Mark Carney's next challenge: minority rule
It's official: the Liberals have a minority government.
They've got ambitious plans, and they've made big promises. But even though they got a substantial 44 per cent of the popular vote, they're now leading a country where 41 per cent of voters coalesced around their biggest opponent, the Conservatives. And they're still dealing with Donald Trump's trade war.
So how will they make it work?
Today, Paul Wells — a longtime political journalist who also publishes a Substack under his own name — joins us to talk about the Liberals' path forward.
For transcripts of Front Burner, please visit: https://www.cbc.ca/radio/frontburner/transcripts
Subscribe to Front Burner on your favourite podcast app.
Listen on Apple Podcasts
Listen on Spotify
Listen on YouTube
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
12 minutes ago
- CTV News
Debate is underway in the U.S. Senate on Trump's big bill, but overnight voting is delayed
WASHINGTON —Debate is underway in the U.S. Senate for an all-night session Sunday, with Republicans wrestling President Donald Trump's big bill of tax breaks and spending cuts over mounting Democratic opposition -- and even some brake-pumping over the budget slashing by the president himself. The outcome from the weekend of work in the Senate remains uncertain and highly volatile, and overnight voting has been pushed off until Monday. GOP leaders are rushing to meet Trump's Fourth of July deadline to pass the package, but they barely secured enough support to muscle it past a procedural Saturday night hurdle in a tense scene. A handful of Republican holdouts revolted, and it took phone calls from Trump and a visit from Vice President JD Vance to keep it on track. GOP Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina announced Sunday he would not seek reelection after Trump badgered him for saying he could not vote for the bill with its steep Medicaid cuts. A new analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found that 11.8 million more Americans would become uninsured by 2034 if the bill became law. It also said the package would increase the deficit by nearly $3.3 trillion over the decade. But other Senate Republicans, along with conservatives in the House, are pushing for steeper cuts, particularly to health care, drawing their own unexpected warning from Trump. 'Don't go too crazy!' the president posted on social media. 'REMEMBER, you still have to get reelected.' All told, the Senate bill includes some $4 trillion in tax cuts, making permanent Trump's 2017 rates, which would expire at the end of the year if Congress fails to act, while adding the new ones he campaigned on, including no taxes on tips. The Senate package would roll back billions in green energy tax credits that Democrats warn will wipe out wind and solar investments nationwide, and impose $1.2 trillion in cuts, largely to Medicaid and food stamps, by imposing work requirements and making sign-up eligibility more stringent. Additionally, the bill would provide a $350 billion infusion for border and national security, including for deportations, some of it paid for with new fees charged to immigrants. If the Senate can pass the bill, it would need to return to the House. Speaker Mike Johnson has told lawmakers to be on call for a return to Washington this week. Democrats ready to fight all night Unable to stop the march toward passage of the 940-page bill, the Democrats as the minority party in Congress is using the tools at its disposal to delay and drag out the process. Democrats forced a full reading of the text, which took some 16 hours. Then senators took over the debate, filling the chamber with speeches, while Republicans largely stood aside. 'Reckless and irresponsible,' said Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan. 'A gift to the billionaire class,' said Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Sen. Patty Murray, the ranking Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, raised particular concern about the accounting method being used by the Republicans, which says the tax breaks from Trump's first term are now 'current policy' and the cost of extending them should not be counted toward deficits. 'In my 33 years here in the United States Senate, things have never -- never -- worked this way,' said Murray, the longest-serving Democrat on the Budget Committee. She said that kind of 'magic math' won't fly with Americans trying to balance their own household books. 'Go back home and try that game with your constituents,' she said. 'We still need to kick people off their health care -- that's too expensive. We still need to close those hospitals -- we have to cut costs. And we still have to kick people off SNAP -- because the debt is out of control.' Sanders said Tillis' decision not to seek reelection shows the hold that Trump's cult of personality has over the GOP. 'We are literally taking food out of the mouths of hungry kids,' Sanders said, while giving tax breaks to Jeff Bezos and other wealthy billionaires. GOP leaders unfazed Republicans are using their majorities to push aside Democratic opposition, and appeared undeterred, even as they have run into a series of political and policy setbacks. 'We're going to pass the 'Big, beautiful bill,' said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., the Budget Committee chairman. The holdout Republicans remain reluctant to give their votes, and their leaders have almost no room to spare, given their narrow majorities. Essentially, they can afford three dissenters in the Senate, with its 53-47 GOP edge, and about as many in the House, if all members are present and voting. Trump, who has at times allowed wiggle room on his deadline, kept the pressure on lawmakers to finish. He threatened to campaign aginst Tillis, who was worried that Medicaid cuts would leave many without health care in his state. Trump badgered Tillis again on Sunday morning, saying the senator 'has hurt the great people of North Carolina.' Later Sunday, Tillis issued a lengthy statement announcing he would not seek reelection in 2026. In an impassioned evening speech, Tillis shared his views arguing the Senate approach is a betrayal of Trump's promise not to kick people off health care. 'We could take the time to get this right,' he thundered. But until then, he said he would remain opposed. Democrats can't filibuster, but can stall Using a congressional process called budget reconciliation, the Republicans can rely on a simple majority vote in the Senate, rather than the typical 60-vote threshold needed to overcome objections. Without the filibuster, Democrats have latched on to other tools to mount their objections. One is the full reading of the bill text, which has been done in past situations. Democrats also intend to use their full 10 hours of available debate time, now underway. And then Democrats are prepared to propose dozens of amendments to the package, a process called vote-a-rama. But Republicans late Sunday postponed that expected overnight session to early Monday. GOP senators to watch As Saturday's vote tally teetered, attention turned to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who was surrounded by GOP leaders in intense conversation. She voted 'yes.' Several provisions in the package are designed for her state in Alaska, but some were out of compliance of the strict rules by the Senate parliamentarian. A short time later, Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., drew holdouts Sen. Rick Scott of Florida, Mike Lee of Utah and Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming to his office. Vance joined in. Later, Scott said, 'We all want to get to yes.'
CTV News
2 hours ago
- CTV News
Debate is underway in U.S. Senate on Trump's big bill. It may go all night
WASHINGTON —Debate is underway in the Senate for an all-night session Sunday, with Republicans wrestling President Donald Trump's big bill of tax breaks and spending cuts over mounting Democratic opposition -- and even some brake-pumping over the budget slashing by the president himself. The outcome from the weekend of work in the Senate remains uncertain and highly volatile. GOP leaders are rushing to meet Trump's Fourth of July deadline to pass the package, but they barely secured enough support to muscle it past a procedural hurdle in a tense scene the day before. A handful of Republican holdouts revolted, and it took phone calls from Trump and a visit from Vice President JD Vance to keep it on track. GOP Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina announced Sunday he would not seek reelection after Trump badgered him for saying he could not vote for the bill with its steep Medicaid cuts. A new analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found that 11.8 million more Americans would become uninsured by 2034 if the bill became law. It also said the package would increase the deficit by nearly $3.3 trillion over the decade. But other Senate Republicans, along with conservatives in the House, are pushing for steeper cuts, particularly to health care, drawing their own unexpected warning from Trump. 'Don't go too crazy!' the president posted on social media. 'REMEMBER, you still have to get reelected.' All told, the Senate bill includes some $4 trillion in tax cuts, making permanent Trump's 2017 rates, which would expire at the end of the year if Congress fails to act, while adding the new ones he campaigned on, including no taxes on tips. The Senate package would roll back billions in green energy tax credits that Democrats warn will wipe out wind and solar investments nationwide, and impose $1.2 trillion in cuts, largely to Medicaid and food stamps, by imposing work requirements and making sign-up eligibility more stringent. Additionally, the bill would provide a $350 billion infusion for border and national security, including for deportations, some of it paid for with new fees charged to immigrants. If the Senate can push through overnight voting and pass the bill, it would need to return to the House. Speaker Mike Johnson has told lawmakers to be on call for a return to Washington this coming week. Democrats ready to fight all night Unable to stop the march toward passage of the 940-page bill, the Democrats as the minority party in Congress is using the tools at its disposal to delay and drag out the process. Democrats forced a full reading of the text, which took some 16 hours, ending Sunday afternoon. Then senators took over the debate, filling the chamber with speeches, while Republicans largely stood aside. 'Reckless and irresponsible,' said Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan. 'A gift to the billionaire class,' said Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Sen. Patty Murray, the ranking Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, raised particular concern about the accounting method being used by the Republicans, which says the tax breaks from Trump's first term, in 2017, are now 'current policy' and the cost of extending them should not be counted toward deficits. 'In my 33 years here in the United States Senate, things have never -- never -- worked this way,' said Murray, the longest-serving Democrat on the Budget Committee. She said that kind of 'magic math' won't fly with Americans trying to balance their own household books. 'Go back home and try that game with your constituents,' she said. 'We still need to kick people off their health care -- that's too expensive. We still need to close those hospitals -- we have to cut costs. And we still have to kick people off SNAP -- because the debt is out of control.' Sanders said Tillis' decision not to seek reelection shows the hold that Trump's cult of personality has over the GOP. 'We are literally taking food out of the mouths of hungry kids,' Sanders said, while giving tax breaks to Jeff Bezos and other wealthy billionaires. GOP leaders unphased Republicans are using their majorities to push aside Democratic opposition, and appeared undeterred, even as they have run into a series of political and policy setbacks. 'We're going to pass the 'Big, beautiful bill,' said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., the Budget Committee chairman. 'And President Trump is going to sign it.' The holdout Republicans remain reluctant to give their votes, and their leaders have almost no room to spare, given their narrow majorities. Essentially, they can afford three dissenters in the Senate, with its 53-47 GOP edge, and about as many in the House, if all members are present and voting. Trump, who has at times allowed wiggle room on his deadline, kept the pressure on lawmakers to finish. He threatened to campaign against Tillis, who was worried that Medicaid cuts would leave many without health care in his state. Trump badgered Tillis again on Sunday morning, saying the senator 'has hurt the great people of North Carolina.' Later Sunday, Tillis issued a lengthy statement announcing he would not seek reelection in 2026. Democrats can't filibuster, but can stall Using a congressional process called budget reconciliation, the Republicans can muscle the bill through on a simple majority vote in the Senate, rather than the typical 60-vote threshold needed to overcome objections. Without the filibuster, Democrats have latched on to other tools to mount their objections. One is the full reading of the bill text, which has been done in past situations. Democrats also intend to use their full 10 hours of available debate time, now underway. And then Democrats are prepared to propose dozens of amendments to the package that would be considered in an all-night voting session -- or all-day, depending on the hour. GOP senators to watch As Saturday's vote tally teetered, attention turned to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who was surrounded by GOP leaders in intense conversation. She voted 'yes.' Several provisions in the package are designed for her state in Alaska. A short time later, Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., drew holdouts Sen. Rick Scott of Florida, Mike Lee of Utah and Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming to his office. Vance joined in. The talks dragged on. Then Vance led them all back in to vote. Later, Scott said he had met with the president, adding, 'We all want to get to yes.' Lee said the group 'had an internal discussion about the strategy to achieve more savings and more deficit reduction, and I feel good about the direction where this is going, and more to come.'
Globe and Mail
2 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
U.S. Supreme Court ruling jeopardizes birthright citizenship
An explosive constitutional battle broke out over the weekend in the U.S., as the country assessed the impact of a Supreme Court decision that jeopardized the notion of 'birthright citizenship' and inflamed all the passions of the Donald Trump era. The high court ruled Friday that lower courts could not 'stay,' or delay, the implementation of executive orders or laws. The decision has immediate implications beyond ending nationwide injunctions, which has been used against executive-branch policies of both Republican and Democratic administrations but came into full flower in the Joe Biden and Trump years. The lower courts had questioned the constitutionality of Mr. Trump's birthright citizenship policy, announced the day he returned to the White House on Jan. 20. So the Supreme Court's decision opened the way, if only temporarily, to permit the administration to deny American citizenship to some people born in the U.S. It's an initiative by the Trump administration that has roiled American politics and has the potential of altering the composition of the country's population. Until Friday's ruling, it was a common assumption that the 14th Amendment's provision granting citizenship to all born in the U.S. was beyond debate. But, as it has done in a full gamut of areas, the Trump administration has taken what was a settled matter and, in the process, unsettled American politics. Trump administration ends legal protections for half-million Haitians who now face deportations The Supreme Court's decision spurred fresh determination from the Trump camp to expand its drive against migrants, prompted indignant howls of protest from migrant-rights activists. It triggered yet another national debate on the Constitution, the prerogatives of the executive branch, and the policies of the President. The Trump offensive against all the assumptions of American civic life took special aim at the very first sentence of the post-Civil War amendment, passed by Congress in 1866 and confirmed by the states two years later: 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.' For 157 years, the interpretation of that language was largely immune to challenge, even though the context was the granting of citizenship to the enslaved persons who had been freed in the aftermath of the Civil War. The meaning was clear: Those born in the U.S. were, by definition, Americans. Even an earlier Supreme Court, in 1898, affirmed that notion, and for more than a century and a quarter, it seemed unassailable. But the new focus on immigration, and what the Trump administration considered the promiscuous conferring of American citizenship on the children of those residing in the country illegally, transformed a given to a right that the President and anti-immigrant activists wanted to take away. Many legal scholars doubt the Trump tactic, and argue that what the words say is what the amendment means. But the Trump administration argues that the context of the 14th amendment – part of a flurry of changes in American life after the Civil War that tore the country apart geographically, culturally, economically, and morally – means that the language reflected a specific moment in time and a specific circumstance. They argue that the 19th-century amendment doesn't apply to far different 21st-century circumstances. The irony is that many of those who support that position also embrace a 'strict constructionist' view of the Constitution, urging in other cases that the words of the founding American document (which includes the 25 amendments that followed) are to be taken literally, shorn of context or interpretation. The Supreme Court's decision actually said nothing about birthright citizenship. It merely argued that, as Justice Amy Coney Barrett put it, excesses by the executive branch can't be stanched by excesses of the judicial branch. That means that lower-court judges skeptical of, or opposed to, Trump policies cannot invalidate those initiatives. The fact that the court test involved the Trump birthright citizenship case opened the administration to pursue its original intention, the denial of citizenship to some children of migrants and to make them vulnerable to deportation. This was an especially important target to the administration because of its view that large numbers of migrants were having children in the U.S., or coming to the country, for the express purpose of rendering their children American citizens. A May study by the Migration Policy Institute at Penn State University found that, if Mr. Trump prevailed, about 255,000 children born on U.S. soil each year would be denied American citizenship. The Supreme Court likely will rule on birthright citizenship in its next term, which begins in October, though it is possible some of the suits already filed may prompt it to make a swifter ruling. Opinion: The missing pieces migrants leave behind The Trump administration must wait about a month before taking action in the 28 states that haven't challenged the President's order. Opponents of the policy didn't wait to take legal action. The court challenges came first from New Hampshire and New Jersey, but other states likely will follow, taking advantage of the fact the Supreme Court's decision offered another opening for action. It's an analogue to the opening granted to the Trump administration. The Supreme Court ruled that class-action suits could be filed in federal district courts that might, in specific geographical areas, bar enforcement of the Trump order. This issue has been confined thus far to the executive and judicial branches. But shortly after the Trump executive order, legislation was filed on Capitol Hill that would grant citizenship only to children born to a parent who is a U.S. citizen or national, to a lawful permanent resident living in the country, or to a non-American legally admitted to the country performing active service in the armed services. No congressional action has been taken.
