,000 — roughly equal to the sale price. The Beatty building next door, however, sold for $800,000 despite being assessed at $510,000. (Rep. Joyce Beatty’s financial disclosure lists the sale proceeds at between $1,000,000 and $5,000,000. That may be an erroneous overestimate, or the developer may have also purchased her clothing shop, Pieces for Wear, at the same location. Beatty did not respond to requests for comment or clarification, nor did Lifestyle.)
The Trautman properties had been purchased by the CDDC for $3.3 million in 2006 and 2007.
The CDDC Board appears to have a close-knit relationship with Joyce Beatty. Board members at the time, their spouses, and PACs affiliated with their companies have contributed over $280,000 to Beatty over her career. The board and donors include Victoria’s Secret billionaires Abigail Wexner and her husband Les, who have generated controversy for their extremely close relationship with the late Jeffrey Epstein.
A close ally of Congresswoman Beatty, former Columbus Mayor Mike Coleman, was the subject of an FBI investigation over the sale of his real estate property in 2010. Coleman sold his house in 2010 to a Chinese businesswoman who was exploring using Columbus as a distribution hub. Coleman sold the house to the businesswoman for $510,000, who later resold the property for just $250,000. Coleman appointed Otto Beatty to the Downtown Commission.
Beatty is now facing an insurgent primary challenger whose viability is driven in significant part, ironically, by gentrification. The high cost of living has fueled anger among longtime residents, and the new residents — the gentrifiers — have been harnessed in other races as a force to upend the status quo. In 2018, gentrifying neighborhoods provided Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s margin of victory over incumbent Joe Crowley, and those types of neighborhoods are likely to side heavily in Columbus with the challenger, Morgan Harper, in the Columbus race.
During Rep. Joyce Beatty’s time as state House minority leader, the couple attracted controversy due to Otto Beatty’s work as a lobbyist for a payday lending firm as the Ohio legislature was considering broad-reaching bipartisan reforms to payday lending. Beatty opposed the reforms until her husband’s work was revealed by the Columbus Dispatch. Then state Rep. Bob Hagan said to the Dispatch about the reform legislation: “So I’m running into a roadblock — and it’s not a very comfortable roadblock because I have been around too long to not realize something else is behind it. It’s disappointing that this is what has been happening. I don’t know whether this legal work is influencing her or not, but I do find it disappointing.”
As the Cleveland Plain Dealer later reported, “The revelation, which came after Joyce Beatty had puzzled political observers by staunchly opposing the payday lending legislation, shook up members of the House Democratic caucus who were unaware of Otto Beatty’s work in Virginia.”
Like Otto Beatty, Joyce Beatty was term-limited out of her state House seat, which represented the Ohio State University. Beatty, after leaving office, went to work for OSU doing community outreach and engagement for a controversially large salary. That position made her one of the school’s leading voices in talks with the community around the question of gentrification, which OSU’s expansion drove considerably. That position’s salary allowed her to inflate her pension from the State of Ohio to over $250,000 annually.
Beatty, ahead of winning the job at OSU, had claimed a Ph.D. from the University of Cincinnati/Pacific Western University, which was unaccredited and has since been forced to close by the state of Hawaii. She no longer makes that claim and instead writes in her congressional bio that she “completed all requirements but her dissertation for a doctorate at the University of Cincinnati.”
Observers and opponents of gentrification in Columbus have raised concern about the cost of living increases that accompany rampant development like the Beatty project. “One of the problems that I see is that powers that be want to control everything in these neighborhoods instead of empowering people to be involved,” said Joe Motil, a community activist in Columbus. “With agencies like the CCDC and the Downtown Commission, they buy the land, they make the decisions, and they control the money to develop it. They’re not empowering lower income people to purchase abandoned homes. They are stacked with people with money who also contribute heavily to our electeds in city hall.”
Miranda Martinez is an associate professor at Ohio State who studies gentrification. “For me what has been interesting is how rapid the gentrification has been and how little public comment and input there’s been. There often seems to be no provision for affordability as a concern,” said Martinez. “Columbus is turning away from a place that had relatively plentiful cheap housing into a place where that’s not the case.”
After the 2010 tea party wave, the new census knocked down Ohio’s congressional delegation from 18 to 16. Republicans began gerrymandering the state, and entered into negotiations with Otto Beatty and Joyce Beatty over the contours of the district that Beatty now represents, according to testimony by Ray DiRossi, a Republican operative involved with the gerrymandering effort. DiRossi testified that “a number of people, including myself who had worked with [Joyce Beatty] thought that she would be an ideal candidate” for the new gerrymandered Democratic district. Stuffing so many Democrats into one district — Republicans referred to Columbus as “dog meat voting territory” and a “Franklin County Sinkhole” — enabled Republicans to amass a 12-4 majority in the House delegation, despite the state being more evenly split between the parties.
The heavily Democratic Columbus district helped Republican Steve Stivers get reelected in a newly drawn and more comfortably Republican seat, and also helped make another suburban district more Republican. DiRossi, meanwhile, testified that Republicans helped clear the path for Beatty by drawing a potential opponent out of the new district.
Republican Ohio House Speaker William G. Batchelder III denied he had ever referred to Columbus voters as “dog meat” but admitted he “intend[ed] to draw a district that [Joyce Beatty] could potentially win.” He noted that he was close friends with Otto Beatty and had served with Joyce Beatty. Troy Judy, Batchelder’s chief of staff, confirmed the arrangement, testifying that the “relationship with Congresswoman Beatty and her husband Otto Beatty led him to have a priority to create a central district in Franklin County encompassing Columbus and having representation specifically for Congress[wo]man Beatty.”
There was a legal rationale for the admission. Batchelder and other Republicans argued that they had drawn the district specifically for Beatty because of their close relationship with her and their earnest support for minority representation in Congress. But the district court didn’t buy it, ruling that, “In sum, even accepting all of Defendants’ proffered justifications for drawing District 3, we conclude that they were secondary to the map drawers’ predominant intent: conferring Republican advantage by packing District 3 and facilitating the cracking of Districts 12 and 15. We also conclude that District 3 actually packed Democratic voters.”
The potential opponent Beatty drew out of the district was Mary Jo Kilroy, who had beaten Stivers in 2008, but lost to him in 2010 and had been signaling a rematch. Kilroy ran anyway against Beatty, and in a four-way primary, Beatty edged her out by 1,500 votes. She then easily won the general election, and has served since.
While in Congress, Joyce Beatty’s estimated net worth has increased from $2.6 million to over $10 million, according to data collected by the Center for Responsive Politics. As of 2016, she was the 35th wealthiest member of the House.


theintercept--2020-03-03--ICE Officials in Texas Are Keeping Migrants in Jail With Potentially Illegal Blanket Parole Denials

Enforcement officials in San Antonio , Texas , have been systematically denying parole to large numbers of people who were detained after crossing into the United States hoping to apply for asylum .
Instead of being allowed to join family or sponsors and work on their cases in the U.S. , many migrants are being held without a chance of release while they wait for court dates .
According to documents reviewed by The Intercept and lawyers working in the area , ICE ’ s San Antonio field office has been refusing parole for any detainee subject to a new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bar , which makes migrants ineligible for asylum if they did not ask for protection in countries they crossed on their way to the U.S .
The bar applies to most non-Mexicans arriving at the southern border .
On one form shown to The Intercept by an attorney with the legal services provider American Gateways , ICE explicitly stated that the transit bar was the sole reason that their client was denied release after a parole interview on September 25 , 2019 , about two weeks after the Supreme Court allowed the bar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sent to a different attorney contained similar language .
Agents in El Paso had been issuing the same kind of denials , though they appear to have changed course a little over a month ago .
“ In El Paso , there was a blanket rule that everyone was denied parole , if they were subject to the bar .
That was for sure , ” Taylor Levy , an El Paso-based attorney , told The Intercept .
She added that some of her denials had been readjudicated and granted starting in late @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the policy is still in effect but is apparently being applied erratically .
“ It hasn ’ t seemed to be consistent even within our field .
… Port Isabel Detention Center was still releasing people on parole , while the [ T. Don Hutto Residential Center ] has not been , pretty much as long or longer than [ the South Texas Detention Facility at ] Pearsall , ” said Sara Ramey , executive director for the San Antonio-based Migrant Center for Human Rights .
Some of the inconsistencies may be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to several attorneys , the orders appear to be coming from supervisory officers in each field office as opposed to ICE headquarters .
Denise Gilman , director of the Immigration Clinic at University of Texas School of Law , also pointed to Hutto — a women ’ s detention center with a capacity of about 500 people , managed by the contractor CoreCivic — and Pearsall — a GEO Group-run detention center that holds around 1,900 people .
Hutto , she said , “ is filled with Cameroonian and Congolese women who are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case.
” “ Nine months ago , those Cameroonian women would have gotten out the minute they passed their credible fear interview , ” she added , referring to the first step in the asylum process .
Denying parole en masse is likely illegal , according to Michael Tan , deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Union ’ s Immigrants ’ Rights Project .
Two federal court rulings have blocked the government from applying generalized parole denials to asylum-seekers specifically .
It appears that ICE in San Antonio ( and previously , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legal reasoning that migrants subject to the transit bar were not covered by those rulings , because they no are longer considered asylum-seekers .
But the parole statute itself specifies that decisions are to be made on a “ case-by-case basis.
” Tan , who was involved in the earlier parole litigation , said that if ICE continued to default to detaining people instead of considering parole , “ we would seriously consider bringing an additional legal challenge.
” ICE did not respond to several requests for comment to its El Paso office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Intercept was unable to confirm whether other field offices had experienced the same issue .
Attorneys dealing with ICE ’ s San Diego office said it had not come up .
by the blanket parole denials come from outside the Western Hemisphere , because they are not currently subject to new Trump administration policies that are returning many asylum-seekers to Mexico to await their hearings , or sending them to Guatemala or Honduras , to seek asylum there .
For those who are detained in the U.S. , the administration has tried @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of detention : bond or humanitarian parole .
In April 2019 , Attorney General William Barr used the power of his office — which oversees the nation ’ s system of immigration courts — to rule that migrants arriving to claim asylum were not eligible for bond .
A federal court blocked Barr ’ s ruling and ordered the government to resume bond hearings for asylum-seekers , though BuzzFeed News recently reported that eligible migrants were being denied those hearings in El Paso and Otero , New Mexico ( which falls under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ late as January .
The majority of migrants detained while arriving in the United States aren ’ t considered to qualify for bond , leaving them with only the option of parole .
It is offered at the government ’ s discretion for reasons such as pregnancy , medical conditions , being a minor , or for anyone whose detention is deemed “ not in the public interest.
” Since 2009 , ICE has had a directive to presumptively release people who pass credible fear interviews and are continuing the asylum process .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ it : This week , civil rights groups sued ICE ’ s New York field office over revelations that it has used a rigged algorithm to recommend whether people should be detained or released , resulting in almost everyone being detained .
In a July 2018 decision , a federal judge found that five ICE field offices — including El Paso — weren ’ t complying with the agency ’ s own directive and were issuing blanket denials of parole regardless of circumstances .
Parole grants out of those offices had collectively dropped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The judge ordered the government to stop issuing denials without making “ individualized parole determinations ” ( and later made a similar ruling in another case involving a different field office ) .
However , these specific orders don ’ t seem to apply to migrants who can no longer seek asylum .
Remaining in detention as court dates approach isn ’ t merely bothersome .
It severely hampers migrants ’ ability to prepare complex , document-heavy cases .
Conditions in detention facilities can be horrific and incentivize migrants to abandon their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prolonged detention .
There have been seven deaths in ICE custody so far in the 2020 fiscal year alone .
Since they now don ’ t qualify for asylum , people subject to the transit bar face even tougher odds of being released from detention and ultimately winning any chance of staying in the U.S .
They can still seek two other forms of protection : “ withholding of removal ” or protections under the Convention Against Torture , though those are less robust and require a higher burden of evidence than asylum @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact as a reason to deny parole , claiming that the difficulty in winning these cases means that these people pose a greater “ flight risk ” and may not return for their court hearings .
In an email dated January 6 and shared with The Intercept by an attorney who works with detained migrants in the El Paso area , an ICE deportation officer wrote “ [ y ] our client ’ s parole was denied again due to his asylum bar.
” The officer added , “ ICE considers him a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ removal proceedings , ” and “ ICE determined that there is no guarantee that your client will show up for removal if a safe third country will accept him.
” This last bit is in reference to the fact that , unlike asylum , withholding is not designed to lead to permanent residency .
It does not prevent the U.S. government from sending a noncitizen to a third country , or even returning them to the place they fled if the U.S. decides that circumstances have changed to make it safer .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Paso area ceased its blanket denial policy in January .
It may have had to do with overcrowding , which was already a problem months ago .
Quartz reported in September that the San Diego and El Paso Border Patrol sectors were urgently seeking additional storage space for detention-related supplies .
In May , the Department of Homeland Security ’ s Inspector General found that Border Patrol ’ s El Paso Del Norte Processing Center was wildly and dangerously overcrowded .
( Recent migrants are initially held in Border Patrol custody before being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lacks detention space , people stay longer in Border Patrol facilities . )
Blocking access to both bond and parole for migrants detained in the El Paso sector would mean that ICE ’ s detention facilities — and by extension , Border Patrol ’ s — would have been taking in more detainees and releasing very few , as large numbers of asylum-seekers from Central America continued to arrive at the southern border .
The fact that ICE eased access to bond and parole at about the same time last month in El @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have stemmed more from practical concerns than from legal worries about parole denials .
Attorneys operating in the San Antonio area said detention centers there appeared to still be below capacity .
Linda Corchado , the director of legal services at the El Paso-based Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center , said that the rollout and subsequent reversal of the policy in El Paso pointed to a pattern of “ arbitrary denials.
” At “ one period of time , an entire class is barred then suddenly , that bar is lifted , ” @ @ @

Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials in San Antonio, Texas, have been systematically denying parole to large numbers of people who were detained after crossing into the United States hoping to apply for asylum. Instead of being allowed to join family or sponsors and work on their cases in the U.S., many migrants are being held without a chance of release while they wait for court dates.
According to documents reviewed by The Intercept and lawyers working in the area, ICE’s San Antonio field office has been refusing parole for any detainee subject to a new Trump administration policy known as the transit bar, which makes migrants ineligible for asylum if they did not ask for protection in countries they crossed on their way to the U.S. The bar applies to most non-Mexicans arriving at the southern border.
On one form shown to The Intercept by an attorney with the legal services provider American Gateways, ICE explicitly stated that the transit bar was the sole reason that their client was denied release after a parole interview on September 25, 2019, about two weeks after the Supreme Court allowed the bar to take effect. Another denial notice sent to a different attorney contained similar language.
Denying parole en masse is likely illegal.
Agents in El Paso had been issuing the same kind of denials, though they appear to have changed course a little over a month ago. “In El Paso, there was a blanket rule that everyone was denied parole, if they were subject to the bar. That was for sure,” Taylor Levy, an El Paso-based attorney, told The Intercept. She added that some of her denials had been readjudicated and granted starting in late January.
In the San Antonio sector, the policy is still in effect but is apparently being applied erratically. “It hasn’t seemed to be consistent even within our field. … Port Isabel Detention Center was still releasing people on parole, while the [T. Don Hutto Residential Center] has not been, pretty much as long or longer than [the South Texas Detention Facility at] Pearsall,” said Sara Ramey, executive director for the San Antonio-based Migrant Center for Human Rights. Some of the inconsistencies may be due to the fact that, according to several attorneys, the orders appear to be coming from supervisory officers in each field office as opposed to ICE headquarters.
Denise Gilman, director of the Immigration Clinic at University of Texas School of Law, also pointed to Hutto — a women’s detention center with a capacity of about 500 people, managed by the contractor CoreCivic — and Pearsall — a GEO Group-run detention center that holds around 1,900 people. Hutto, she said, “is filled with Cameroonian and Congolese women who are being stuck in detention throughout their entire case.”
“Nine months ago, those Cameroonian women would have gotten out the minute they passed their credible fear interview,” she added, referring to the first step in the asylum process.
Denying parole en masse is likely illegal, according to Michael Tan, deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Immigrants’ Rights Project. Two federal court rulings have blocked the government from applying generalized parole denials to asylum-seekers specifically. It appears that ICE in San Antonio (and previously, El Paso) is relying on the legal reasoning that migrants subject to the transit bar were not covered by those rulings, because they no are longer considered asylum-seekers. But the parole statute itself specifies that decisions are to be made on a “case-by-case basis.”
“Nine months ago, those Cameroonian women would have gotten out the minute they passed their credible fear interview.”
Tan, who was involved in the earlier parole litigation, said that if ICE continued to default to detaining people instead of considering parole, “we would seriously consider bringing an additional legal challenge.”
ICE did not respond to several requests for comment to its El Paso office and headquarters in Washington, D.C. The Intercept was unable to confirm whether other field offices had experienced the same issue. Attorneys dealing with ICE’s San Diego office said it had not come up.
Migrants at the El Paso Border Patrol Station No. 1 are given mylar blankets as they wait on Aug. 1, 2019. Photo: Adriana Zehbrauskas/The New York Times via Redux
Most migrants affected by the blanket parole denials come from outside the Western Hemisphere, because they are not currently subject to new Trump administration policies that are returning many asylum-seekers to Mexico to await their hearings, or sending them to Guatemala or Honduras, to seek asylum there.
For those who are detained in the U.S., the administration has tried to block access to the two paths out of detention: bond or humanitarian parole. In April 2019, Attorney General William Barr used the power of his office — which oversees the nation’s system of immigration courts — to rule that migrants arriving to claim asylum were not eligible for bond. A federal court blocked Barr’s ruling and ordered the government to resume bond hearings for asylum-seekers, though BuzzFeed News recently reported that eligible migrants were being denied those hearings in El Paso and Otero, New Mexico (which falls under the El Paso sector), as late as January.
The majority of migrants detained while arriving in the United States aren’t considered to qualify for bond, leaving them with only the option of parole. It is offered at the government’s discretion for reasons such as pregnancy, medical conditions, being a minor, or for anyone whose detention is deemed “not in the public interest.” Since 2009, ICE has had a directive to presumptively release people who pass credible fear interviews and are continuing the asylum process. The agency hasn’t always followed it: This week, civil rights groups sued ICE’s New York field office over revelations that it has used a rigged algorithm to recommend whether people should be detained or released, resulting in almost everyone being detained.
In a July 2018 decision, a federal judge found that five ICE field offices — including El Paso — weren’t complying with the agency’s own directive and were issuing blanket denials of parole regardless of circumstances. Parole grants out of those offices had collectively dropped from about 90 percent to near zero. The judge ordered the government to stop issuing denials without making “individualized parole determinations” (and later made a similar ruling in another case involving a different field office). However, these specific orders don’t seem to apply to migrants who can no longer seek asylum.
There have been seven deaths in ICE custody so far in the 2020 fiscal year alone.
Remaining in detention as court dates approach isn’t merely bothersome. It severely hampers migrants’ ability to prepare complex, document-heavy cases. Conditions in detention facilities can be horrific and incentivize migrants to abandon their cases rather than risk their health in prolonged detention. There have been seven deaths in ICE custody so far in the 2020 fiscal year alone.
Since they now don’t qualify for asylum, people subject to the transit bar face even tougher odds of being released from detention and ultimately winning any chance of staying in the U.S. They can still seek two other forms of protection: “withholding of removal” or protections under the Convention Against Torture, though those are less robust and require a higher burden of evidence than asylum. ICE seems to have used this fact as a reason to deny parole, claiming that the difficulty in winning these cases means that these people pose a greater “flight risk” and may not return for their court hearings.
In an email dated January 6 and shared with The Intercept by an attorney who works with detained migrants in the El Paso area, an ICE deportation officer wrote “[y]our client’s parole was denied again due to his asylum bar.” The officer added, “ICE considers him a flight risk due to the withholding of removal proceedings,” and “ICE determined that there is no guarantee that your client will show up for removal if a safe third country will accept him.”
This last bit is in reference to the fact that, unlike asylum, withholding is not designed to lead to permanent residency. It does not prevent the U.S. government from sending a noncitizen to a third country, or even returning them to the place they fled if the U.S. decides that circumstances have changed to make it safer.
Read Our Complete Coverage The War on Immigrants
It’s not clear why the El Paso area ceased its blanket denial policy in January. It may have had to do with overcrowding, which was already a problem months ago. Quartz reported in September that the San Diego and El Paso Border Patrol sectors were urgently seeking additional storage space for detention-related supplies. In May, the Department of Homeland Security’s Inspector General found that Border Patrol’s El Paso Del Norte Processing Center was wildly and dangerously overcrowded. (Recent migrants are initially held in Border Patrol custody before being transferred to ICE, so if ICE lacks detention space, people stay longer in Border Patrol facilities.)
Blocking access to both bond and parole for migrants detained in the El Paso sector would mean that ICE’s detention facilities — and by extension, Border Patrol’s — would have been taking in more detainees and releasing very few, as large numbers of asylum-seekers from Central America continued to arrive at the southern border. The fact that ICE eased access to bond and parole at about the same time last month in El Paso further suggests that the decisions may have stemmed more from practical concerns than from legal worries about parole denials. Attorneys operating in the San Antonio area said detention centers there appeared to still be below capacity.
Linda Corchado, the director of legal services at the El Paso-based Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center, said that the rollout and subsequent reversal of the policy in El Paso pointed to a pattern of “arbitrary denials.” At “one period of time, an entire class is barred then suddenly, that bar is lifted,” she said.


theintercept--2020-03-03--Super Tuesday: Live Coverage From The Intercept and “Democracy Now”

are teaming up for a live broadcast as Super Tuesday results come in .
Intercept Co-Founding Editor Jeremy Scahill will @ @ @ @ @ s ” Amy Goodman , Juan González , and Nermeen Shaikh to host a conversation @ @ @ @ @ .
Tune in for analyses from The Intercept ’ s Ryan Grim , Mehdi Hasan @ @ @ @ @ Fang , Akela Lacy , Robert Mackey , and other guests .
Watch here March @ @ @ @ @ to midnight ET .

The Intercept and “Democracy Now” team up for a live Super Tuesday broadcast.
Intercept Co-Founding Editor Jeremy Scahill joins “Democracy Now’s” Amy Goodman, Juan González, and Nermeen Shaikh to host a conversation with guests across the country, including analyses from The Intercept’s Ryan Grim, Mehdi Hasan, Glenn Greenwald, Naomi Klein, Lee Fang, Akela Lacy, Robert Mackey, and other guests.
March 3, 7 p.m. to midnight ET.


theintercept--2020-03-03--Working Families Party: “Warren Is a Progressive and Will Work to Ensure We Have a Progressive Nomin

Working Families Party: “Warren Is a Progressive and Will Work to Ensure We Have a Progressive Nominee”

The last few days have seen a rapid consolidation of the establishment behind Joe Biden , following his expected but decisive win in South Carolina .
Both former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Amy Klobuchar dropped abruptly out of the race and threw what weight they had behind the former vice president .
Many of their high-dollar donors announced they ’ d be following suit .
Beto O ’ Rourke and a host of other high-profile Democrats , including former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Tammy Duckworth , then came out with their own public endorsements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Democratic establishment had made up its mind — though the question of former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg and his billions still looms .
Some on the left , in turn , ramped up their calls for Sen. Elizabeth Warren to drop out and endorse Sen. Bernie Sanders .
Since Sanders is leading , their argument goes , the progressive movement needs to show a unified front against the newly formed establishment bloc .
Warren staying in , then , risks splitting the progressive vote .
Ahead of Super Tuesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her refusal to drop out with a betrayal of the progressive movement — amplified further by her recent embrace of Super PAC assistance .
They even go so far as to suggest that Warren is only in the race to undermine Sanders at this point and perhaps to win some consolation prize from Biden .
“ If you ’ ve watched Warren closely , you know she first came into public life to destroy Biden ’ s bankruptcy bill .
She ’ s been in a fight with the Wall Street wing of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Dinkin said .
( The Intercept has previously written on the bankruptcy bill fight . )
“ It ’ s totally obvious to me that Warren is a progressive and will work to ensure we have a progressive nominee.
” Warren should drop out rests on a few assumptions that could very well be mistaken .
The first is that her doing so now would be better for Sanders than it would be for Biden — an assumption that involves complicated assessments of delegate math and second choices .
A Quinnipiac @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent of Warren supporters said Sanders would be their second choice .
That ’ s substantial , but about 7 percent of Warren voters said they ’ d pick Klobuchar as their second choice , 25 percent said they ’ d pick Buttigieg , and 8 percent said they ’ d go for Biden .
So Sanders could get a third of Warren votes if she dropped out now , but , if Biden receives the bulk of the Buttigieg and Klobuchar votes , Biden could get 40 percent .
Sanders has significantly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remain viable — that is , collect delegates — just about everywhere in the country .
If a candidate comes in below the 15 percent threshold of viability , their delegates are distributed to other viable candidates .
In California , Texas , and Virginia , Warren is on the cusp of viability .
If she ends up collecting those delegates tonight , she can hold on to them until the convention and release them with an endorsement of Sanders .
If she drops out or falls below viability , those delegates get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bloomberg — with Sanders taking roughly 30 percent , if the polls hold , and the rest going to the establishment candidates .
That gives the moderate wing of the party a clear path to a collective majority of delegates , which they could and would use to deny Sanders the nomination .
Voters who are still with Warren , Dinkin argued , are voters she is keeping away from Biden .
“ Warren is providing more on-ramps for the progressive movement .
If Warren is picking up delegates tomorrow , more progressive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good thing for all of us , whether you support Warren or Sanders , ” he said .
Indeed , we ’ ve known for months that Warren , Buttigieg , and Klobuchar have been fighting over the same mix of college-educated voters .
And Warren does have some key electoral advantages over the remaining frontrunning competitors .
She ’ s the only woman running , and she ’ s the youngest candidate in the race .
Another Quinnipiac poll from February found that 26 percent of Buttigieg voters ranked Klobuchar as their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Warren .
Biden by contrast , was next with 19 percent , and Sanders a mere 11 percent .
Sara Nelson , the head of the flight attendants union and a rising progressive star , said she ’ s worried that the left isn ’ t thinking strategically about delegate accumulation in an environment where the establishment is determined to prevent a single candidate from crossing the 50 percent threshold .
“ I ’ m not sure why people are jumping right over the strategic question about how we get enough delegates for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who has not endorsed a candidate , said .
“ Any candidate who accrues delegates now or up to the convention has the ability to tell those delegates how they think they should vote .
If that candidate never has the chance to accrue those delegates , then they have to just leave it up to somebody else to decide.
” She said that she talks regularly to Larry Cohen , a longtime union leader and a Sanders backer who is chair of Our Revolution .
Cohen has been arguing for months that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 50 percent , both might need to stay in .
“ If you actually look at how rules work and you look at Larry Cohen ’ s explanation of that on Nomiki ’ s show , posted from four days ago , and you actually listen to that and understand how this works , the candidates who stay in have a hell of a lot more control of the outcome.
” If it ’ s the case that Sanders is better served by Warren staying viable but trailing him , did the campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
“ No comment , ” Nelson said .
There has been some speculation , including from vocal Warren supporters , that Warren ’ s strategy is to go to the convention to convince Biden delegates to support her as a compromise candidate to stave off Sanders ’ s nomination .
Her campaign manager , Roger Lau , even sent out a memo on Sunday that said “ the convention in Milwaukee is the final play ” for their campaign , and they aim to “ ultimately prevail at the national convention in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to understand why some read that as Warren saying her strategy rests on convincing superdelegates in the second round to back her , even if she doesn ’ t win a single state and even if the Democratic establishment makes their preference for Biden decidedly clear .
But this forgets a campaign truism : Every candidate is 100 percent in-it-to-win-it until the very second they drop out .
Just moments before Buttigieg suspended his campaign , for instance , he was pledging to go all the way to the convention .
There ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ committed and fired up .
Signaling a possibility that you ’ ll soon drop out sends voters fleeing for more stable candidates .
The rationale a candidate gives for staying in a race should not be taken either seriously or literally ; candidates are simply in until they ’ re not .
Backers of Sanders , and those who hope progressive infighting doesn ’ t hand the nomination to Biden , worry that Warren ’ s recent attacks on Sanders suggest she won ’ t be an ally in the end .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
“ Her stiffest criticism of Bernie is effectively that they agree on everything , and she thinks she can get it done better , ” he said .
Still , the stiff criticism is creating real consternation .
“ Senator Warren has been an ally of the progressive movement throughout her entire career .
But I hope she stops attacking Senator Sanders and publicly commits to give her delegates to him if he has more votes to ensure a progressive wins the nomination , ” Alexandra Rojas , executive director of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a statement Monday .
“ I ’ d say the same to Bernie , ” Rojas added .
“ Pursuing the nomination through a contested convention without accumulating the most delegates would be harmful for our movement , our party , and the policies she ’ s spent her life fighting for.
” If Warren did make such a commitment though , she ’ d risk the support of voters who prefer her to Biden or Bloomberg , but prefer Biden or Bloomberg to Sanders .
could be more helpful for progressives for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ duck out now , is because Warren has shown her ability to go hard on her opponents and create tests for them that they fail .
While Biden did fine in the South Carolina debate , the media , fundraising class , and Democratic establishment are now hoping nobody remembers his abysmal , sleepy , awkward performances over the last year and previous nine debates .
Sanders also has legitimate trouble going after Biden , due to the fact that he has trouble attacking people he considers friends .
( See also : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign surrogates have attacked the former vice president for his decadeslong support for cuts to Social Security , Sanders himself has kept his criticisms extremely mild , even apologizing for an op-ed one of his surrogates wrote that argued Biden had a corruption problem .
“ It is absolutely not my view that Joe Biden is corrupt in any way , ” Sanders said .
On Monday night in Minnesota , on the eve of Super Tuesday , Sanders said this of Biden : “ I mean this very sincerely : Joe Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve known Joe for a very long time .
Joe is a decent guy .
He ’ s just wrong on the issues .
He ’ s just wrong with his vision for the future.
” That might not be the most compelling argument for an electorate that wants more than anything to beat Donald Trump .
Warren spent much of this campaign laying off Biden , which has fueled the skepticism that she ’ ll truly take him on .
But on Saturday night , she accused Biden of being someone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mitch McConnell and the Republicans that he ’ ll trade good ideas for bad ones.
” And on Monday night rally in Los Angeles , she whacked him again .
“ No matter how many Washington insiders tell you to support [ Biden ] , nominating their fellow Washington insider will not meet this moment , ” she warned .
“ Nominating a man who says we do not need any fundamental change in this country will not meet this moment .
Nominating someone who wants to restore the world before Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaving more and more people behind for decades , is a big risk for our party and our country.
” A final advantage to both candidates staying in could be on the debate stage .
An affair that pits Bloomberg as a Sanders attack dog and leaves Biden as a statesman could be a disaster for Sanders .
With Sanders laying out his vision for the country and Warren attacking Biden and Bloomberg , the playing field is leveled , if not tilted toward the progressives .
“ When you think about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ wouldn ’ t it be great to see Warren and Sanders team up to give Biden ’ s record the scrutiny it deserves ?
” All of that , of course , depends on Warren continuing to win delegates .
If on Tuesday night , Klobuchar and Buttigieg refugees pushed Warren slightly higher , she has reason to stay in .
If not — if she bottoms out instead — there ’ s little reason to persist .
Update and Correction : March 3 , 2020 , 12:50 p.m .
ET An @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Sen. Tammy Baldwin endorsed Joe Biden .
In fact , it was Sen. Tammy Duckworth .
The article was updated to include comments from Nelson .

The last few days have seen a rapid consolidation of the establishment behind Joe Biden, following his expected but decisive win in South Carolina. Both former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Amy Klobuchar dropped abruptly out of the race and threw what weight they had behind the former vice president. Many of their high-dollar donors announced they’d be following suit. Beto O’Rourke and a host of other high-profile Democrats, including former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Tammy Duckworth, then came out with their own public endorsements of Biden. After months of indecision, the Democratic establishment had made up its mind — though the question of former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg and his billions still looms.
Some on the left, in turn, ramped up their calls for Sen. Elizabeth Warren to drop out and endorse Sen. Bernie Sanders. Since Sanders is leading, their argument goes, the progressive movement needs to show a unified front against the newly formed establishment bloc. Warren staying in, then, risks splitting the progressive vote. Ahead of Super Tuesday, some voices on the left equated her refusal to drop out with a betrayal of the progressive movement — amplified further by her recent embrace of Super PAC assistance. They even go so far as to suggest that Warren is only in the race to undermine Sanders at this point and perhaps to win some consolation prize from Biden.
Joe Dinkin, a spokesperson for the Working Families Party, which backed Sanders in 2016 but is behind Warren in 2020, argued that such an assessment was confused on multiple fronts. Sanders and Warren, he said, still need each other both in the race, and when it comes to the convention, Warren’s delegates will wind up on the progressive side of the equation in the end.
“It’s totally obvious to me that Warren is a progressive and will work to ensure we have a progressive nominee.”
“If you’ve watched Warren closely, you know she first came into public life to destroy Biden’s bankruptcy bill. She’s been in a fight with the Wall Street wing of the Democratic Party for about 15 years,” Dinkin said. (The Intercept has previously written on the bankruptcy bill fight.) “It’s totally obvious to me that Warren is a progressive and will work to ensure we have a progressive nominee.”
The argument that Warren should drop out rests on a few assumptions that could very well be mistaken. The first is that her doing so now would be better for Sanders than it would be for Biden — an assumption that involves complicated assessments of delegate math and second choices.
A Quinnipiac poll from early February showed that 33 percent of Warren supporters said Sanders would be their second choice. That’s substantial, but about 7 percent of Warren voters said they’d pick Klobuchar as their second choice, 25 percent said they’d pick Buttigieg, and 8 percent said they’d go for Biden. So Sanders could get a third of Warren votes if she dropped out now, but, if Biden receives the bulk of the Buttigieg and Klobuchar votes, Biden could get 40 percent.
Sanders has significantly consolidated the left and is likely to remain viable — that is, collect delegates — just about everywhere in the country. If a candidate comes in below the 15 percent threshold of viability, their delegates are distributed to other viable candidates. In California, Texas, and Virginia, Warren is on the cusp of viability. If she ends up collecting those delegates tonight, she can hold on to them until the convention and release them with an endorsement of Sanders. If she drops out or falls below viability, those delegates get split between Sanders, Biden, and Bloomberg — with Sanders taking roughly 30 percent, if the polls hold, and the rest going to the establishment candidates. That gives the moderate wing of the party a clear path to a collective majority of delegates, which they could and would use to deny Sanders the nomination.
In California, if 2% of voters shift Warren?Sanders, then Biden+Bloomberg get a majority of delegates. In Texas, if 1% shift EW?BS, then JB+MB get two-thirds of the delegates. In Virginia, if 3% shift EW?BS, then JB+MB get two-thirds of the delegates. Please don't do that. pic.twitter.com/w4ZZH1vEns — Max Kennerly (@MaxKennerly) March 3, 2020
Voters who are still with Warren, Dinkin argued, are voters she is keeping away from Biden.
“Warren is providing more on-ramps for the progressive movement. If Warren is picking up delegates tomorrow, more progressive delegates headed to the convention is a good thing for all of us, whether you support Warren or Sanders,” he said.
Indeed, we’ve known for months that Warren, Buttigieg, and Klobuchar have been fighting over the same mix of college-educated voters. And Warren does have some key electoral advantages over the remaining frontrunning competitors. She’s the only woman running, and she’s the youngest candidate in the race.
“One of Warren’s unique talents is that she is bringing new people into the progressive movement.”
“One of Warren’s unique talents is that she is bringing new people into the progressive movement. She’s been attracting voters who could have been supporting Biden or Pete behind a candidate who’s for Medicare for All, a wealth tax, the Green New Deal, and universal child care,” Dinkin said.
That’s a point that another pro-Warren group, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, is now making as well.
The math for progressives: @ewarren & @BernieSanders each attract some core progressives AND swing supporters who would otherwise land with Biden. Case in point: Warren is a magnet for many Amy and Pete supporters who would otherwise default to Biden and pad his numbers. https://t.co/KMFSFsauwO — BoldProgressives.org (@BoldProgressive) March 3, 2020
Another Quinnipiac poll from February found that 26 percent of Buttigieg voters ranked Klobuchar as their second choice, and 26 percent ranked Warren. Biden by contrast, was next with 19 percent, and Sanders a mere 11 percent.
Sara Nelson, the head of the flight attendants union and a rising progressive star, said she’s worried that the left isn’t thinking strategically about delegate accumulation in an environment where the establishment is determined to prevent a single candidate from crossing the 50 percent threshold. “I’m not sure why people are jumping right over the strategic question about how we get enough delegates for a progressive candidate,” Nelson, who has not endorsed a candidate, said. “Any candidate who accrues delegates now or up to the convention has the ability to tell those delegates how they think they should vote. If that candidate never has the chance to accrue those delegates, then they have to just leave it up to somebody else to decide.”
She said that she talks regularly to Larry Cohen, a longtime union leader and a Sanders backer who is chair of Our Revolution. Cohen has been arguing for months that in order for the left to acquire 50 percent, both might need to stay in. “If you actually look at how rules work and you look at Larry Cohen’s explanation of that on Nomiki’s show, posted from four days ago, and you actually listen to that and understand how this works, the candidates who stay in have a hell of a lot more control of the outcome.”
If it’s the case that Sanders is better served by Warren staying viable but trailing him, did the campaign make a mistake holding rallies in Massachusetts? “No comment,” Nelson said.
There has been some speculation, including from vocal Warren supporters, that Warren’s strategy is to go to the convention to convince Biden delegates to support her as a compromise candidate to stave off Sanders’s nomination. Her campaign manager, Roger Lau, even sent out a memo on Sunday that said “the convention in Milwaukee is the final play” for their campaign, and they aim to “ultimately prevail at the national convention in Milwaukee.”
It’s not hard to understand why some read that as Warren saying her strategy rests on convincing superdelegates in the second round to back her, even if she doesn’t win a single state and even if the Democratic establishment makes their preference for Biden decidedly clear.
But this forgets a campaign truism: Every candidate is 100 percent in-it-to-win-it until the very second they drop out. Just moments before Buttigieg suspended his campaign, for instance, he was pledging to go all the way to the convention. There’s no other way to keep supporters committed and fired up. Signaling a possibility that you’ll soon drop out sends voters fleeing for more stable candidates. The rationale a candidate gives for staying in a race should not be taken either seriously or literally; candidates are simply in until they’re not.
Backers of Sanders, and those who hope progressive infighting doesn’t hand the nomination to Biden, worry that Warren’s recent attacks on Sanders suggest she won’t be an ally in the end. That’s a misreading too, Dinkin said. “Her stiffest criticism of Bernie is effectively that they agree on everything, and she thinks she can get it done better,” he said.
Bernie Sanders just responded to Elizabeth Warren's attack on him that he "fails to get things done." pic.twitter.com/WtvbZmIiCW — jordan (@JordanUhl) March 3, 2020
Still, the stiff criticism is creating real consternation. “Senator Warren has been an ally of the progressive movement throughout her entire career. But I hope she stops attacking Senator Sanders and publicly commits to give her delegates to him if he has more votes to ensure a progressive wins the nomination,” Alexandra Rojas, executive director of Justice Democrats, told BuzzFeed News in a statement Monday.
“I’d say the same to Bernie,” Rojas added. “Pursuing the nomination through a contested convention without accumulating the most delegates would be harmful for our movement, our party, and the policies she’s spent her life fighting for.”
If Warren did make such a commitment though, she’d risk the support of voters who prefer her to Biden or Bloomberg, but prefer Biden or Bloomberg to Sanders.
Another reason it could be more helpful for progressives for Warren to keep competing, rather than duck out now, is because Warren has shown her ability to go hard on her opponents and create tests for them that they fail. While Biden did fine in the South Carolina debate, the media, fundraising class, and Democratic establishment are now hoping nobody remembers his abysmal, sleepy, awkward performances over the last year and previous nine debates. Sanders also has legitimate trouble going after Biden, due to the fact that he has trouble attacking people he considers friends. (See also: Warren.) While Sanders’s campaign surrogates have attacked the former vice president for his decadeslong support for cuts to Social Security, Sanders himself has kept his criticisms extremely mild, even apologizing for an op-ed one of his surrogates wrote that argued Biden had a corruption problem. “It is absolutely not my view that Joe Biden is corrupt in any way,” Sanders said.
On Monday night in Minnesota, on the eve of Super Tuesday, Sanders said this of Biden: “I mean this very sincerely: Joe Biden is a friend of mine, I’ve known Joe for a very long time. Joe is a decent guy. He’s just wrong on the issues. He’s just wrong with his vision for the future.” That might not be the most compelling argument for an electorate that wants more than anything to beat Donald Trump.
Warren spent much of this campaign laying off Biden, which has fueled the skepticism that she’ll truly take him on.
Warren spent much of this campaign laying off Biden, which has fueled the skepticism that she’ll truly take him on. But on Saturday night, she accused Biden of being someone “so eager to cut deals with Mitch McConnell and the Republicans that he’ll trade good ideas for bad ones.” And on Monday night rally in Los Angeles, she whacked him again.
“No matter how many Washington insiders tell you to support [Biden], nominating their fellow Washington insider will not meet this moment,” she warned. “Nominating a man who says we do not need any fundamental change in this country will not meet this moment. Nominating someone who wants to restore the world before Donald Trump, when the status quo has been leaving more and more people behind for decades, is a big risk for our party and our country.”
A final advantage to both candidates staying in could be on the debate stage. An affair that pits Bloomberg as a Sanders attack dog and leaves Biden as a statesman could be a disaster for Sanders. With Sanders laying out his vision for the country and Warren attacking Biden and Bloomberg, the playing field is leveled, if not tilted toward the progressives.
“When you think about the March debate,” Dinkin said, “wouldn’t it be great to see Warren and Sanders team up to give Biden’s record the scrutiny it deserves?”
All of that, of course, depends on Warren continuing to win delegates. If on Tuesday night, Klobuchar and Buttigieg refugees pushed Warren slightly higher, she has reason to stay in. If not — if she bottoms out instead — there’s little reason to persist.
Update and Correction: March 3, 2020, 12:50 p.m. ET
An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that Sen. Tammy Baldwin endorsed Joe Biden. In fact, it was Sen. Tammy Duckworth. The article was updated to include comments from Nelson.