Democrats Block Data Center Electricity Bill

Senate Democrats have Blocked a Bill that seeks to address Data Center Electricity Costs, calling it Ineffective and Toothless, though the Legislation passed the House with Significant Bipartisan Support. The Democrats did Not provide the Ratepayer Protection Act, with the 60 Votes needed to Overcome the Filibuster, Blocking it in a Procedural Vote on 9/30/2026, 57-43.

Democratic Sens. Jon Ossoff (GA), Raphael Warnock (GA), Maggie Hassan (NH), and Amy Klobuchar (MN) Voted with Republicans in Favor of the Bbill. Ossoff faces a Tough Senate race in 11/2026, while Klobuchar is Running for Governor of MN. The Measure, which has been Pushed in the Senate by Vulnerable Republican Sen. Jon Husted (OH), would Force States to consider Adopting Standards to make Tech Companies Pay for the additional Electricity Costs caused by their Data Centers.

It does Not actually Force States to Adopt these Standards and could Ultimately Lead to-No-Action, which is why its Detractors are Calling the legislation Ineffective. Democrats have said the Chamber should Instead take up Legislation that Mandates that Big Tech Cover the Cost “Americans are demanding real guardrails on AI and data centers, but all the Republicans offer is a toothless messaging bill. The bill is a fraud. I can sum up the shortcomings of the Republican data center bill with one word: optional. The bill is optional,” Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said T9/29/2026 on the Senate floor.

The Legislation’s Supporters note that while it won’t Fix the Entire Problem, it could Spur Consideration of such Standards in States that were Not already taking Action. The Bill Passed the House. 9/2026 417-3. The Senate Push comes as Large Data Centers, and their Potential to Hike Electricity Rates due to their Significant Power Demand, receive Increasing Public Backlash.

In Ohio in particular, former Sen. Sherrod Brown (D), who is Running to try to Oust Husted, has Criticized His Opponent as “the point man to bring these data centers to Ohio” during Husted’s time as Lieutenant Governor. An Internal Memo from the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) described Data Centers as “the anchor hanging around Husted’s neck.”

However, Senators appear Ppoised to take a Second Crack at the Ratepayer Issue, saying Bipartisan Permitting Reform Legislation Unveiled 9/30/2026 has Provisions that would ensure Data Center Developers have to Pay for Excess Costs. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) particularly Credited Husted with the Provision.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

Trump Administration Nearly Isolated at UN

A heavily one-sided vote at the United Nations places Washington at odds with almost the entire membership, arriving just as the U.S. finally has a confirmed Ambassador at the global body. The United Nations has delivered an overwhelmingly lopsided vote against a move by the Trump(R) administration, a diplomatic rebuke that critics characterized as “indefensible”. The result leaves Washington nearly isolated from the rest of the international body at a time when the U.S. is actively seeking backing on several Major issues.

The significance lies in the rarity of near-unanimous agreement at the UN, and in what the tally says about the distance between Washington and even some of its traditional allies. The vote also comes shortly after the U.S. filled its ambassadorial post following an eight-month vacancy. According to the report, member states opposed the Trump administration’s move by such a wide margin that the U.S. was left with almost no support. The description “indefensible” quickly became associated with the episode, portraying the administration’s position as one that even governments normally friendly toward Washington were unwilling to publicly defend.

Near-unanimous votes at the United Nations usually emerge only under unusual circumstances. Disputes involving sanctions, territorial questions or unilateral policy declarations can produce overwhelming margins when one country is viewed as acting against a long-established international consensus. The Trump administration has encountered similar situations before. In 12/2017, the UN General Assembly voted 128 to 9, with 35 abstentions, to condemn Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital despite explicit warnings that U.S. aid could be reduced for countries voting against Washington. Britain, France, Germany and Japan, supported the resolution,

The U.S. Mission to the United Nations has repeatedly presented the Administration’s foreign policy as focused on concrete results rather than symbolic statements. Before a Security Council vote on a U.S. drafted Gaza Resolution, Ambassador Mike Waltz (R) argued that broad regional support, including backing from Arab and Muslim-majority countries, made opposition to the American proposal difficult to justify. Deputy Representative Tammy Bruce has similarly told the Council that the administration “did not issue strongly worded letters,” instead pointing to negotiated agreements and practical steps involving Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Gaza as examples of U.S. leadership.

From the administration’s standpoint, therefore, votes of this kind can be seen as the price of challenging an international system it regards as ineffective. From the perspective of much of the UN membership, the tally illustrates how isolated Washington can become when it acts largely on its own. The timing adds to the diplomatic significance. The Senate confirmed Mike Waltz, Trump’s former national security adviser, as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations on September 19, 2025, by a 47-43 vote following months of delays, according to CBS News. The position had remained vacant for eight months, leaving Washington without a confirmed top envoy at the UN while conflicts in Ukraine, Gaza and other regions continued.

Waltz’s nomination had also been complicated by his involvement in the Signal chat controversy, in which senior administration officials inadvertently shared sensitive information concerning a military strike in Yemen. He nonetheless moved through his confirmation hearing with relatively limited disruption, with the controversy emerging more than an hour into the questioning. Now, only a short time into the position, Waltz faces a diplomatic environment in which the United States has just absorbed one of the most overwhelming rebukes the international body can deliver.

Diplomats often interpret UN votes differently depending on the size of the margin. A close defeat can be presented as a disagreement among allies. An overwhelming loss sends a different message: it suggests that the U.S. position failed to draw meaningful support, including from countries that might normally avoid directly opposing Washington. The 2017 Jerusalem vote demonstrated a similar dynamic. Trump threatened consequences for governments receiving American aid, yet the General Assembly still voted decisively against the U.S. position. Although the resolution was nonbinding and largely symbolic, The New York Times reported that it illustrated how the administration’s break with a decades-old international consensus had contributed to U.S. diplomatic isolation.

Symbolic defeats can still carry practical effects. Repeatedly finding itself isolated in major votes can weaken the political capital Washington relies on when seeking support for Security Council initiatives it considers important, including efforts such as the resolution backing Trump’s 20-point Gaza peace plan. Several aspects of the latest vote remain unresolved in the available reporting. The precise language of the resolution, the final tally and the identities of any governments that sided with the United States have not been fully documented in the material currently available. The exact mechanics of the vote should therefore be treated as still developing.

It also remains uncertain whether the administration will regard the result as an acceptable diplomatic cost or reconsider its approach. The 2017 episode shows that retaliation through reductions in aid has previously been raised as an option, while more recent Gaza diplomacy demonstrates that the United States can still build broader coalitions when it devotes sufficient effort to doing so.

The broader pattern is clearer. The administration has shown a willingness to accept overwhelming opposition at the UN when it believes its policy position is justified, while member states have shown an increasing readiness to register that disagreement openly. The next question is whether Waltz, newly confirmed and still early in his tenure, can reduce a diplomatic divide that votes such as this continue to expose in near-unanimous terms.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

Trump EO Renaming AI to Super Intelligence

Trump (R) Signed an Executive Order (EO) 9/29/2026 Tenaming " Intelligence" (AI) to “super intelligence” (SI) in an Effort to Rebrand the Technology amid Calls to Rein in its Development. Trump has repeatedly Characterized Whistleblowers' Warnings of Insufficient Oversight as Overblown and a "hoax."

The EO said that the Term “Super Intelligence” better Captures the Capabilities of the Rapidly Developing Technology, which does “much more than imitate or automate discrete aspects of human intelligence.”

“As these capabilities continue to improve, they increasingly represent not merely artificial intelligence, but a new era of Super Intelligence,” the Order said. “The terminology used by the Federal Government should Reflect the Transformative Capabilities of these Technologies and the Limitless Opportunities they create for the American People. It’s not artificial, we all agree on that,” Trump said To Reporters.

In the AI Space, the Term "Super Intelligence" already Refers to a Specific kind of AI, that Exceeds the Cognitive Capabilities of Humans in Virtually All Aspects of Tthinking. SI has not yet been Achieved.

The EO requires All Fderal Agencies to use the New Term, when Referring to the Technology in Ppublic Communications, Websites, Reports, and Policy Documents. Micha el Kratsios, Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, will also Determine whether an Official Definition of the New Term should be Modified or Expanded, according to the Order.

The Rebranding comes a week after Trump began using the New Term at the U.N. General Assembly, pushing back against Calls for Greater Regulation of the Industry. He Assured World Leaders that Tech Executives would Erect the Appropriate Guardrails on their Models, Despite Mmounting Concerns Relating to AI Replacing Jobs and Iinstances of Rogue Agents accessing Government Websites or initiating Cyberattacks.

Tech Executive Signed a "morally binding” Constitution on AI on 9/29/2026 at the White House. The Details of the Cconstitution and how it would affect SI Regulation were Not immediately Clear. Trump has Reiterated He would Not Slow down SI Growth and that Maintaining American Dominance over the Technology was a National Security concern.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

UN Climate Negotiations COP31 in Türkiye

Will the World's Governments allow the Trump (R) Administration to Bully them into continued Dependence on Fossil Fuels? Will the Governments Offer more Speeches and Empty Promises, or Deliver a Concrete Plan to Phase-Out the Fossil Fuels that Drive the Climate and Economic Crisis?

During New York Climate Week last week.Momentum Built to Fight for Climate Justice and Set the Stage for Concrete Action at COP31. Members of the Nepali Diaspora and Frontline Communities, who brought their Demand for Climate Reparations to the UN’s Doorstep, following Fossil Fueled Glacial Floods that Killed over 1400+ with over 5000 People still Missing, in Collaboration with Partners at Desis Rising Up & Moving, Institute for Policy Studies, and The Asian Peoples' Movement on Debt and Development. A Group of People hold Signs that Call for climate Reparations for Nepal.

- Held strategy sessions on halting major areas of fossil fuel expansion, including exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) and the dirty power plants that feed data centers

- New Data, Exposing how TotalEnergies Sources 71% of its LNG into Europe, from Countries with Governments Hostile to the EU, putting the Region at Rrisk.

- To the Hypocrisy of the Countries that have Done the Mmost Damage to Our Climate, and the Least to Repair it, Demanding Credible Roadmaps for a Fair, Fast, and funded, Fossil Fuel Phaseout.

- They made the Case that Phasing out Fossil Fuels isn’t just a Climate Necessity, it’s about making Life more Affordable and Secure. At a time when People are Struggling with High Energy and Food Bills, continued Dependence on Volatile Fossil Fuels leaves Families and Economies exposed to Price Shocks. A Fair Transition to Renewable Energy can Help Lower Costs, Create Good Green Jobs, and Build Greater Energy Security and Resilience.

That’s why We Pushed Governments to Move Beyond Vague Commitments and put Forward Credible National Roadmaps, Backed by Public Funding and Policies that Protect Workers and Communities. And We Wworked with Partners to Ensure Global South Countries have the Finance and Policy Space they need to make the Transition to Affordable Renewable Energy on Fair Terms.

The World has already Agreed to Move in this Direction. At COP28, Governments Committed to Transition Away from Fossil Fuels. Nearly 60 Countries gathered in Santa Marta this year, to Discuss how to Turn that Commitment into Practical Plans. Climate Week was another Step, with France, the Netherlands, and Germany, Publishing Roadmaps to Transition away from Fossil Fuels.

Now, the Road Leads to COP31 in Türkiye.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

Hegseth to Cut 20% of Admirals and Generals

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth (R) is set to announce a 20% Cut to slots slated for Admirals and Generals at the Pentagon, as part of His push to Overhaul the Outlook of the Department, Two Pentagon Officials Confirmed to The Hill on 9/29/2026. The Defense secretary will Ppublicize the Reductions, which will affect Senior Leadership positions across the Army, and the Air Force, on 9/30/2026 during His State of the Force Address in Quantico, Va.

The Pentagon Chief will Address Junior Officers and Enlisted Leaders at the Marine Corps Base, where He will Outline His Priorities for the Pentagon in the coming months, including the Major Leadership Shake-Up The New Push from the Defense Secretary comes after He looked to Cut the Number of Active-Duty Four-Star Generals and Admirals in the U.S. Military by at least 10% last year.

In 5/2025, Hegseth Directed Pentagon Leadership to Cut the Number of General Officers in the National Guard by at least 20% and Slash the Total Number of G and Flag Officers, those with a One-Star Rank or Above, by 10%. The Pentagon Chief’s May Order said He wanted “Less Generals, more GIs” and to “shift resources from bloated headquarters elements to our warfighters.”

Hegseth Argued at the Time the Reductions were Critical to Remove “redundant force structure to optimize and streamline leadership by reducing excess general and flag officer positions.” The Service Branches are Requested to Implement the Cuts by 1/1/2027, while some Positions will be Down Graded instead of Slashed.

The Pentagon is Fequiring Troops to meet Waist-to-Height Requirements and Exhibit “impeccable” Grooming Standards to Attend Hegseth’s Speech on 9/29/2026. The upcoming Leadership Cuts come as Hegseth has Fired or Pushed Out more than Two Dozen Military Leaders across the Military Branches since taking the Leading Role at the Pentagon, Personnel Moves that have Unnerved Congressional Lawmakers in both PEies.

In July, Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), the Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said She was Concerned by the Removal of Senior Military Officers and Blocking Promotions of Lower-Ranked Personnel. “I find this deeply troubling,” Collins said during a Hearing. “These are men and women who volunteered to serve our country and swore an oath to support and defend our Constitution.”

Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA), who Sits on the House Armed Services Committee, said during an 4/2026 Hearing that Hegseth’s Firing of Gen. Randy George, the U.S. Army’s former Chief-of-Staff, would have a “chilling effect” on the way the Armed Services Operate. The Pentagon Chief has also Blocked Promotions of Officers slated for Promotion to One and Two-Star Generals, saying that Military Leaders Serve at the Pleasure of the President.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

Supreme Court Blocks MS Voting Map

The Unsigned Ruling keeps Missouri's 2022 Districts in Place for a Midterm Election already Underway, handing Trump (R) a Defeat in His National Redistricting Push. According to a Newsweek Report cited by MSN, Trump Rebuked the Supreme Court on 9/28/2026 after the Justices Rejected the Missouri GOP Congressional Map for the Third Time, Shutting down a Republican Effort to use New Districts in Midterm Elections that are already Underway.

The Unsigned Ruling Blocked a Federal Appeals Court Decision that would have Revived the Trump-backed 2025 Map, letting stand instead a Missouri Supreme Court Decision requiring the Map to go before Voters in a November Referendum. There were No noted Ddissents. The Rebuke from Trump, Delivered within hours of the Ruling, turned a State-Level Redistricting Fight into the Latest Flashpoint between the Ppresident and a Court he has frequently Praised.

The justices halted a Rruling from a Panel of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, that had Directed a District Judge to bar Missouri from using anything other than the New Republican-Friendly Map for the November Elections. In its Unsigned Opinion, the Supreme Court wrote that “at this late date, ordering reversion to the 2025 map in the midst of an ongoing election would usher in electoral chaos.”

The Court leaned Heavily on Timing. Military and Overseas Ballots had already gone out, Absentee Voting began this Week, and the Justices noted that “the election is not merely upcoming; it has already started.” Lower Federal Courts, the opinion said, should not alter a state’s election rules on the eve of a vote. The practical effect is that Missouri voters will cast ballots under the same Congressional Districts used in 2022 and 2024, a Map that Yields Six Republican-held Seats and Two Democratic-held Seats. The Proposed 2025 Map was Designed to Eliminate One of those Democratic Seats, currently held by Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D) (Kansas City, 5th District )'

Trump encouraged Missouri Republicans to adopt the New Map as part of a Nationwide Redistricting Push intended to give Republicans an Edge in the Midterms. The Map was already used in the State's August Primaries, and Republicans Argued that Switching Maps between the Primary and General Elections would itself Violate the Constitution, an Argument Accepted by the Appeals Court before the Supreme Court Stepped in.

The proposed 2025 Map was Designed to Eliminate One of Missouri's Democratic-held House Seats, currently held by Cleaver. The November Elections will determine Control of Congress, while Missouri 2022 Map includes Six Republican-held Seats and Two Democratic-held Seats. The Dispute began last year, when Missouri’s Legislature Adopted the New Map, known as HB 1, with Trump’s Encouragement. Opponents responded under Missouri’s Constitution: in 12/2025, organizers Ssubmitted more than 300,000 Signatures to Force a Referendum on the Map at the November 2026 election.

Secretary of State Denny Hoskins rejected that petition on August 4, the final day to do so. Richard von Glahn, executive director of People Not Politicians Missouri, sued the same day. On September 3, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the map could Not be used Unless Voters Approved it First.

What followed was a Dizzying stretch of Conflicting Orders. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who Handles Emergency Appeals from Missouri, Declined to Disturb the State Court Ruling. Days later, the Supreme Court Paused a Federal Judge’s Decision that would have Allowed the New Map. Then, on Monday, an 8th Circuit Panel sided with Republican Congressional Candidates and sought to Revive it, setting up Friday’s Final Rebuff.

Friday's Ruling means Missouri's November Election willPproceed under the 2022 Map, but Voters will still decide the Referendum on the 2025 Map itself. Missourians will choose Congressional Candidates under the Old Lines while also Vvoting on the proposed new Map. “We are done with corrupt politicians trying to force their map into effect outside the process outlined in the Missouri constitution,” von Glahn said in a Statement after the Rruling. “We have said from the beginning, people, not politicians will be the final deciders on this DC power grab.”

Republican Officials, including Gov. Mike Kehoe and Attorney General Catherine Hanaway, had Publicly insisted the Redrawn Map would be Used this Fall. That Position is now Foreclosed for 2026, though the Party couldPpursue a New Map if the Referendum Fails The Decision Prevents Missouri from using the 2025 Map in the 2026 Election. The Supreme Court cited the Fact that Voting had already Begun and said Reverting to the 2025 Map during an Ongoing Election wouldUusher in “electoral chaos.” There were No noted Dissents.

Missouri's Constitution allowed Opponents of the New Map to CollectSsignatures and Force a Public Referendum. Organizers Submitted more than 300,000 Signatures in 12/2025 in Support of a Petition to put the Map before Voters. What remains Unclear is how much the Episode Damages the Map’s Prospects in the Referendum, and whether Trump’s Public Attack on the Court foreshadows a Broader Rift as other Redistricting Cases reach the Justices. For now, the 2022 Lines hold, the Ballots are Out, and the Voters get the Final word.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker

Judge Blocks Trump Tying Anti-Terrorism Grants to Election Changes

A U.S.Judge Blocked the Trump (R) Administration on 9/28/2026, from Conditioning Counter-Terrorism Funds to State and Local Governments on to Election Administration. The Decision by Washington-based U.S. District Judge Amir Ali marks the latest Defeat for Trump, in His Bid to Increase the Federal Government's Authority over Elections ahead of the 11/3/2026 Midterms, when His Republicans are Fighting to retain Majorities in both Houses of Congress.

Earlier this year, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Announced that it would Withhold 20% of Funding under Grant Programs related to Preparing for Terrorist Attacks and other Threats until State or Local Governments Adopted Election Administration Measures Favored by the Administration.

In His 9/28/2026, Ali sided with Counties and Cities in Ohio, Tennessee, and Texas, which Sued to Block the Changes on the Basis that the Conditioning of such Funds Exceeded the Federal Emergency Management Agency' (FEMA) Authority. A Coalition of mostly Democratic Governed States Filed a Separate Legal Challenge to the Policy, which remains Pending.

The Grant Programs Totaling about $1.1 Billion, have Existed for Years. None of Them were Signed with Election Security Specifically in Mind.

“Congress did not authorize the grant program. to be used for the sort of election administration reforms FEMA demands here — changes that, whether sound or not as a matter of policy, are not advanced to prepare for or respond to ‘acts of terrorism,’” wrote Ali, an Appointee of President Joe Biden (D).

In Announcing the Plan to Condition the Funds, DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin (R)( said the New Requirements would Protect Election Systems from Foreign Interference and Cyberattacks.

The Plan would have required Grant Recipients to use Equipment that Accepts Hand-Marked Paper Ballots rather than Electronic Voting Systems, Manually Audit at least 5% of Ballots Cast, and Compare their Voter rolls to a DHS Ddatabase to make sure No Non-Citizens were Registered to Vote.

Trump has long made False Claims about Widespread Voting Fraud in U.S. Elections including the 2020 Presidential Election that He Lost.

Independent Studies and Audits have found Voter Fraud to be Rare.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker