theintercept--2020-10-28--Anatomy of a Lie: How the Trump Campaign Edited Video of Biden to Create a Fake Gaffe

about Fox News on Tuesday , telling reporters that the channel he relies on to brainwash voters should give less air time to former President Barack Obama ridiculing him and more to misleading videos of former Vice President Joe Biden , edited to make him look old and unfit for office .
“ I only saw he was on Fox , ” the president replied when asked what he thought of Obama skewering him during a drive-in rally in support of Biden in Orlando .
“ Fox puts him on all the time , ” Trump lamented .
“ Fox @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more of the speech than he let on , because 21 minutes into Obama ’ s remarks — shortly after the former president told the current one , “ tweeting at the TV doesn ’ t fix things ; watching TV all day doesn ’ t fix things ” — he tweeted his dismay that Fox was showing it .
Instead of carrying Obama ’ s speeches live , Trump told reporters after he tore himself away from the television , Fox should really be doing more to help him win next week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Biden ’ s recent appearances that have been deceptively edited to mislead viewers about the Democratic presidential nominee ’ s mental state .
The Trump campaign has produced a series of such videos recently , by monitoring live streams of Biden ’ s campaign events each day , and then editing his statements entirely out of context to create dishonest clips that fit their caricature of the former vice president as a man in cognitive decline in a way the original recordings do not .
Trump referred specifically to one of those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ team of rapid-reaction liars , when he suggested that Fox “ should show the picture of Sleepy Joe yesterday , when he rushed to Pennsylvania — because he saw that I had 25,000 people at each event — when he rushed to Pennsylvania and he did a statement and he got lost in a fog .
They should show that.
” The video Trump was referring to was a 27-second clip from a 24-minute ABC News live stream of Biden ’ s visit to meet campaign volunteers at a voting center in Chester @ @ @ @ @ @ @ video was unaltered , it was posted on Twitter , Facebook and YouTube by the Trump campaign ’ s director of strategic response , Francis Brennan , with an entirely false caption .
While Brennan claimed that what the video showed was Biden being unable to answer a question about Supreme Court reform , and his staff rushing reporters away to conceal this stumble , anyone who bothers to consult the archived recording of the original stream on ABC ’ s Facebook page can see that this is a brazen lie .

Donald Trump whined about Fox News on Tuesday, telling reporters that the channel he relies on to brainwash voters should give less air time to former President Barack Obama ridiculing him and more to misleading videos of former Vice President Joe Biden, edited to make him look old and unfit for office.
“I only saw he was on Fox,” the president replied when asked what he thought of Obama skewering him during a drive-in rally in support of Biden in Orlando. “Fox puts him on all the time,” Trump lamented. “Fox is very disappointing.”
Trump clearly watched more of the speech than he let on, because 21 minutes into Obama’s remarks — shortly after the former president told the current one, “tweeting at the TV doesn’t fix things; watching TV all day doesn’t fix things” — he tweeted his dismay that Fox was showing it.
Instead of carrying Obama’s speeches live, Trump told reporters after he tore himself away from the television, Fox should really be doing more to help him win next week’s election, like showing snippets of Biden’s recent appearances that have been deceptively edited to mislead viewers about the Democratic presidential nominee’s mental state.
The Trump campaign has produced a series of such videos recently, by monitoring live streams of Biden’s campaign events each day, and then editing his statements entirely out of context to create dishonest clips that fit their caricature of the former vice president as a man in cognitive decline in a way the original recordings do not.
Trump referred specifically to one of those clips, produced on Monday by his team of rapid-reaction liars, when he suggested that Fox “should show the picture of Sleepy Joe yesterday, when he rushed to Pennsylvania — because he saw that I had 25,000 people at each event — when he rushed to Pennsylvania and he did a statement and he got lost in a fog. They should show that.”
(The fact that Trump mistakenly called video of Biden speaking a “picture” — an error he repeated in reference to a different clip moments later — was a reminder of how absurd it is that he, of all people, is trying to argue that anyone who mangles words lacks the mental acuity to be president.)
The video Trump was referring to was a 27-second clip from a 24-minute ABC News live stream of Biden’s visit to meet campaign volunteers at a voting center in Chester, Pennsylvania on Monday. While the video was unaltered, it was posted on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube by the Trump campaign’s director of strategic response, Francis Brennan, with an entirely false caption.
While Brennan claimed that what the video showed was Biden being unable to answer a question about Supreme Court reform, and his staff rushing reporters away to conceal this stumble, anyone who bothers to consult the archived recording of the original stream on ABC’s Facebook page can see that this is a brazen lie.
WATCH: As Biden starts to stumble with a question about court-packing his staff immediately starts escorting the camera out of the event. pic.twitter.com/8KLXiz3GAD — Francis Brennan (@FrancisBrennan) October 26, 2020
In reality, the part of the video just before what was clipped out by Trump’s aide shows that Biden told his staff that he wanted to speak more with his volunteers before a separate news conference nearby. He then gave a clear and complete answer to a question from a supporter who suggested that he should push back on reporters who raise so-called court-packing.
“I think the press is asking legitimate questions,” Biden began. He then outlined his plan, if elected, to set up a commission of constitutional scholars to make suggestions for court reform, and made specific mention of the possibility of rotating judges off the Supreme Court to circuit courts after a period of time. “I’m not a big fan of court packing,” he added, “but I’m going to listen. I’ll listen to all the ideas there because it’s become a serious question, going into the middle of the 21st century.”
It was at that point that Biden’s staff moved the reporters observing the chat with volunteers a short distance away to where a podium was set up for the news conference. About seven minutes later, Biden came to that podium and made a short statement and took questions, including one from Daniel Bush of PBS NewsHour, who asked if Biden was in favor of introducing term limits for Supreme Court Justices.
Biden replied clearly to that question too, saying without hesitation that he had no intention of ending the lifetime appointments of the Justices, but that he would listen to suggestions from a commission of scholars that would have 180 days to report back with recommendations for reforming the courts.
The Trump campaign’s entirely false claim about the meaning of this 27-second clip, which has already been viewed over a million times on social networks and talked up by the president, followed a similar distortion of Biden’s remarks the day before.
As the Washington Post correspondent Dave Weigel reported, more than a million people viewed another misleadingly edited clip of Biden, this time speaking with the comedian George Lopez during an online event on Sunday, which cut out a question from Lopez to make it seems as if Biden had mistakenly referred to Trump as “George.” Trump and other members of his campaign then claimed that Biden had confused the current disastrous Republican president with the previous disastrous Republican president.
Despite Weigel’s debunking, the Trump campaign’s misleading edit of the video was reported as fact on Monday morning, and not just on “Fox and Friends” but also on the “Today” show where debate moderator Kristen Welker failed to explain how the original context had been changed by removing George Lopez from the exchange.
Seems like the Today Show also just took the Trump campaign video without checking. Not everyone is as pedantic as me about seeing where the hell a video clip came from. https://t.co/qKjJE8LklJ — David Weigel (@daveweigel) October 26, 2020
NBC later added an editor’s note beneath Welker’s report on its website, which explained that: “The video of Joe Biden talking about the 2020 election and ‘four more years of George…’ came from an interview that Biden did Sunday with George Lopez. The fact that Biden was talking with George Lopez was relevant and helpful context that should have been included in the original report.” Even so, the video of Welker’s report, which was broadcast to the show’s millions of viewers, remains uncorrected.
Untroubled by reality, Trump gleefully mocked Biden for the supposed gaffe at a rally in Pennsylvania on Monday, referring to his opponent as “a mess.”
In his plea to Fox News on Tuesday, Trump suggested that the channel “should show the picture where he called me George. He thought I was George. I guess he’s talking about George Bush. But he thought I was George, and they should show that.”
While Biden’s at times halting and often meandering manner of speaking can lead to verbal stumbles — and has resulted in genuine gaffes over his decades in public life — Trump’s attempt to manufacture flubs speaks of a certain desperation.
Later on Tuesday, that deeply dishonest effort continued, with the Trump campaign posting video of Biden at a campaign stop in Georgia saying, “Why am I doing this? Why? What is my real aim?”
Joe Biden: “Why am I doing this? Why? What is my real aim?” pic.twitter.com/pNPfzirGjO — Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) October 27, 2020
Far from being confused, however, the text of Biden’s prepared remarks made it plain that he was, in fact, quoting from a philosophical letter published this month by Pope Francis.
“In his recent encyclical, Pope Francis warns us against this phony populism that appeals to the ‘basest and most selfish’ instincts,” Biden said. “Then he says this: ‘Politics is something more noble than posturing, marketing and media spin. These sow nothing but division, conflict and a bleak cynicism…'”
“For those who seek to lead, ‘we do well to ask ourselves, ‘Why I am doing this?’ ‘What is my real aim?'” Biden continued, quoting the pope. “Pope Francis has asked questions that anyone who seeks to lead this great nation should answer,” he concluded.


theintercept--2020-10-28--Rep. Don Bacon Used Taxpayer Expense Account to Pay Campaign Consultant

, R-Neb.
, used his congressional expense account to pay his campaign strategist , a move that may raise ethics concerns over the use of taxpayer funds .
Bacon ’ s congressional office made two payments this year using government funds totaling $ 52,518 to “ Double Bogey Strategies , ” a limited liability company registered in Alexandria , Virginia , and owned by David Watts , the campaign strategist advising Bacon ’ s reelection effort .
The expense payments to Watts ’ s company included $ 20,371 for “ printing & reproduction ” and $ 32,147 for “ advertisements.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a campaign consulting firm retained by Bacon since 2017 .
House ethics rules and federal law prohibit the use of congressional government funds on communication advisers and campaign advisers , as well as for any campaign-related purposes .
While Watts may have been doing work for the congressional office , using the same consultant for the campaign and the congressional office is unusual .
Congressional advertising , mass email , and unsolicited postal mail funded by the government is allowed under extensive restrictions to prevent lawmakers from spending government funds on explicitly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used to announce town halls and other constituent services .
Watts , a former official with the National Republican Congressional Committee , has played an active role in the Bacon campaign , and records show that he has advised the lawmaker throughout the campaign this cycle .
His name appears in the Bacon campaign ’ s mass emails to supporters , and a Bacon campaign commercial is featured on Watts ’ s consulting website as an example of his accomplishments .
Neither the Bacon campaign nor Watts responded to multiple requests for comment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an inquiry from The Intercept but has not responded .
Bacon represents Nebraska ’ s 2nd District , which is centered around Omaha and is one of the most competitive House seats in the country .
He is facing a spirited rematch challenge from Democratic candidate Kara Eastman , a social worker and nonprofit leader who lost in a close race during the midterm election .
Eastman out-raised Bacon in the latest round of quarterly campaign finance disclosures and polls suggest another close race .
The Bacon campaign has paid Watts ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ payments totaling $ 15,000 during the period when Watts ’ s other firm also received funding from Bacon ’ s congressional expense account .
In comments to the press , Watts has explained that he has helped his clients , including Bacon , adapt to a campaign environment constricted by the coronavirus pandemic .
“ What ’ s been interesting is that for most of the past nine weeks , the pandemic has kept members in their districts and that ’ s given them the chance to do lots of Zoom meetings with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Well News , a political news site .
The government payments to Watts ’ s company are listed in Bacon ’ s filing in his Members ’ Representational Allowance report that lists expenses spent between April 1 through June 30 of this year .
Members of the House of Representatives are provided an MRA account to hire official staff , pay rent at district offices , reimburse for travel , and fund other activities related to official congressional affairs .
Congressional ethics rules state that MRA funds may only be used to hire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unrelated to campaign or political activities , such as custodial services and equipment maintenance .
Last July , the House Ethics Committee fined Rep. David Schweikert , R-Ariz. , $ 50,000 for using his MRA expense account for campaign-related funds .
An investigation had found that the Arizona Republican spent $ 270,000 in congressional MRA funds on a series of campaign-related travel , accommodations , and food .
Staff hired using MRA funds also performed campaign-related duties , in violation of ethics rules and federal law .
In 2018 , the House Ethics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ D-Ill. , improperly used his MRA expense to hire his former chief of staff through a consulting firm , a violation of the ban on hiring consultants using the account .
Gutiérrez was ordered to pay $ 9,700 back to the U.S. Treasury .
And , in perhaps the most famous recent case , former Rep. Aaron Schock , R-Ill. , stepped down after reports showed that he had used his MRA account for lavish decorations of his congressional office designed to reflect the design of a room in the television show “ @ @ @ @

Congressman Don Bacon , R-Neb., used his congressional expense account to pay his campaign strategist, a move that may raise ethics concerns over the use of taxpayer funds.
Bacon’s congressional office made two payments this year using government funds totaling $52,518 to “Double Bogey Strategies,” a limited liability company registered in Alexandria, Virginia, and owned by David Watts, the campaign strategist advising Bacon’s reelection effort.
The expense payments to Watts’s company included $20,371 for “printing & reproduction” and $32,147 for “advertisements.” Watts also owns Double Eagle Strategies, a campaign consulting firm retained by Bacon since 2017.
House ethics rules and federal law prohibit the use of congressional government funds on communication advisers and campaign advisers, as well as for any campaign-related purposes. While Watts may have been doing work for the congressional office, using the same consultant for the campaign and the congressional office is unusual.
Congressional advertising, mass email, and unsolicited postal mail funded by the government is allowed under extensive restrictions to prevent lawmakers from spending government funds on explicitly political endeavors. Such communications are generally used to announce town halls and other constituent services.
Watts, a former official with the National Republican Congressional Committee, has played an active role in the Bacon campaign, and records show that he has advised the lawmaker throughout the campaign this cycle. His name appears in the Bacon campaign’s mass emails to supporters, and a Bacon campaign commercial is featured on Watts’s consulting website as an example of his accomplishments.
Neither the Bacon campaign nor Watts responded to multiple requests for comment. Bacon’s congressional office acknowledged an inquiry from The Intercept but has not responded.
After publication of this article, Bacon told local station KMTV that Watts’ hiring was routine. “There was nothing unusual about what we did. We gave it to the lowest bidder, right, we have two or three vendors that we use and the guy that gave us the lowest price, we took and that saves taxpayer money,” said Bacon.
Craig Holman, an ethics and lobbying expert with Public Citizen, raised serious concerns with Bacon’s choice of paying his campaign consultant with taxpayer funds.
“Rep. Bacon’s use of MRA funds to a company owned by his political advisor, David Watts, very likely appears to violate congressional rules on the use of office funds,” said Holman. “Under the rules, MRAs are to be used exclusively to support ‘official duties’ or helping constituents. These taxpayer dollars may not be used for personal benefit or political purposes, and that restriction has been defined by the House ethics committee to prohibit the use of such funds to pay for services or products provided by political consultants and even staff members. The printing services provided by Double Bogey Strategies may normally have been permissible, but the fact that the company is owned by Bacon’s political consultant crosses permissible boundaries.”
Bacon represents Nebraska’s 2nd District, which is centered around Omaha and is one of the most competitive House seats in the country. He is facing a spirited rematch challenge from Democratic candidate Kara Eastman, a social worker and nonprofit leader who lost in a close race during the midterm election. Eastman outraised Bacon in the latest round of quarterly campaign finance disclosures and polls suggest another close race.
Eastman has called for an ethics investigation into the use of the congressional expense account.
The Bacon campaign has paid Watts’s company at least $178,478, including payments totaling $15,000 during the period when Watts’s other firm also received funding from Bacon’s congressional expense account.
In comments to the press, Watts has explained that he has helped his clients, including Bacon, adapt to a campaign environment constricted by the coronavirus pandemic.
“What’s been interesting is that for most of the past nine weeks, the pandemic has kept members in their districts and that’s given them the chance to do lots of Zoom meetings with their constituents,” Watts told the Well News, a political news site.
The government payments to Watts’s company are listed in Bacon’s filing in his Members’ Representational Allowance report that lists expenses spent between April 1 through June 30 of this year. Members of the House of Representatives are provided an MRA account to hire official staff, pay rent at district offices, reimburse for travel, and fund other activities related to official congressional affairs.
Congressional ethics rules state that MRA funds may only be used to hire contractors for general, nonlegislative office work unrelated to campaign or political activities, such as custodial services and equipment maintenance.
Lawmakers frequently misuse government funds meant for legislative and constituent services.
“This year we have seen a rash of scandals involving the misuse of public funds by members of Congress and their staff, including Reps. David Schweikert, Sanford Bishop and Matt Gaetz,” said Holman.
Last July, the House Ethics Committee fined Rep. David Schweikert, R-Ariz., $50,000 for using his MRA expense account for campaign-related funds.
An investigation had found that the Arizona Republican spent $270,000 in congressional MRA funds on a series of campaign-related travel, accommodations, and food. Staff hired using MRA funds also performed campaign-related duties, in violation of ethics rules and federal law.
In 2018, the House Ethics Committee found that then-Rep. Luis Gutiérrez, D-Ill., improperly used his MRA expense to hire his former chief of staff through a consulting firm, a violation of the ban on hiring consultants using the account. Gutiérrez was ordered to pay $9,700 back to the U.S. Treasury.
And, in perhaps the most famous recent case, former Rep. Aaron Schock, R-Ill., stepped down after reports showed that he had used his MRA account for lavish decorations of his congressional office inspired by the design of a room in the television show “Downton Abbey.”
Update: October 30, 2020
This article has been updated to include comments from Bacon and ethics expert Craig Holman, and to reflect that Eastman has called for an investigation.


theintercept--2020-10-29--Overturning the Affordable Care Act Could Result in 68,000 Deaths

The growth in the number of uninsured between 2016 and 2019 likely resulted from several steps the administration has taken to shrink health care coverage , such as cutting spending for a program that helps people sign up for health insurance , according to the study ’ s authors .
The administration also supported the repeal of the individual mandate by Congress in 2017 .
As many as 68,000 people may die in a single year if the Supreme Court overturns the Affordable Care Act , according to research published Thursday .
The study , published by Health Affairs , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already lost health insurance coverage during the first three years of the Trump administration and that between 3,399 and 25,180 people died as a result of losing that coverage .
The loss of health insurance has well-documented financial , medical , and psychological consequences .
In general , the uninsured tend to be sicker because they receive less preventive care .
“ Something as simple as treating high blood pressure can prevent strokes and heart attacks , ” said Adam Gaffney , a pulmonary and critical care physician at Harvard Medical School who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ authors .
“ I ’ ve seen many patients in the ICU with emergencies that could have been avoided with a better system.
” In part because they delay and forego both diagnoses and treatments , those without health insurance coverage run a greater risk of dying .
Far more deaths are expected if the Supreme Court overturns the Affordable Care Act .
The authors of the study use the Urban Institute ’ s estimate that 19.9 million people will likely lose their health insurance , as well as several studies tying a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to calculate that the massive loss in health coverage will likely cause between 22,892 and 68,345 deaths per year among adults under 65 .
While the study focused on adults , an estimated 726,000 children also lost coverage during the first three years of the Trump administration , according to the Georgetown University Health Policy Institute , which predicts that an additional 1.7 million children will become uninsured if the Affordable Care Act is overturned .
On November 10 , the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments in California v. Texas , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ court striking down the entire Affordable Care Act in the midst of a global pandemic that has already resulted in more than 227,000 deaths in the U.S. Amy Coney Barrett , Donald Trump ’ s recently installed justice , is expected to vote with conservatives against the law .
Trump appears not to have a plan for making sure that those who lose coverage as a result of the Supreme Court decision will have continued access to health care .
At the same time that the estimated death toll from overturning the health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Health and Human Services held a press briefing on what it described as “ the Trump Administration ’ s efforts to deliver on the President ’ s healthcare vision of better care , lower costs , and more choice.
” During the call with reporters , Alex Azar , the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services , announced that the administration finalized a rule that will require insurers to publicly post the price of the most common procedures and services .
The requirement will go into effect in 2023 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ most shoppable ” services .
For all other services , it will start in 2024 .
Seema Verma , the administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services , told reporters on the call that the new rule is “ the culmination of four years of groundbreaking reforms.
” But Gaffney pointed out that new requirements on insurers won ’ t help the millions of people without insurance .
“ It ’ s a total mirage , ” said Gaffney .
“ The administration has had four years to improve health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s happen is that it ’ s gotten worse .
”

As many as 68,000 people may die in a single year if the Supreme Court overturns the Affordable Care Act, according to research published Thursday. The study, published by Health Affairs, found that some 2.3 million people have already lost health insurance coverage during the first three years of the Trump administration and that between 3,399 and 25,180 people died as a result of losing that coverage.
The growth in the number of uninsured between 2016 and 2019 likely resulted from several steps the administration has taken to shrink health care coverage, such as cutting spending for a program that helps people sign up for health insurance, according to the study’s authors. The administration also supported the repeal of the individual mandate by Congress in 2017.
The loss of health insurance has well-documented financial, medical, and psychological consequences. In general, the uninsured tend to be sicker because they receive less preventive care. “Something as simple as treating high blood pressure can prevent strokes and heart attacks,” said Adam Gaffney, a pulmonary and critical care physician at Harvard Medical School who is one of the study’s authors. “I’ve seen many patients in the ICU with emergencies that could have been avoided with a better system.”
In part because they delay and forego both diagnoses and treatments, those without health insurance coverage run a greater risk of dying.
Far more deaths are expected if the Supreme Court overturns the Affordable Care Act. The authors of the study use the Urban Institute’s estimate that 19.9 million people will likely lose their health insurance, as well as several studies tying a lack of insurance to premature death, to calculate that the massive loss in health coverage will likely cause between 22,892 and 68,345 deaths per year among adults under 65.
While the study focused on adults, an estimated 726,000 children also lost coverage during the first three years of the Trump administration, according to the Georgetown University Health Policy Institute, which predicts that an additional 1.7 million children will become uninsured if the Affordable Care Act is overturned.
On November 10, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments in California v. Texas, a case that could result in the court striking down the entire Affordable Care Act in the midst of a global pandemic that has already resulted in more than 227,000 deaths in the U.S. Amy Coney Barrett, Donald Trump’s recently installed justice, is expected to vote with conservatives against the law. Trump appears not to have a plan for making sure that those who lose coverage as a result of the Supreme Court decision will have continued access to health care.
At the same time that the estimated death toll from overturning the health care law was released, the department of Health and Human Services held a press briefing on what it described as “the Trump Administration’s efforts to deliver on the President’s healthcare vision of better care, lower costs, and more choice.”
During the call with reporters, Alex Azar, the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, announced that the administration finalized a rule that will require insurers to publicly post the price of the most common procedures and services. The requirement will go into effect in 2023 for 500 of what Azar called the “most shoppable” services. For all other services, it will start in 2024.
Seema Verma, the administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, told reporters on the call that the new rule is “the culmination of four years of groundbreaking reforms.”
But Gaffney pointed out that new requirements on insurers won’t help the millions of people without insurance. “It’s a total mirage,” said Gaffney. “The administration has had four years to improve health coverage and access, and all that’s happen is that it’s gotten worse.”


theintercept--2020-10-29--On the Ballot in Missouri: A GOP Effort to Undo Redistricting Reform

Amendment 3 was drafted in part by Graves Garrett LLC , a firm that has represented Republicans in gerrymandering cases , including both the National Republican Redistricting Trust , and Thomas Hofeller , the architect of racial gerrymanders in states across the country , including some in Missouri .
It would also introduce drastic changes to districting practices , like allowing Missouri to exclude children and noncitizens from the count .
If passed , Missouri would be the first state in the nation to do so , though it ’ s a proposal that has been pushed by Republicans in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ analysis of the impacts of districting in such a way and found that in Texas , counting only the eligible voting population would weaken Hispanic voting power and advantage “ Republicans and non-Hispanic whites , ” according to a trove of documents released by Hofeller ’ s daughter following his death .
The American Legislative Exchange Council pushed the idea at its annual conference last year .
On Election Day , voters will decide on a Republican-backed initiative that would undo the reforms made by “ Clean Missouri , ” some aspects of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ set to take place during next year ’ s redistricting process .
In 2018 , voters in Missouri overwhelmingly approved a plan to implement new campaign finance reforms and retool the state ’ s districting process ahead of map redrawing in 2021 .
That package , known as the “ Clean Missouri ” plan , was cast as a shield against partisan gerrymandering and would likely put a damper on the GOP ’ s growing control over the state legislature .
Just two years later , state Republicans are seeking to reverse it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ redistricting could negatively impact residents in communities of color and with large numbers of children and undocumented people , according to advocates working to defeat the new ballot measure .
Clean Missouri made it to the ballot in 2018 following a petition process with 347,000 signatures and was subsequently approved by more than 60 percent of voters .
Amendment 3 , meanwhile , was created and passed by the state legislature .
The push for Amendment 3 has been spearheaded by Fair Missouri , a campaign committee with ties to the former chair @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of the founders of the firm involved in drafting parts of the amendment .
Its supporters include the Missouri Farm Bureau and the Northwest Missouri Conservatives PAC , a group formed in August and run by a College Republicans chapter president .
They argue that Amendment 3 would stop gerrymandering , preserve voting power in rural communities , protect minority populations , and maintain and strengthen ethics reforms approved in 2018 .
Amendment 3 ’ s supporters , led by Fair Missouri , have spent just under $ 250,000 in support of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 7 million spent by Clean Missouri this cycle , which spent about $ 5.5 million in 2018 .
Fair Missouri argues that Clean Missouri does not reflect the will of Missouri voters because it has received a lot of money from out of state , but according to an analysis from Sludge , Fair Missouri has not received contributions from any Missouri residents and is funded by a web of GOP dark-money groups with ties to state Republicans .
Clean Missouri is backed by some 350 political leaders and organizations around the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Clean Missouri ’ s campaign director , who filed the initiative ’ s original petition in late 2016 .
“ Voters don ’ t like the idea of politicians trying to undo what they just did , ” said Nicholson .
Backers of Clean Missouri say they ’ re fighting a longstanding gerrymander that has decreased the level of competition in Missouri elections .
Republicans have held a trifecta in Missouri since 2017 , when former Republican Gov .
Eric Greitens took office .
Greitens resigned in 2018 amid investigations into allegations of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign finance , and was replaced by former Lt. Gov .
Mike Parsons .
Parsons will face Democrat Nicole Galloway , Missouri ’ s state auditor , in next week ’ s election .
A coalition of 16 organizations , including the American Civil Liberties Union , the Brennan Center , Common Cause , the Center for Popular Democracy , and Color of Change , wrote an open letter earlier this month calling on voters to reject the ballot measure .
“ Amendment 3 is an attempt by self-interested politicians to gut popular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote , “ and then replace them with an unprecedented , discriminatory redistricting system unlike anything Missouri — or America — has ever seen.
” “ Clean Missouri ” initiative introduced new campaign finance regulations , eliminated lobbyists gifts worth more than $ 5 , required that lawmakers wait two years before becoming lobbyists , enhanced transparency in the state legislature by opening the body to the state ’ s public records laws , and established a new process for drawing district maps headed by a nonpartisan demographer .
That year , 62 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ measure , even in a majority of heavily Republican counties .
It passed in every state Senate district , more than 90 percent of state House districts , and in 70 percent of the state ’ s counties , as well as the city of St. Louis , according to the coalition of national civil rights groups fighting the new amendment .
Amendment 3 would eliminate the nonpartisan demographer position outlined in the Clean Missouri plan and make negligible changes to campaign finance contribution limits .
The amendment would lower the limit on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 100 , from $ 2,500 to $ 2,400 , and lower the limit on gifts from lobbyists to legislators from $ 5 to $ 0 .
It would change the order of priority for redistricting criteria , making partisan fairness and competitiveness last .
It could also cause local government entities to lose revenue , according to the summary that appears on the ballot .
The language of the amendment that will appear on ballots has been hotly contested , with a circuit judge saying that the summary submitted by the GOP-controlled legislature @ @ @ @ @ @ @ insufficient , ” and failed to notify Missourians that adopting Amendment 3 would undo the 2018 vote .
After a series of appeals , it was decided that the ballot text would , among other things , explicitly say that the state constitution would be amended to “ Change the redistricting process voters approved in 2018 by : ( i ) transferring responsibility for drawing state legislative districts from the Nonpartisan State Demographer to Governor-appointed bipartisan commissions ; ( ii ) modifying and reordering the redistricting criteria.
” “ The politicians , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it won ’ t stand on its own , their policy .
And so they ’ ve got some tricks .
Like they ’ re trying to fool voters into passing this thing , ” Nicholson said .
“ When voters go to vote , the first two bullets they ’ ll see are intended to make it look like this is a reform package .
But what we ’ ve been able to find as we talk to voters is that that attempt at deception is actually one of the primary reasons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The amendment text specifies that districts would be drawn on the basis of “ one person , one vote.
” Republican backers of Amendment 3 have said they understood that phrase to mean that districts should be drawn based on voting population , as opposed to total population .
During floor debate on the amendment in January , sponsor Republican state Sen. Dan Hegeman said that the measure ’ s intended purpose was to count only eligible voters in drawing legislative maps .
“ We ’ re looking at the people that vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote are the people that are counted .
Not registered voters , but the opportunity to do that , ” Hegeman said .
Civil rights groups say the amendment , if passed , would leave the state vulnerable to a barrage of lawsuits for excluding nonvoting-eligible people from the count .
“ Amendment 3 appears to be the vanguard of a broader conservative strategy to exclude children and noncitizens from being counted , ” the Brennan Center wrote in a September analysis of the GOP proposal .
“ But should those behind Amendment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ districts are drawn , the effects on the state , and on Black , Latino , and Asian communities in particular , would be profound.
” Lobbyists and political operatives started working to upend Clean Missouri before vote tallies were finalized , said Yurij Rudensky , Brennan Center counsel and co-author of the analysis .
“ Voters sidestepped the law-making process to reclaim redistricting and make it voter-centric and people-centric , ” he said .
“ And lawmakers who want to maintain their ability to draw political districts and have political forces guide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reforms.
” The state Senate districts that would be most impacted by a shift to adult apportionment “ also contain neighborhoods that have been the target of state-sponsored segregation and racist disinvestment , ” the report continues .
And districts that would shrink should the amendment pass would receive less government funding based on the exclusion of children and noncitizens .
Such a shift “ would , at least in effect , perpetuate an ugly history of discrimination against communities of color in Missouri , ” according to the analysis .
Other groups @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NARAL Pro-Choice Missouri PAC , Planned Parenthood Votes – St. Louis and Southwest Missouri PAC , the Jewish Community Relations Council , and numerous local papers , including the Kansas City Star , St. Louis Post-Dispatch , Joplin Globe , Jefferson County Leader , and St. Louis American .
A number of elected officials representing majority-Black districts argued that the 2018 amendment would dilute Black voting power , but many are still not supporting Amendment 3 .
Groups supporting the measure include the Missouri Farm Bureau , a group called Don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Missouri Conservatives PAC , Missouri Right to Life PAC , and Republicans of Pike County .
The original package would artificially break up and gerrymander rural communities in pursuit of partisan aims , said Eric Bohl , MOFB director of public affairs and advocacy .
Members had concerns beyond the redistricting plans , he explained , including having only one appointed bureaucrat in charge of drawing legislative maps .
He blamed Clean Missouri ’ s passage on “ radical advocacy groups ” that pushed it using “ ethics candy , ” he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually doing , which was pushing for partisan control of the state .
The state ’ s old process , in place since 1940 , wasn ’ t inherently biased , he added , noting that the system produced supermajorities for both Democrats and Republicans over time .
“ It ’ s just that right now , the way that the electorate leans is pretty conservative in the state of Missouri , ” Bohl said .
“ So this looks to us more like one side of the political aisle just is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not winning elections.
” “ If it really was as huge of a mandate for that type of redistricting as the opponents of Amendment 3 claim , then I guess maybe they ’ ll see that show up at the polls , ” Bohl said .
Missourians have already started casting absentee and mail-in ballots , and some people said they were confused by the amendment language and regretted voting for it , the Northwest Missourian reported .
Still , Nicholson believes that there is sufficient energy around the issue to defeat Amendment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first started working on this , I had no idea that anyone cared about redistricting reform other than us in Missouri , ” he said .
It took two years to get the original measure on the 2018 ballot and collect more than twice the amount of signatures necessary .
“ We won because it was really good policy .
”

In 2018, voters in Missouri overwhelmingly approved a plan to implement new campaign finance reforms and retool the state’s districting process ahead of map redrawing in 2021. That package, known as the “Clean Missouri” plan, was cast as a shield against partisan gerrymandering and would likely put a damper on the GOP’s growing control over the state legislature. Just two years later, state Republicans are seeking to reverse it.
On Election Day, voters will decide on a Republican-backed initiative that would undo the reforms made by “Clean Missouri,” some aspects of which are already in effect and others set to take place during next year’s redistricting process.
Amendment 3 was drafted in part by Graves Garrett LLC, a firm that has represented Republicans in gerrymandering cases, including both the National Republican Redistricting Trust, and Thomas Hofeller, the architect of racial gerrymanders in states across the country, including some in Missouri. It would also introduce drastic changes to districting practices, like allowing Missouri to exclude children and noncitizens from the count. If passed, Missouri would be the first state in the nation to do so, though it’s a proposal that has been pushed by Republicans in recent years. Hofeller conducted an unpublished analysis of the impacts of districting in such a way and found that in Texas, counting only the eligible voting population would weaken Hispanic voting power and advantage “Republicans and non-Hispanic whites,” according to a trove of documents released by Hofeller’s daughter following his death. The American Legislative Exchange Council pushed the idea at its annual conference last year.
Including only the voting population during redistricting could negatively impact residents in communities of color and with large numbers of children and undocumented people, according to advocates working to defeat the new ballot measure.
Clean Missouri made it to the ballot in 2018 following a petition process with 347,000 signatures and was subsequently approved by more than 60 percent of voters. Amendment 3, meanwhile, was created and passed by the state legislature. The push for Amendment 3 has been spearheaded by Fair Missouri, a campaign committee with ties to the former chair of Missouri’s Republican Party, one of the founders of the firm involved in drafting parts of the amendment. Its supporters include the Missouri Farm Bureau and the Northwest Missouri Conservatives PAC, a group formed in August and run by a College Republicans chapter president. They argue that Amendment 3 would stop gerrymandering, preserve voting power in rural communities, protect minority populations, and maintain and strengthen ethics reforms approved in 2018.
Amendment 3’s supporters, led by Fair Missouri, have spent just under $250,000 in support of their efforts — far less than the $7 million spent by Clean Missouri this cycle, which spent about $5.5 million in 2018. Fair Missouri argues that Clean Missouri does not reflect the will of Missouri voters because it has received a lot of money from out of state, but according to an analysis from Sludge, Fair Missouri has not received contributions from any Missouri residents and is funded by a web of GOP dark-money groups with ties to state Republicans.
Clean Missouri is backed by some 350 political leaders and organizations around the state, said Sean Soendker Nicholson, Clean Missouri’s campaign director, who filed the initiative’s original petition in late 2016. “Voters don’t like the idea of politicians trying to undo what they just did,” said Nicholson.
Backers of Clean Missouri say they’re fighting a longstanding gerrymander that has decreased the level of competition in Missouri elections. Republicans have held a trifecta in Missouri since 2017, when former Republican Gov. Eric Greitens took office. Greitens resigned in 2018 amid investigations into allegations of sexual assault, blackmail, and improper campaign finance, and was replaced by former Lt. Gov. Mike Parsons. Parsons will face Democrat Nicole Galloway, Missouri’s state auditor, in next week’s election.
A coalition of 16 organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Brennan Center, Common Cause, the Center for Popular Democracy, and Color of Change, wrote an open letter earlier this month calling on voters to reject the ballot measure. “Amendment 3 is an attempt by self-interested politicians to gut popular voter-approved nonpartisan redistricting reforms,” they wrote, “and then replace them with an unprecedented, discriminatory redistricting system unlike anything Missouri — or America — has ever seen.”
The 2018 “Clean Missouri” initiative introduced new campaign finance regulations, eliminated lobbyists gifts worth more than $5, required that lawmakers wait two years before becoming lobbyists, enhanced transparency in the state legislature by opening the body to the state’s public records laws, and established a new process for drawing district maps headed by a nonpartisan demographer. That year, 62 percent of Missouri voters approved the ballot measure, even in a majority of heavily Republican counties. It passed in every state Senate district, more than 90 percent of state House districts, and in 70 percent of the state’s counties, as well as the city of St. Louis, according to the coalition of national civil rights groups fighting the new amendment.
Amendment 3 would eliminate the nonpartisan demographer position outlined in the Clean Missouri plan and make negligible changes to campaign finance contribution limits. The amendment would lower the limit on contributions for state Senate candidates by $100, from $2,500 to $2,400, and lower the limit on gifts from lobbyists to legislators from $5 to $0. It would change the order of priority for redistricting criteria, making partisan fairness and competitiveness last. It could also cause local government entities to lose revenue, according to the summary that appears on the ballot.
The language of the amendment that will appear on ballots has been hotly contested, with a circuit judge saying that the summary submitted by the GOP-controlled legislature was “misleading, unfair, and insufficient,” and failed to notify Missourians that adopting Amendment 3 would undo the 2018 vote. After a series of appeals, it was decided that the ballot text would, among other things, explicitly say that the state constitution would be amended to “Change the redistricting process voters approved in 2018 by: (i) transferring responsibility for drawing state legislative districts from the Nonpartisan State Demographer to Governor-appointed bipartisan commissions; (ii) modifying and reordering the redistricting criteria.”
“The politicians, the lobbyists who put this together know that it won’t stand on its own, their policy. And so they’ve got some tricks. Like they’re trying to fool voters into passing this thing,” Nicholson said. “When voters go to vote, the first two bullets they’ll see are intended to make it look like this is a reform package. But what we’ve been able to find as we talk to voters is that that attempt at deception is actually one of the primary reasons people are so angry about this.”
The amendment text specifies that districts would be drawn on the basis of “one person, one vote.” Republican backers of Amendment 3 have said they understood that phrase to mean that districts should be drawn based on voting population, as opposed to total population. During floor debate on the amendment in January, sponsor Republican state Sen. Dan Hegeman said that the measure’s intended purpose was to count only eligible voters in drawing legislative maps. “We’re looking at the people that vote. The people that are able to vote are the people that are counted. Not registered voters, but the opportunity to do that,” Hegeman said.
Civil rights groups say the amendment, if passed, would leave the state vulnerable to a barrage of lawsuits for excluding nonvoting-eligible people from the count. “Amendment 3 appears to be the vanguard of a broader conservative strategy to exclude children and noncitizens from being counted,” the Brennan Center wrote in a September analysis of the GOP proposal. “But should those behind Amendment 3 succeed in transforming who counts when districts are drawn, the effects on the state, and on Black, Latino, and Asian communities in particular, would be profound.”
Lobbyists and political operatives started working to upend Clean Missouri before vote tallies were finalized, said Yurij Rudensky, Brennan Center counsel and co-author of the analysis. “Voters sidestepped the law-making process to reclaim redistricting and make it voter-centric and people-centric,” he said. “And lawmakers who want to maintain their ability to draw political districts and have political forces guide that process just wanted to undermine the reforms.”
The state Senate districts that would be most impacted by a shift to adult apportionment “also contain neighborhoods that have been the target of state-sponsored segregation and racist disinvestment,” the report continues. And districts that would shrink should the amendment pass would receive less government funding based on the exclusion of children and noncitizens. Such a shift “would, at least in effect, perpetuate an ugly history of discrimination against communities of color in Missouri,” according to the analysis.
Other groups opposing Amendment 3 include AARP, the NARAL Pro-Choice Missouri PAC, Planned Parenthood Votes – St. Louis and Southwest Missouri PAC, the Jewish Community Relations Council, and numerous local papers, including the Kansas City Star, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Joplin Globe, Jefferson County Leader, and St. Louis American. A number of elected officials representing majority-Black districts argued that the 2018 amendment would dilute Black voting power, but many are still not supporting Amendment 3. Groups supporting the measure include the Missouri Farm Bureau, a group called Don’t Tread on MO PAC, the Northwest Missouri Conservatives PAC, Missouri Right to Life PAC, and Republicans of Pike County.
The original package would artificially break up and gerrymander rural communities in pursuit of partisan aims, said Eric Bohl, MOFB director of public affairs and advocacy. Members had concerns beyond the redistricting plans, he explained, including having only one appointed bureaucrat in charge of drawing legislative maps. He blamed Clean Missouri’s passage on “radical advocacy groups” that pushed it using “ethics candy,” he said, to distract from what they were actually doing, which was pushing for partisan control of the state.
The state’s old process, in place since 1940, wasn’t inherently biased, he added, noting that the system produced supermajorities for both Democrats and Republicans over time. “It’s just that right now, the way that the electorate leans is pretty conservative in the state of Missouri,” Bohl said. “So this looks to us more like one side of the political aisle just is not liking the fact that they’re not winning elections.”
“If it really was as huge of a mandate for that type of redistricting as the opponents of Amendment 3 claim, then I guess maybe they’ll see that show up at the polls,” Bohl said.
Missourians have already started casting absentee and mail-in ballots, and some people said they were confused by the amendment language and regretted voting for it, the Northwest Missourian reported. Still, Nicholson believes that there is sufficient energy around the issue to defeat Amendment 3 next Tuesday. “When I first started working on this, I had no idea that anyone cared about redistricting reform other than us in Missouri,” he said. It took two years to get the original measure on the 2018 ballot and collect more than twice the amount of signatures necessary. “We won because it was really good policy.”


theintercept--2020-10-29--How Sri Preston Kulkarni’s Run for Congress Got Tangled Up in Indian Politics

Democratic voters in a Houston-area congressional district , the choice between Sri Preston Kulkarni and Troy Nehls is an obvious one .
Kulkarni , whose 2018 campaign was lauded for its grassroots outreach operation to Asian Americans , is backed by former Vice President Joe Biden and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee , which for the second consecutive election has prioritized Texas ’ s 22nd Congressional District in its effort to flip Republican seats .
Nehls , meanwhile , is the Donald Trump-supporting sheriff of Fort Bend County , with a checkered record that includes being fired from a previous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a year .
His narcotics unit has been accused of racial profiling for its disproportionate stops and searches of Latinos , which the sheriff ’ s office has denied .
But for some Asian American voters , the decision has become more complicated .
Though Kulkarni went to great lengths to court the quickly growing voting bloc in the Houston suburbs during his 2018 run against Republican Rep. Pete Olson , his efforts to cultivate a diverse coalition of supporters have gone awry among Indian Americans in the district .
Kulkarni ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ headlined by India ’ s far-right Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Trump , in addition to allegations that his political career was launched with the aid of individuals ideologically connected to Hindu extremist groups in India , have cracked open deep-seated political divisions among Muslim and Hindu communities that were largely unified around his 2018 campaign .
“ Our board is very mixed about how they feel about Sri , ” said Munira Bangee , president of Houston Muslim Democrats .
A recent survey showed that U.S.-India relations ranks among the least important @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but Kulkarni ’ s ties to members of U.S. Hindu nationalist groups that are connected to violent , anti-Muslim activity in India have caused him to lose some of his 2018 supporters .
A few have gone as far as backing Kulkarni ’ s Republican opponent — although Nehls himself has also been courted by pro-Modi groups and individuals during the race .
The seat in Texas ’ s 22nd District opened up after Olson , having defeated Kulkarni by 5 percentage points in 2018 , announced his retirement last year .
Kulkarni @ @ @ @ @ @ @ district — the majority of residents in Fort Bend County are people of color , and 17 percent are voting-eligible Asian Americans — includes contacting voters in 27 languages , up from 13 last cycle .
Kulkarni ’ s domestic political positions hew mainly to the center .
While he advocated for Medicare for All in 2018 , his current platform favors a public option and states that he opposes efforts to dismantle Medicaid and Medicare .
He has said that he is against defunding police departments and does not mention signature progressive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New Deal , in his platform .
His 2020 campaign has a host of endorsements from moderate Democrats , including the Blue Dog PAC , the political arm of the centrist Blue Dog Coalition , as well as from a couple progressive groups like Indivisible and environmentalist organization the Sierra Club .
Though District 22 was once a Republican stronghold , the race for the open congressional seat is neck and neck , with the latest internal Democratic poll showing Kulkarni with a slight lead .
In part because of the DCCC ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Kulkarni ’ s fundraising has far surpassed Nehls : $ 4.5 million to $ 1 million .
Kulkarni did not directly answer questions from The Intercept about his connections to members of Hindu nationalist groups operating in the United States .
In a statement , he said , “ Unfortunately , our opponent ’ s campaign has attempted to sow division in our district , by inflaming tension in our faith communities , including the Hindu and Muslim communities .
We absolutely reject such divisive tactics .
In a district as diverse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ achieve true representation is through strong coalitions which include every community.
” Nehls did not respond to a request for comment .
At the center of the controversy over Kulkarni ’ s donors is Ramesh Bhutada , the national vice president of the U.S. wing of the Indian Hindu nationalist paramilitary group Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh , or RSS .
In the 1970s , Bhutada helped establish Houston ’ s first chapter of the Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh , an organization under the RSS umbrella that is set up in the U.S. as a nonprofit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work and fostering community among Hindus living in America .
Bhutada has also been active in political organizing and fundraising for Modi ’ s election campaigns , as well as those of several U.S. politicians , notably Rep. Tulsi Gabbard , D-Hawaii , who has drawn her own criticism for ties to Hindu nationalist groups and been a vocal supporter of the Modi government .
Both Bhutada and his son Rishi were involved in organizing “ Howdy , Modi.
” Bhutada and his relatives were reportedly involved in an effort that raised a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s 2018 campaign .
Kulkarni himself has indicated that Bhutada was instrumental in getting his political career off the ground : After winning the Democratic nomination in the 2018 primary runoff , he said in a victory speech that Bhutada “ has been like a father to me on this campaign.
” Bhutada and his wife Kiran have donated a total of $ 29,000 to Kulkarni ’ s 2018 and 2020 campaigns , according to Federal Election Commission filings .
Speaking to The Intercept , Rishi Bhutada said that he and his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he happened upon an Indian name while researching District 22 ’ s Democratic primary candidates .
The younger Bhutada is on the boards of Hindu American Foundation , a controversial D.C.-based advocacy organization that invited Kulkarni to its 2018 gala , and Hindu American PAC , a political action committee that donates to politicians it deems represent Hindu American interests , including $ 22,500 to Kulkarni since 2018 .
Rishi Bhutada said he and his father were impressed by Kulkarni ’ s commitment to building diverse coalitions in the district , as well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like climate change and gun violence .
“ Sri was really pioneering something different , where he was strongly pushing outreach to every immigrant community in the district : Indian American , Pakistani American , Chinese American , Nigerian Americans , everybody , ” said Rishi Bhutada , who has donated $ 20,200 to Kulkarni along with his wife Shradha .
“ So we really thought , OK this guy is trying something new and is possibly the best candidate that the Democrats have had in this district since Nick Lampson .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really believed it.
” The Bhutadas began activating the Hindu American community to support Kulkarni , asking them to donate and volunteer for his campaign .
Among them were several individuals who helped organize “ Howdy , Modi ” and who are leaders in U.S. affiliates of the Hindu right .
Their connections and contributions to Kulkarni were first reported in August by independent journalist and activist Pieter Friedrich , who has been at the helm of an online campaign against Kulkarni and these donors .
These ties , not much noticed in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kulkarni ’ s current campaign , in large part due to his attendance at the Modi rally .
“ The ‘ Howdy , Modi ’ event caused a lot of tension between communities , ” said Shakeib , a voter in District 22 who asked to be identified only by his first name , citing fear of online harassment .
“ On the one hand , we had 50,000 people that came to the event , and on the other side , we had a huge protest happening .
I haven ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 25 years living in Houston.
” Shakeib has not yet decided who he will vote for , telling The Intercept that he hopes Kulkarni will condemn the RSS and consider returning the controversial donations in order to rebuild trust with the Muslim community before Election Day .
People were tipped off to Kulkarni ’ s attendance at the event after Harris County District Clerk Marilyn Burgess , a Democrat , posted a photo on Facebook posing with Kulkarni inside NRG Stadium in front of American and Indian flags .
The photo set @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Muslim Democrats ’ private Facebook group , Bangee said , over why he attended an event celebrating the right-wing Indian prime minister .
Kulkarni addressed the group later that week , saying that he went “ not as an endorsement of any specific figure or policy , but as a show of respect for the Indian-American community and especially the volunteers who worked hard to organize the largest collection of Indian-Americans in America ’ s history , many of whom were also volunteers on our campaign last year , and who worked alongside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get out voters last year.
” He said this was his same rationale for attending Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan ’ s speech during the Islamic Society of North America convention in Houston the month prior .
Kulkarni went on to say that he had spent more than 60 hours last September in private discussions with various stakeholders on the Indian government ’ s unilateral decision to revoke Kashmir ’ s partial autonomy and lock down the Muslim-majority region last August , an action that caused international alarm amid reports of an internet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights abuses .
In the weeks leading up to the November election , the online campaign against Kulkarni has painted him as effectively a stooge for Hindu nationalists in the U.S. — criticizing his close ties with individuals like Ramesh Bhutada and his apparent hesitance to disassociate himself from right-wing Hindu groups in the U.S. Late last month , Kulkarni lost the endorsement of Emgage , an American Muslim political action committee that had supported his 2018 run but decided to refrain from endorsing any candidate in the District 22 race this year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him .
“ The unfortunate thing is that when these attacks against Sri started , his response didn ’ t go far enough to give people comfort that he was disassociated from the views being attributed to him online , ” said Wa ’ el Alzayat , CEO of Emgage Foundation .
“ He also didn ’ t clearly disassociate himself from potential supporters who held those views , or were tied to organizations accused of extremism abroad.
” Kulkarni has tried to manage the controversy over his candidacy that has been raging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ response to criticism , he has given a handful of interviews in which he professed that he and his campaign have no connections to foreign organizations or ideologies , including the RSS .
His campaign added to its website that “ it does not accept support from any foreign entities , nor is it connected to or influenced by any foreign organizations , such as RSS , [ the Chinese Communist Party ] , or their affiliates.
” At a private meeting of board members of the Islamic Society of Greater Houston earlier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. Foreign Service official , was captured on video telling assembled guests that as little as two years prior , he had been unaware of the existence of the RSS and would have thought it was an acronym for Real Simple Syndication , a popular web feed .
After Emgage ’ s decision not to back his campaign this September , Kulkarni posted a “ letter to the Muslim community ” on his website , lamenting that the group had been pressured by “ nefarious actors ” to renege on its support for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Congress , he would oppose measures by the Modi government to strip the citizenship of Indian Muslims — an issue of serious concern to Indian Americans whose friends and families in India would be gravely endangered by such a move .
“ I want to make it clear that I am , and always have been , an ally to the Muslim community , ” Kulkarni wrote .
“ My goal throughout all of this is to serve as an intermediary between our many different communities to spark dialogue and understanding in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help people.
” Kulkarni has made a final push with the Muslim community , including visiting several mosques during the early-voting period that began on October 13 .
He also made one last appeal on Facebook to the Houston Muslim Democrats : “ For all those who want true representation in TX-22 , please don ’ t listen to the conspiracy theories and propaganda .
Look at our record and the choice is clear .
We need all of your support and we need it now.
” Though some skeptical voters were appeased @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some Indian Muslims in the Houston area , his response was too little , too late , after months of apparent equivocating about the Modi government ’ s discriminatory policies .
Those who spoke to The Intercept said that in the worst case , Kulkarni ’ s remarks appeared to be merely an attempt to salvage his dwindling base of Muslim supporters while also retaining his funding streams from individuals connected with the U.S. Hindu right .
“ People are still not happy , his base is still falling , ” Shakeib said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him is that he should condemn what ’ s going on in India , he should condemn the RSS , and he should return funding he ’ s gotten from these executives.
” Over the last few years , the potential influence of Hindutva money in U.S. politics has become a wider concern within the South Asian American diaspora .
Members of the U.S. Hindu right could leverage their funding and leadership in their communities to influence how elected officials respond to the deteriorating political situation in India , including by obstructing congressional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Raju Rajagopal , co-founder of Hindus for Human Rights , a progressive Hindu American advocacy group .
Rajagopal , who co-moderated a virtual town hall with Nehls last month , said that as a lifelong Democrat , he would never ask voters to back a Republican and that he has heard from some Democrats in the district that they may abstain from voting in the race .
As a hub of Hindu nationalist activity and the second-largest Indian American population in the country , Texas has also become one of the main states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hindutva money in politics .
Even as Kulkarni ’ s conflict is largely intra-Democratic , Texas Republicans have sought to capitalize on the dynamic .
In a series of since-deleted tweets on September 25 , Olson referred to contributions to Kulkarni from his major Hindu donors as “ big time money from Nazi sympathizers , ” despite the fact that Olson himself received $ 4,000 from Ramesh Bhutada in 2009 and 2011 .
During the 2018 race , Olson was caught on video referring to Kulkarni as a “ liberal , liberal , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ While Kulkarni was in the crowd at “ Howdy , Modi , ” Olson was part of the event ’ s congressional delegation and shook hands with the Indian prime minister on stage .
Olson did not respond to a request for comment .
On a national level , Republican Hindus last December launched Americans4Hindus , a Super PAC created in response to what its founders perceive as leftist , anti-India sentiment within the Democratic Party , particularly from Indian American politicians like Reps. Ro Khanna and Pramila Jayapal , who have sharply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ human rights abuses .
Several members of the group have been involved in pro-Modi and pro-BJP organizing , including its co-chairs , Romesh Japra and Raj Bhayani .
The group has endorsed Trump , as well as a number of congressional candidates , including Nehls , who attended an A4H Zoom call during the week of the Republican National Convention .
In September , Nehls and his brother , who is running to succeed him as sheriff , participated in an in-person event co-hosted by A4H and Hindu Congress of America , another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hindu American supporters in the district is Bangar Reddy , a Fort Bend County resident for 25 years .
He previously donated $ 1,000 to Kulkarni in June 2019 after he said he attended a meet-and-greet with the candidate at the home of Jugal Malani .
Malani is the chair of the nonprofit that organized “ Howdy , Modi , ” and , with his wife and son , has donated $ 18,300 to Kulkarni ’ s campaigns .
But Reddy , who was a transportation coordinator for the event , thought that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ participant .
Reddy ran in the district ’ s Republican primary and , after losing , joined Nehls ’ s campaign as outreach director .
Referring to Kulkarni as a leftist and a socialist , Reddy told The Intercept that he disagreed with the candidate making statements on Indian politics that Reddy perceived to be critical of the Indian government .
“ Over a period of time , things have changed .
Sri has become more far left , pandering to every community and promising everything , ” Reddy said .
“ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a litmus test that proved he ’ s neither for Indian Americans and doesn ’ t have a solid agenda.
” In addition to Nehls ’ s military and police service , Reddy told The Intercept that the sheriff has established himself as a familiar face in the district and built rapport with different communities .
“ Everybody knows him , and over a period of time he ’ s grown a good relationship with the Indian American community , ” he said .
Last August , the Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh visited the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the Hindu holiday Raksha Bandhan ; HSS chapters across the U.S. are known to visit police and fire departments , as well as local elected officials , during this holiday .
Nehls has shown himself to be uninitiated on many issues that are driving divisions in District 22 .
During the September virtual town hall co-hosted by Hindu and Muslim progressive groups , Nehls repeatedly expressed that he did not know enough about the Muslim ban or India ’ s Citizenship Amendment Act , which excludes Muslim migrants from Muslim-majority countries from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nears , Indian Muslims , and others who have become invested in the issue , are torn over who to vote for .
Following the Islamic Society of Greater Houston meeting with Kulkarni , an ISGH board member came out in support of Nehls , setting off further discord in the community as the board president tried to quell rumors about the organization endorsing any candidates , which it can not do as a 501 ( c ) ( 3 ) nonprofit .
But others say they will bite the bullet and vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a staunch Democrat and some are willing to look beyond his funding and support him , ” said Bangee of Houston Muslim Democrats , who lives in the neighboring 7th District .
“ They ’ ve held fundraisers and phone banked and donated … because a Democrat is better than a Republican .
”

For many Democratic voters in a Houston-area congressional district, the choice between Sri Preston Kulkarni and Troy Nehls is an obvious one. Kulkarni, whose 2018 campaign was lauded for its grassroots outreach operation to Asian Americans, is backed by former Vice President Joe Biden and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which for the second consecutive election has prioritized Texas’s 22nd Congressional District in its effort to flip Republican seats. Nehls, meanwhile, is the Donald Trump-supporting sheriff of Fort Bend County, with a checkered record that includes being fired from a previous police job for accruing 19 misconduct violations in a year. His narcotics unit has been accused of racial profiling for its disproportionate stops and searches of Latinos, which the sheriff’s office has denied.
But for some Asian American voters, the decision has become more complicated. Though Kulkarni went to great lengths to court the quickly growing voting bloc in the Houston suburbs during his 2018 run against Republican Rep. Pete Olson, his efforts to cultivate a diverse coalition of supporters have gone awry among Indian Americans in the district. Kulkarni’s attendance last year at a rally headlined by India’s far-right Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Trump, in addition to allegations that his political career was launched with the aid of individuals ideologically connected to Hindu extremist groups in India, have cracked open deep-seated political divisions among Muslim and Hindu communities that were largely unified around his 2018 campaign.
“Our board is very mixed about how they feel about Sri,” said Munira Bangee, president of Houston Muslim Democrats.
A recent survey showed that U.S.-India relations ranks among the least important issues for the Indian American electorate, but Kulkarni’s ties to members of U.S. Hindu nationalist groups that are connected to violent, anti-Muslim activity in India have caused him to lose some of his 2018 supporters. A few have gone as far as backing Kulkarni’s Republican opponent — although Nehls himself has also been courted by pro-Modi groups and individuals during the race.
The seat in Texas’s 22nd District opened up after Olson, having defeated Kulkarni by 5 percentage points in 2018, announced his retirement last year. Kulkarni’s field operation in the diverse district — the majority of residents in Fort Bend County are people of color, and 17 percent are voting-eligible Asian Americans — includes contacting voters in 27 languages, up from 13 last cycle. Kulkarni’s domestic political positions hew mainly to the center. While he advocated for Medicare for All in 2018, his current platform favors a public option and states that he opposes efforts to dismantle Medicaid and Medicare. He has said that he is against defunding police departments and does not mention signature progressive Democratic issues, such as a Green New Deal, in his platform. His 2020 campaign has a host of endorsements from moderate Democrats, including the Blue Dog PAC, the political arm of the centrist Blue Dog Coalition, as well as from a couple progressive groups like Indivisible and environmentalist organization the Sierra Club.
Though District 22 was once a Republican stronghold, the race for the open congressional seat is neck and neck, with the latest internal Democratic poll showing Kulkarni with a slight lead. In part because of the DCCC’s significant investment in flipping the district, Kulkarni’s fundraising has far surpassed Nehls: $4.5 million to $1 million.
Kulkarni did not directly answer questions from The Intercept about his connections to members of Hindu nationalist groups operating in the United States. In a statement, he said, “Unfortunately, our opponent’s campaign has attempted to sow division in our district, by inflaming tension in our faith communities, including the Hindu and Muslim communities. We absolutely reject such divisive tactics. In a district as diverse as TX-22, the only way to achieve true representation is through strong coalitions which include every community.” Nehls did not respond to a request for comment.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, set to win reelection, speaks to victorious party workers at the Bharatiya Janata Party headquarters in New Delhi on May 23, 2019. Photo: Atul Loke/Getty Images
“Like a Father to Me”
The past two years in India have been marked by an alarming escalation of political and sectarian conflict instigated by Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party. Under the BJP’s rule, India’s religious minorities, particularly Muslims, and Dalits and Indigenous groups, have faced violence and disenfranchisement.
Modi enjoys support in the U.S. from a like-minded segment of the Indian American public, including a Houston-based nonprofit connected to people affiliated with Hindu nationalist organizations across the U.S. that planned last year’s “Howdy, Modi” rally. He also has vehement opponents, however, including some who were appalled by Kulkarni’s appearance at the rally and the candidate’s acceptance of at least $60,000 in campaign contributions from members of U.S.-based Hindu nationalist groups and their family members.
At the center of the controversy over Kulkarni’s donors is Ramesh Bhutada, the national vice president of the U.S. wing of the Indian Hindu nationalist paramilitary group Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, or RSS. In the 1970s, Bhutada helped establish Houston’s first chapter of the Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh, an organization under the RSS umbrella that is set up in the U.S. as a nonprofit with a stated aim of doing service work and fostering community among Hindus living in America. Bhutada has also been active in political organizing for Modi’s election campaigns, as well as organizing and fundraising for the campaigns of several U.S. politicians, notably Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, who has drawn her own criticism for ties to Hindu nationalist groups and been a vocal supporter of the Modi government. Both Bhutada and his son Rishi were involved in organizing “Howdy, Modi.”
Bhutada and his relatives were reportedly involved in an effort that raised a total of $45,000 to jump-start Kulkarni’s 2018 campaign. Kulkarni himself has indicated that Bhutada was instrumental in getting his political career off the ground: After winning the Democratic nomination in the 2018 primary runoff, he said in a victory speech that Bhutada “has been like a father to me on this campaign.” Bhutada and his wife Kiran have donated a total of $29,000 to Kulkarni’s 2018 and 2020 campaigns, according to Federal Election Commission filings.
A cutout of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is seen at the “Howdy, Modi” rally in Houston’s NRG Stadium on Sept. 22, 2019. Photo: Todd Spoth for The Intercept
Speaking to The Intercept, Rishi Bhutada said that he and his father first met Kulkarni in 2018 after he happened upon an Indian name while researching District 22’s Democratic primary candidates. The younger Bhutada is on the boards of Hindu American Foundation, a controversial D.C.-based advocacy organization that invited Kulkarni to its 2018 gala, and Hindu American PAC, a political action committee that donates to politicians it deems represent Hindu American interests, including $22,500 to Kulkarni since 2018.
Rishi Bhutada said he and his father were impressed by Kulkarni’s commitment to building diverse coalitions in the district, as well as his positions on domestic policy issues like climate change and gun violence.
“Sri was really pioneering something different, where he was strongly pushing outreach to every immigrant community in the district: Indian American, Pakistani American, Chinese American, Nigerian Americans, everybody,” said Rishi Bhutada, who has donated $20,200 to Kulkarni along with his wife Shradha. “So we really thought, OK this guy is trying something new and is possibly the best candidate that the Democrats have had in this district since Nick Lampson. He’s got a shot and we really believed it.”
The Bhutadas began activating the Hindu American community to support Kulkarni, asking them to donate and volunteer for his campaign. Among them were several individuals who helped organize “Howdy, Modi” and who are leaders in U.S. affiliates of the Hindu right. Their connections and contributions to Kulkarni were first reported in August by independent journalist and activist Pieter Friedrich, who has been at the helm of an online campaign against Kulkarni and these donors.
These ties, not much noticed in 2018, have become highly contentious in Kulkarni’s current campaign, in large part due to his attendance at the Modi rally. “The ‘Howdy, Modi’ event caused a lot of tension between communities,” said Shakeib, a voter in District 22 who asked to be identified only by his first name, citing fear of online harassment. “On the one hand, we had 50,000 people that came to the event, and on the other side, we had a huge protest happening. I haven’t seen that kind of mass protest before in 25 years living in Houston.” Shakeib has not yet decided who he will vote for, telling The Intercept that he hopes Kulkarni will condemn the RSS and consider returning the controversial donations in order to rebuild trust with the Muslim community before Election Day.
People were tipped off to Kulkarni’s attendance at the event after Harris County District Clerk Marilyn Burgess, a Democrat, posted a photo on Facebook posing with Kulkarni inside NRG Stadium in front of American and Indian flags. The photo set off a heated conversation within the Houston Muslim Democrats’ private Facebook group, Bangee said, over why he attended an event celebrating the right-wing Indian prime minister.
Kulkarni addressed the group later that week, saying that he went “not as an endorsement of any specific figure or policy, but as a show of respect for the Indian-American community and especially the volunteers who worked hard to organize the largest collection of Indian-Americans in America’s history, many of whom were also volunteers on our campaign last year, and who worked alongside people in this forum to register and get out voters last year.” He said this was his same rationale for attending Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan’s speech during the Islamic Society of North America convention in Houston the month prior.
Kulkarni went on to say that he had spent more than 60 hours last September in private discussions with various stakeholders on the Indian government’s unilateral decision to revoke Kashmir’s partial autonomy and lock down the Muslim-majority region last August, an action that caused international alarm amid reports of an internet shutdown, extrajudicial detentions, and human rights abuses.
In the weeks leading up to the November election, the online campaign against Kulkarni has painted him as effectively a stooge for Hindu nationalists in the U.S. — criticizing his close ties with individuals like Ramesh Bhutada and his apparent hesitance to disassociate himself from right-wing Hindu groups in the U.S. Late last month, Kulkarni lost the endorsement of Emgage, an American Muslim political action committee that had supported his 2018 run but decided to refrain from endorsing any candidate in the District 22 race this year after facing pressure to distance itself from him.
“The unfortunate thing is that when these attacks against Sri started, his response didn’t go far enough to give people comfort that he was disassociated from the views being attributed to him online,” said Wa’el Alzayat, CEO of Emgage Foundation. “He also didn’t clearly disassociate himself from potential supporters who held those views, or were tied to organizations accused of extremism abroad.”
RSS volunteers perform a salute toward the RSS flag during shastra puja, a “worship of weapons,” during the Vijayadashami festival in Amritsar, India, on Oct. 25, 2020. Photo: Sameer Sehgal/Hindustan Times/Getty Images
Crisis Control
Kulkarni has tried to manage the controversy over his candidacy that has been raging for the past several months. In response to criticism, he has given a handful of interviews in which he professed that he and his campaign have no connections to foreign organizations or ideologies, including the RSS. His campaign added to its website that “it does not accept support from any foreign entities, nor is it connected to or influenced by any foreign organizations, such as RSS, [the Chinese Communist Party], or their affiliates.” At a private meeting of board members of the Islamic Society of Greater Houston earlier this month, Kulkarni, a former U.S. Foreign Service official, was captured on video telling assembled guests that as little as two years prior, he had been unaware of the existence of the RSS and would have thought it was an acronym for Real Simple Syndication, a popular web feed.
After Emgage’s decision not to back his campaign this September, Kulkarni posted a “letter to the Muslim community” on his website, lamenting that the group had been pressured by “nefarious actors” to renege on its support for him and vowing that if elected to Congress, he would oppose measures by the Modi government to strip the citizenship of Indian Muslims — an issue of serious concern to Indian Americans whose friends and families in India would be gravely endangered by such a move.
“I want to make it clear that I am, and always have been, an ally to the Muslim community,” Kulkarni wrote. “My goal throughout all of this is to serve as an intermediary between our many different communities to spark dialogue and understanding in the hopes of creating real change that can help people.”
Kulkarni has made a final push with the Muslim community, including visiting several mosques during the early-voting period that began on October 13. He also made one last appeal on Facebook to the Houston Muslim Democrats: “For all those who want true representation in TX-22, please don’t listen to the conspiracy theories and propaganda. Look at our record and the choice is clear. We need all of your support and we need it now.”
Though some skeptical voters were appeased by Kulkarni’s letter, for some Indian Muslims in the Houston area, his response was too little, too late, after months of apparent equivocating about the Modi government’s discriminatory policies. Those who spoke to The Intercept said that in the worst case, Kulkarni’s remarks appeared to be merely an attempt to salvage his dwindling base of Muslim supporters while also retaining his funding streams from individuals connected with the U.S. Hindu right.
“People are still not happy, his base is still falling,” Shakeib said. “What people are now asking him is that he should condemn what’s going on in India, he should condemn the RSS, and he should return funding he’s gotten from these executives.”
Rep. Pete Olson, R-Texas, sports a bandi jacket on the House floor before an address by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to a joint session of Congress on June 8, 2016. Photo: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Getty Images
Hindutva Money in Politics
Over the last few years, the potential influence of Hindutva money in U.S. politics has become a wider concern within the South Asian American diaspora. Members of the U.S. Hindu right could leverage their funding and leadership in their communities to influence how elected officials respond to the deteriorating political situation in India, including by obstructing congressional censure of the Modi government, said Raju Rajagopal, co-founder of Hindus for Human Rights, a progressive Hindu American advocacy group. Rajagopal, who co-moderated a virtual town hall with Nehls last month, said that as a lifelong Democrat, he would never ask voters to back a Republican and that he has heard from some Democrats in the district that they may abstain from voting in the race.
As a hub of Hindu nationalist activity and the second-largest Indian American population in the country, Texas has also become one of the main states where voters are paying more attention to Hindutva money in politics. Even as Kulkarni’s conflict is largely intra-Democratic, Texas Republicans have sought to capitalize on the dynamic. In a series of since-deleted tweets on September 25, Olson referred to contributions to Kulkarni from his major Hindu donors as “big time money from Nazi sympathizers,” despite the fact that Olson himself received $4,000 from Ramesh Bhutada in 2009 and 2011. During the 2018 race, Olson was caught on video referring to Kulkarni as a “liberal, liberal, liberal Indo-American who is a carpetbagger.” While Kulkarni was in the crowd at “Howdy, Modi,” Olson was part of the event’s congressional delegation and shook hands with the Indian prime minister on stage. Olson did not respond to a request for comment.
On a national level, Republican Hindus last December launched Americans4Hindus, a Super PAC created in response to what its founders perceive as leftist, anti-India sentiment within the Democratic Party, particularly from Indian American politicians like Reps. Ro Khanna and Pramila Jayapal, who have sharply criticized Modi over his government’s human rights abuses. Several members of the group have been involved in pro-Modi and pro-BJP organizing, including its co-chairs, Romesh Japra and Raj Bhayani.
The group has endorsed Trump, as well as a number of congressional candidates, including Nehls, who attended an A4H Zoom call during the week of the Republican National Convention. In September, Nehls and his brother, who is running to succeed him as sheriff, participated in an in-person event co-hosted by A4H and Hindu Congress of America, another right-wing group.
Fort Bend County Sheriff Troy Nehls and Lucas Wu lift Ethan Wu into an airboat as they are evacuated from rising waters from Tropical Storm Harvey at the Orchard Lakes subdivision on Aug. 27, 2017, in unincorporated Fort Bend County, Texas. Photo: Brett Coomer/Houston Chronicle/AP
Switching Sides
Among Nehls’s Hindu American supporters in the district is Bangar Reddy, a Fort Bend County resident for 25 years. He previously donated $1,000 to Kulkarni in June 2019 after he said he attended a meet-and-greet with the candidate at the home of Jugal Malani. Malani is the chair of the nonprofit that organized “Howdy, Modi,” and, with his wife and son, has donated $18,300 to Kulkarni’s campaigns. But Reddy, who was a transportation coordinator for the event, thought that Kulkarni should have been a more active participant.
Reddy ran in the district’s Republican primary and, after losing, joined Nehls’s campaign as outreach director. Referring to Kulkarni as a leftist and a socialist, Reddy told The Intercept that he disagreed with the candidate making statements on Indian politics that Reddy perceived to be critical of the Indian government.
“Over a period of time, things have changed. Sri has become more far left, pandering to every community and promising everything,” Reddy said. “The ‘Howdy, Modi’ event was a litmus test that proved he’s neither for Indian Americans and doesn’t have a solid agenda.”
In addition to Nehls’s military and police service, Reddy told The Intercept that the sheriff has established himself as a familiar face in the district and built rapport with different communities. “Everybody knows him, and over a period of time he’s grown a good relationship with the Indian American community,” he said.
Last August, the Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh visited the Fort Bend County Sheriff’s Office for the Hindu holiday Raksha Bandhan; HSS chapters across the U.S. are known to visit police and fire departments, as well as local elected officials, during this holiday.
Nehls has shown himself to be uninitiated on many issues that are driving divisions in District 22. During the September virtual town hall co-hosted by Hindu and Muslim progressive groups, Nehls repeatedly expressed that he did not know enough about the Muslim ban or India’s Citizenship Amendment Act, which excludes Muslim migrants from Muslim-majority countries from receiving expedited citizenship.
As Election Day nears, Indian Muslims, and others who have become invested in the issue, are torn over who to vote for. Following the Islamic Society of Greater Houston meeting with Kulkarni, an ISGH board member came out in support of Nehls, setting off further discord in the community as the board president tried to quell rumors about the organization endorsing any candidates, which it cannot do as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit.
But others say they will bite the bullet and vote for Kulkarni. “Everybody’s a staunch Democrat and some are willing to look beyond his funding and support him,” said Bangee of Houston Muslim Democrats, who lives in the neighboring 7th District. “They’ve held fundraisers and phone banked and donated … because a Democrat is better than a Republican.”
Update: Oct. 30, 2020
This article has been updated to clarify Ramesh Bhutada’s history of political organizing and fundraising.


theintercept--2020-10-29--The Black Voters Who Could Swing Pennsylvania

The Intercept ’ s Akela Lacy reports from Philadelphia , a Democratic stronghold where Black voters could cast decisive votes in a state that helped swing the 2016 election .
This year , former Vice President Joe Biden headquartered his campaign in the city , while President Donald Trump placed it at the center of his voter fraud conspiracy theories .
The Intercept interviewed dozens of residents in late September : shop owners who find hope in Biden ’ s coronavirus pandemic plan ; early voters outside City Hall eager to cast their ballot rejecting Trump , but full of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote counts ; housing and racial justice activists whose battles with local Democratic officials have soured them on the party ’ s national ticket ; a pair of formerly incarcerated organizers trying to activate new voters in places where participation fell off in the June primary ; and a pastor who hosts Trump campaign events at his church , hoping his candidate can whittle away at Biden ’ s base just enough to make a difference in November .
This video was filmed before Philadelphia police shot and killed 27-year-old Walter Wallace Jr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the protests that followed .
Pennsylvania Gov .
Tom Wolf approved Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney ’ s request to dispatch National Guard troops to the city on Tuesday ; several hundred members are being mobilized .

The Intercept’s Akela Lacy reports from Philadelphia, a Democratic stronghold where Black voters could cast decisive votes in a state that helped swing the 2016 election. This year, former Vice President Joe Biden headquartered his campaign in the city, while President Donald Trump placed it at the center of his voter fraud conspiracy theories.
The Intercept interviewed dozens of residents in late September: shop owners who find hope in Biden’s coronavirus pandemic plan; early voters outside City Hall eager to cast their ballot rejecting Trump, but full of questions about how to ensure that their vote counts; housing and racial justice activists whose battles with local Democratic officials have soured them on the party’s national ticket; a pair of formerly incarcerated organizers trying to activate new voters in places where participation fell off in the June primary; and a pastor who hosts Trump campaign events at his church, hoping his candidate can whittle away at Biden’s base just enough to make a difference in November.
This video was filmed before Philadelphia police shot and killed 27-year-old Walter Wallace Jr. on October 26 in West Philadelphia, and the protests that followed. Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf approved Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney’s request to dispatch National Guard troops to the city on Tuesday; several hundred members are being mobilized.