Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

<ul><li>The amendment to the <keyword id="95281" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Essential-Commodities-Act">Essential Commodities Act</keyword> was introduced as a part of the slew of reforms that Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman introduced in May 2020 as relief measures for COVID-19 pandemic.</li><li>Through the amendments, better price realisation will be made possible for <keyword id="45092" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="farmers">farmers</keyword> and cereals, edible oils, oilseeds, pulses, onions and potatoes will be deregulated. </li></ul>The monsoon session of the parliament will begin on September 14, and one of the amendments that will be up for discussion is for the Essential Commodities Act. Introduced as a part of the slew of reforms that Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman introduced in May 2020 as relief measures for the COVID-19 pandemic and the ₹20 trillion stimulus package, the government had said it was a landmark decision which would help India’s farmers. The amendment was a step towards creating ‘One India, One <keyword id="6355165" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="agriculture">agriculture</keyword> market’. The Essential Commodities Act (ECA) was passed by the Union Cabinet in June and is now an <keyword id="152892" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Ordinance">ordinance</keyword>. The ECA will lapse if it doesn’t get cleared by the Parliament in this session. Amendments to the Essential Commodities Act Through the amendments, better price realisation will be made possible for farmers and cereals, edible oils, oilseeds, pulses, onions, and potatoes will be deregulated. Stock limits will be imposed only under exceptional circumstances like national calamities, famine with a surge in prices. No such stock limit shall apply to processors or value chain participants, or any exporter subject to export demand. According to PRS, a stock limit may only be imposed if there is: (i) a 100% increase in the retail price of horticultural produce; and (ii) a 50% increase in the retail price of non-perishable agricultural food items. What is referred to as Essential Commodity? Currently, essential commodities are defined as per the schedule within the act. The schedule entails drugs (fertilisers – inorganic, organic or mixed), petroleum and petroleum products, food products, raw jute and jute textiles, seeds of food crops, fruits, vegetables, and cattle fodder, jute seed, cottonseed. During this COVID-19 pandemic, face masks and hand sanitizers were added to the list. This was due to the scarcity of the products, and as there were cases of a price increase. However, deeming them essential the government notified that their prices cannot be increased. The notification was in force until June 30, and the two items <a href="https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/policy/hc-rejects-plea-seeking-to-classify-masks-sanitisers-as-essential-commodities/articleshow/77611390.cms">aren’t classified</a> as essential anymore, once the availability in the market improved. What is the Essential Commodities Act initially implemented in 1955? The act was brought into place for the control of the production, supply and distribution of, and trade and commerce, in certain commodities. The act then allowed the government of India to control the price of essential commodities, and also decide to increase or decrease the supply of the product in the market. It also gives the government to regulate through licences, permits or otherwise the storage, transport, distribution, disposal, acquisition, use or consumption of any essential commodity. However, in recent years the Essential Commodities Act has come under a lot of debate. It has also been called ‘<a href="https://theprint.in/opinion/draconian-essential-commodities-act-needs-to-go-if-india-wants-to-raise-farm-incomes/183006/">draconian</a>’ by certain sections as it gives the government complete control. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/science/health/news/the-epidemic-diseases-amendment-ordinance-protecting-the-corona-warriors/articleshow/78038114.cms">The Epidemic Diseases (Amendment) Ordinance — protecting the ‘corona warriors’</a>

Monsoon session of Parliament: All you need to know about the Essential Commodities ordinance

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Sen. <keyword id="11896860" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="bernie-sanders" source="Orion">Bernie Sanders</keyword> said he agreed with Arizona Democrats' decision to censure <keyword id="11930701" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="kyrsten-sinema" source="Orion">Kyrsten Sinema</keyword>.</li><li>On NBC's "Meet the Press," Sanders said that the state party was "exactly right."</li></ul>Sen. Bernie Sanders on Sunday said he supported the Arizona Democratic Party's decision to <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/arizona-democratic-party-unanimously-censure-sen-kyrsten-sinema-filibuster-2022-1">censure</a> Sen. Kyrsten Sinema for her refusal to alter filibuster rules to enact voting-rights legislation.<a href="https://twitter.com/MeetThePress/status/1485255564913528834">During an appearance</a> on NBC's "Meet the Press," the Vermont independent and former two-time presidential candidate was asked by moderator Chuck Todd if the extraordinary move taken by the state party was "appropriate" and the senator agreed with the decision."I think that's exactly right," he said, detailing how passage of voting-rights legislation would be essential in fighting back against restrictive voting bills passed by Republican-led legislatures in response to former President Donald Trump's <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-campaign-lawsuits-election-results-2020-11">debunked voting claims</a>."On that issue of <keyword id="11940459" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="voting-rights" source="Orion">voting rights</keyword>, this is something that's almost different than anything else," Sanders said said. "Right now you have a Republican Party under Trump's leadership that is perpetuating this 'Big Lie' that Trump actually won the election, and therefore, you have 19 Republican states that are moving very aggressively into voter suppression, into extreme gerrymandering."Some of these states are doing away with the powers of independent election officials. They are moving in a very, very anti-democratic way," he added.The Democratic-controlled House on January 13 passed the two key voting-rights bills, which have been <a href="https://rules.house.gov/sites/democrats.rules.house.gov/files/BILLS-117HR5746EAS-RCP117-28.pdf">consolidated</a> into one piece of legislation, titled the "Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act." <keyword id="12012766" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="senate-democrats" source="Orion">Senate Democrats</keyword> sought to cut off debate on the bill once it reached the upper chamber, but 60 votes were required to move forward with the bill. While all 50 Democrats backed the legislation, the 50-member Republican caucus <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/senate-gop-blocks-voting-rights-bill-setting-up-filibuster-fight-2022-1">blocked</a> it.When Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York held a vote that would have changed the <keyword id="12484847" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="senate-filibuster" source="Orion">Senate filibuster</keyword> rules to require a simple majority for passage of the party's signature voting-rights bill, it failed, receiving the votes of 48 Democrats. The Democratic holdouts were Sens. <keyword id="11930702" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="joe-manchin" source="Orion">Joe Manchin</keyword> of West Virginia and Sinema, who joined the bloc of 50 Republicans in <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/senate-votes-against-filibuster-reforms-to-pass-voting-rights-bill-2022-1">opposing</a> the rule change."It was absolutely imperative that we change the rules so that we could pass strong voting-rights legislation," Sanders said. "All Republicans voted against us, two Democrats voted against us. That was a terrible, terrible vote. And I think what the Arizona Democratic Party did was exactly right."While Sinema backs the voting-rights legislation, she has refused to budge on the process for passing legislation, pointing to the country's ideological divide and the need for bipartisanship as the reasoning behind her stance.<a href="https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1481681228076101641">During a floor speech</a> on January 13, Sinema denounced the wave of Republican-led voting laws, but <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/sinema-throws-cold-water-on-lowering-senate-filibuster-threshold-2022-1">concluded</a> that she would only further the political divide in the country by setting aside the filibuster, which proponents say is a necessary in protecting the influence of lawmakers in the minority."These bills help treat the symptoms of the disease, but they do not fully address the disease itself," <a href="https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1481681228076101641">she said at the time</a>. "And while I continue to support these bills, I will not support separate actions that worsen the underlying disease of division infecting our country."Sinema's position has incensed scores of Democratic activists in Arizona and across the country, leading to a fresh push for <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/ruben-gallego-kyrsten-sinema-filibuster-primary-challenge-arizona-progressives-2022-1">a primary challenger</a> when the senator faces reelection in 2024.In recent years, much of Sinema's appeal has radiated from her commitment to bipartisanship, which has boosted her at the ballot box.In 2018, she <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/kyrsten-sinema-wins-arizona-us-senate-seat-martha-mcsally-2018-11">defeated</a> then-Republican Rep. Martha McSally in a contentious race that <a href="https://www.cnn.com/election/2018/results/arizona">tested</a> the competitiveness of the onetime Republican stronghold. CNN exit polling <a href="https://www.cnn.com/election/2018/exit-polls/arizona/senate">showed</a> that the senator won that year by maximizing the Democratic vote, edging out McSally among independents, and peeling away a significant chunk of Republicans.However, Sanders in recent days has <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/sanders-opens-door-manchin-sinema-primary-challengers-filibuster-2022-1">entertained</a> backing progressive challengers to Democratic senators who have rejected reforming filibuster rules, pointing to Sinema and Manchin."If there were strong candidates in those states who were prepared to stand up for working families, who understand that the Democratic Party has got to be the party of working people, taking on big money interests, if those candidates were there in Arizona and West Virginia, yes, I would be happy to support them," <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/23/politics/bernie-sander-kyrsten-sinema-cnntv/index.html">he said</a> on CNN's "State of the Union" on Sunday.

Bernie Sanders says the Arizona Democratic Party was 'exactly right' in censuring Sen. Kyrsten Sinema over her vote to preserve the filibuster

New Delhi, Jan 31 () The Economic Survey on Friday pitched for scrapping of the Essential Commodities Act (ECA), saying the law is "anachronistic" that leads to harassment and is of no help in checking price volatility.
 The Survey also favoured "dynamic" foodgrain policy that allows switching from procurement and distribution of grains to cash transfers, but disfavoured loan waiver to farmers that disrupts the credit culture.
 "The consumer affairs ministry and its related arms must examine whether the anachronistic ECA, which was passed in 1955 in an India worried about famines and shortages, is relevant in today's India," it observed.
 Stating that around 76,000 raids under the ECA were conducted last year, the Survey said that considerable administrative effort goes into enforcement of this law assuming a minimum of 5 persons involved in a raid.
 "As the conviction rate, however, is abysmally low and raids have no impact on prices, the ECA only seems to enable rent-seeking and harassment. The Survey provides clear evidence that the case for jettisoning this anachronistic legislation is strong," the document said.
 The Survey noted that frequent and unpredictable imposition of blanket stock limits on commodities under this law "distorts the incentives for the creation of storage infrastructure by the private sector, movement up the agricultural value chain and development of national market for agricultural commodities".
 Imposition of stock limits on dal in the third quarter of 2006, sugar in first quarter of 2009 and onions in September 2019 had no effect on the volatility of the retail and wholesale prices of onions, it said.
 The ECA, 1955, was enacted to control the production, supply and distribution of, and trade and commerce in, certain goods considered as essential commodities. The Act itself does not lay out rules and regulations but allows the states to issue control orders related to dealer licensing, regulate stock limits, restrict movement of goods and requirements of compulsory purchases under a levy system.
 On the huge buffer stock of foodgrains, the Survey said "the government policies in the foodgrains markets have led to the emergence of government as the largest procurer and hoarder of rice and wheat crowding out".
 This has led to burgeoning food subsidy burden and inefficiencies in the markets, which is affecting the long-run growth of the agriculture sector, it added.
 "The foodgrains policy needs to be dynamic and allow switching from physical handling and distribution of foodgrains to cash transfers/food coupons/smart cards," the Survey suggested.
 On loan waiver, it said an analysis of debt waivers given by states/Centre shows that full waiver beneficiaries consume less, save less, invest less and are less productive after the waiver when compared to the partial beneficiaries.
 "Debt waivers disrupt the credit culture and end up reducing the formal credit flow to the very same farmers, thereby defeating the very purpose of the debt waiver provided to farmers," it added. MJH HRS

Survey suggests scrapping of 'anachronistic' Essential Commodity Act 1955

New Delhi, Mar 19 () The government on Thursday said prices of alcohols used in manufacturing hand sanitizers have been capped under the Essential Commodities Act on account of coranavirus outbreak. The decision would empower the central government and states/union territories to regulate prices, production, sale, distribution, transport, movement, storage, information of alcohols used in manufacturing hand sanitizers, used as preventive measure to avoid infection from COVID-19, Ministry of Consumer Affairs said in a statement. It would also empower governments to smoothen the sale and availability of these items and carry out operations against hoarders, speculators, profiteers, black marketeers and those involved in contravention of the orders of central government and states/UTs in respect of these alcohols. It will help manufacturers of hand sanitizers to keep prices of their product at reasonable level and within the reach of the common people, it added. The ministry said that government has notified an order under the Essential Commodities Act to declare price cap on these alcohols prevailing as on March 5 up to June 30, 2019. "In view the ongoing outbreak of COVID-19 and concern of the logistics for COVID 19 management particularly during last couple of weeks and that prices of the alcohol used in manufacturing the hand sanitizers have been exorbitantly increased by the producers of such alcohol, government has notified an order under the Act to declare price cap prevailing as on 05.03.2020 on the above alcohols up to 30th June, 2019," it said. It has also notified that the raw materials used in manufacture of essential commodities are also essential commodities under the Act. States can now ask the manufactures of these alcohols not to increase the prices of their produce without concurrence of the central government, it said. "On these items, states may now notify the central order in their official Gazette, also issue their own orders under the Act to that effect and take necessary actions as per the situation prevailing in the respective states," it said. Under the Act, powers of the central government have already been delegated to the states by way of orders during 1972 to 1978, it said. The central government, it said, has requested the states/UTs to advise manufacturers of deodorants to manufacture alcohol-based hand sanitizer spray with ethyl alcohol as main content on mass scale in the same plant which may manufacture this alcohol-based sanitizer at very low cost and make it available in the market at the earliest. The states/manufacturers of deodorants may contact drugs controller, Daman &amp; Diu to resolve the issues related to technology. The states have also been advised to ensure licences and approvals for the same on top priority basis. As this item would be an additional product in the production line, it may be endorsed on the drugs and cosmetics licence of such deodorant manufacturers. "The states are also advised that manufacturer of this product may also be given excise permit for use of ethanol alcohol as raw material," it added. Further, they have been advised that the existing manufacturing units of alcohol based sanitizer be encouraged to increase their capacity. "Ministry of Environment has allowed increase in capacity by 50 per cent without further environment clearances," it added. On March 13, the government declared masks, including the N95 variant, and hand sanitizers as 'essential commodities' in the wake of the coronavirus scare leading to shortages and black marketing of these items. RR RVK

Prices of alcohols used in making hand sanitizers capped under Essential Commodities Act: Govt

New Delhi, Mar 13 () The government on Friday declared masks, including N95, and hand sanitizers as 'essential commodities' in the wake of the coronavirus scare leading to shortages and black marketing of these items. These items will remain under essential commodities segment till June-end, a move aimed at ensuring availability at reasonable prices and cracking down on hoarders/black marketeers. The government has notified an order under the Essential Commodities Act to declare masks (2 ply and 3 ply surgical masks, N95 masks) and hand santizers as essential commodities up to June 30, 2020. The decision has empowered the Centre as well states to regulate production, quality, distributions of masks and hand sanitiziers, and also to smoothen sale and availability of these items, and carry out operations against speculators. The step has been taken in view of the "ongoing outbreak of COVID-19 and concern of the logistics for COVID-19 management, particularly during last couple of weeks, and that masks and hand sanitizers have been noted to either not available with most of the vendors in the market or are available with difficult difficulty at exorbitant prices," said the government order. An offence under the Essential Commodities Act can attract imprisonment up to 7 years. MJH NKD ABM

Masks, hand santizers declared 'essential commodities'

<ul><li>Citing the example of other industries where there are no restrictions on how producers sell their products, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman said that farmers should have the choice to sell their produce at attractive prices. </li><li>To this end, Sitharaman said that the government will formulate a central law that will provide barrier-free inter-state trade, along with a framework for online trading of agricultural produce. </li><li>However, for this to pass muster, the government will have to garner support from the opposition parties and farmer bodies, who think APMCs are needed to ensure farmers get a good price for their produce. </li></ul>The Modi government is using COVID-19 crisis to push through the <keyword id="6366428" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="APMC">APMC</keyword> reforms it has been talking about for a long time. Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman made the announcement in the third tranche of the Covid-19 stimulus package today, May 15. Making the announcement, Sitharaman said that this move will give the choice to sell their produce at attractive prices, instead of being tied down to their local APMCs (Agriculture Produce Market Committee). “When you create competition for farmers’ produce, the price improves. There are more buyers, more choices. Farmers will get the benefits of that. Whether you have one buyer or ten buyers for a service makes a difference,” said Ashok Gulati, former chairman of the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="75756781" title="These are the top takeaways from Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman's third installment from Modi's ₹20 lakh crore stimulus" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div> APMC reforms might hit a roadblock in non-BJP ruled states Modi has been batting for APMC reforms for a long time now. “It is imperative to swiftly undertake market reforms of our decades old and restricted agriculture produce and marketing committee (APMC) architecture,” PM Modi <a href="https://www.livemint.com/Politics/M6HMO4jTZrn1iwwbypaEbL/Narendra-Modi-calls-for-swift-APMC-reforms-to-benefit-farmer.html">said</a> in a letter to Chief Ministers in 2018. However, these reforms might hit a roadblock in non-BJP ruled states. “The APMCs have existed since 1963 and there is a good reason they have been around for such a long time. Reform is welcome but it cannot endanger an existing structure. Our party will oppose this proposal if and when it comes before the legislature," a NCP leader was quoted as saying by <a href="https://www.livemint.com/Politics/reRgHJ4NW4Sl4EJMXRyzHJ/APMC-reforms-in-Maharashtra-hit-a-roadblock.html">Livemint</a>. Those who favour the existing APMC structure <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mysuru/farmers-oppose-proposed-amendment-to-apmc-act/articleshow/75744758.cms">argue</a> that diluting APMC reforms will give power to multinational companies and corporates. They are also concerned about minimum support price guarantee, without price regulation in place. So far, only BJP-ruled states like Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh have passed APMC reforms. The Karnataka government issued an ordinance, but it was <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bengaluru/bengaluru-governor-returns-apmc-reforms-ordinance/articleshow/75729589.cms">returned</a> by the state governor earlier today. Sitharaman says the changes will empower farmers Making the announcement, Sitharaman said that farmers should have the freedom of choice to sell their agricultural produce at attractive prices. Further, she said that no other industry restricts producers from selling their product to whomever they want, and at their desired prices. To solve this problem, Sitharaman said that the central government is working on a law. This will remove barriers to inter-state trade and allow farmers to sell their produce to the highest bidder, which should result in increasing their incomes. Apart from this, she also said that a framework for online trading of agricultural produce will also be worked upon. It is likely that this framework will be on the lines of e-NAM, which is a national agriculture market with an online trading platform for farmers. What’s wrong with APMCs? APMCs were set up with the intention to increase farmers’ incomes by making it easier to sell their produce without having to deal with commission agents. However, the government criminalised setting up of competing markets in the same area, essentially creating a monopoly in the form of APMCs. This led to traders forming cartels to artificially lower prices of the agriculture produce they buy from farmers. A 2012 <a href="https://www.cci.gov.in/sites/default/files/AO.pdf">report</a> by the Competition Commission of India cites the example of a visit to Ahmednagar APMC which revealed collusion among traders. These traders then sell the produce at higher prices to end consumers. While APMCs were formed to benefit farmers, it’s the traders who end up milking both farmers as well as consumers. See also: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/essential-commodities-act-to-deregulate-price-of-potatoes-onions-and-pulses/articleshow/75758676.cms">India proposes to deregulate prices of onions, potatoes, pulses and other essential food — prices won’t be capped and one can store as much as needed</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/policy/news/what-is-essential-commodities-act-that-nirmala-sitharaman-wants-to-amend/articleshow/75759156.cms">What is the Essential Commodities Act – the 65-year old act that FM Nirmala Sitharaman said will now be amended</a>

Modi is using the COVID-19 crisis to push through APMC reforms he has wanted for long⁠— but states may oppose

(Eds: Adds details ) New Delhi, Mar 13 () The government on Friday declared face masks and hand sanitizers as essential commodities for the next 100 days as it stepped up efforts to boost supply and prevent hoarding of these items in its fight to check spread of coronavirus disease. The Centre has also invoked Disaster Management Act to ensure price regulation and availability of surgical and protective masks, hand sanitizer and gloves. Both masks (2ply &amp; 3 ply surgical masks, N95 masks) and hand sanitisers have been brought under Essential Commodities Act, 1955, empowering States to regulate production, distribution and prices of these items and also crackdown on hoarding and blackmarketing. "Government has notified an order under the Essential Commodities Act to declare these items as essential commodities up to June 30, 2020, by amending the schedule of the Essential Commodities Act 1955," the Consumer Affairs Ministry said in a statement.The decision would empower the government and States/UTs to regulate production, quality and distribution of masks and hand sanitizers for smooth sale and availability of these items. It also empowers to carry out operations against speculators and those involved in over pricing and black marketing."It will enhance the availability of both the items to the general people at reasonable prices or under MRP (maximum retail price)," the ministry said. The government pointed out that masks and hand sanitizers are either not available in the market or are available with great difficulty at exorbitant prices, in view of the ongoing outbreak of COVID-19.The government has also issued an advisory under the Legal Metrology Act.Under the EC Act, state governments can ask manufacturers to enhance their production capacity of these items for augmenting supply, while States can ensure sale of both the items at MRP under the Legal Metrology Act.States can now notify the central order in their official gazette and also issue their own orders under the EC Act depending on the situation, the ministry said.They may take action against offenders under the EC Act and PBMMSEC Act (Prevention of Blackmarketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act) 1980. An offender under the EC Act can be punished with an imprisonment of up to seven years or fine or both. Under the PBMMSEC Act, one can be detained for maximum six months.Meanwhile, the Centre has also invoked Disaster Management Act to ensure price regulation and availability of surgical and protective mask, hand sanitizer and gloves.Amid reports of non-availability and black marketing of surgical and protective masks, sanitizers and gloves and as a measure of preparedness to address the challenge of outbreak of COVID-19, the health ministry has mandated the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA) to notify these items as drugs. "In pursuance of directions conveyed by Ministry of Health and Family Welfare vide order dated 13.03.2020 under clause (I) of sub-section (2) of section 10 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority has been mandated to regulate the availability and prices of the Surgical and protective masks, Hand sanitizers and Gloves," the pharmaceuticals department under the Chemicals and Fertilisers Ministry said. The NPPA has directed all State /UT governments to take necessary steps to ensure sufficient availability of surgical and protective masks, hand sanitizers and gloves at prices not exceeding the MRP printed on the pack size. State/UT Governments have also been directed to monitor the production and distribution of above mentioned items by the Manufacturers/ Importers, Stockists and Retailers and ensure that hoarding, black marketing and profiteering may not happen.The EC Act was established to ensure the delivery of certain commodities or products, the supply of which, if obstructed owing to hoarding or black-marketing, would affect the normal life of people. This includes foodstuffs, drugs, fuels (petroleum products).The Act itself does not lay out rules and regulations but allows the states to issue control orders related to dealer licensing, regulate stock limits, restrict movement of goods and requirements of compulsory purchases under a levy system. MJH NKD ANZ MR

Govt notifies hand sanitizers, surgical masks, gloves as essential commodities

<ul><li>The <keyword id="12360998" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="commodity-futures-trading-commission" source="Orion">Commodity Futures Trading Commission</keyword> awarded $200 million to a single <keyword id="12110043" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="whistleblower" source="Orion">whistleblower</keyword>.</li><li>The <keyword id="11916730" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="cftc" source="Orion">CFTC</keyword> said the award represented the biggest payment ever to a single whistleblower.</li><li>"The whistleblower's information led the CFTC to important, direct evidence of wrongdoing," the regulator said.</li></ul>The Commodity Futures <keyword id="6368158" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="trading" source="Orion">Trading</keyword> Commission <a href="https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8453-21">said on Thursday</a> that it just awarded $200 million to a single whistleblower.The payment represents the largest award ever to a single individual since the CFTC started its whistleblower program in 2014 under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010.The whistleblower's "timely original information significantly contributed to an already open investigation and led to a successful enforcement action, as well as to the success of two related actions, by a US federal regulator and a foreign regulator," the CFTC said. Since the start of the program, the regulator has paid more than $3 billion in whistleblower awards. To qualify for a potential monetary award, a whistleblower that significantly contributes to the success of an enforcement action must demonstrate that there is a "meaningful nexus" between the information provided and the CFTC's ability to successfully complete its investigation, and to either obtain a settlement or prevail in litigation. A whistleblower that qualifies for an award is eligible to receive between 10% and 30% of monetary sanctions collected from the investigation. That means this whistleblower's information led to monetary sanctions of at least $670 million and up to $2 billion. The <keyword id="12360997" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="whistleblower-award" source="Orion">whistleblower award</keyword> is paid from the CFTC Customer Protection Fund, which is entirely financed by monetary sanctions paid to the CFTC by violators of the Commodity Exchange Act.The CFTC did not identify the specific case the whistleblower aided in order to protect the identify of the individual.

The CFTC just gave $200 million to a whistleblower in its biggest-ever award to a single individual

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Democrats in both chambers are attempting to consolidate their various <keyword id="11984873" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="stock-trading" source="Orion">stock trading</keyword> ban proposals.</li><li>But while key questions about the bill have been largely worked out, obstacles remain.</li></ul>Democrats in Congress are slowly coalescing around a single bill that would ban federal lawmakers from trading stocks."There is consensus around the basic, fundamental principle that members of Congress shouldn't be serving their stock portfolios, they should be serving the people," said Democratic Rep. <keyword id="13570606" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="joe-neguse" source="Orion">Joe Neguse</keyword> of Colorado at a <a href="https://youtu.be/WqnNhEYBhtc">press conference</a> Thursday following a Committee on House Administration <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/republicans-congress-stock-trade-ban-kevin-mccarthy-2022-4">hearing</a> on congressional stock trading. "I think we'll have robust debate on the finer points."Seven of the main Democratic co-sponsors of the various proposals to ban lawmakers from trading stocks shared a stage for the first time Thursday, with members from the progressive left to the moderate middle largely echoing each other's points."I mean, we're all here for the same purpose," Democratic Rep. <keyword id="11949072" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="alexandria-ocasio-cortez" source="Orion">Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez</keyword> of New York said. "Rep. [Abigail] Spanberger said it so well, that this isn't just about actual impropriety, but this is about the perception of impropriety."House Administration Committee Chairwoman <keyword id="12577839" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="zoe-lofgren" source="Orion">Zoe Lofgren</keyword>, a Democrat of California, told Insider that <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/republicans-congress-stock-trade-ban-kevin-mccarthy-2022-4">her committee</a> is "engaged in an honest inquiry to find out what are the various issues and how they can be resolved."But when asked the timing on when she thinks Democrats will come to a consensus on what kind of stock ban measure should be put to a vote on the House floor she responded, "I can't say." Nor would Neguse."I can't speak for House leadership," he said when asked whether House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/we-are-free-market-economy-pelosi-rejects-stock-ban-congress-2021-12">initially opposed</a> stock-ban legislation, is supportive of her Democratic colleagues' efforts. "I would just simply say that when you have folks like Rep. Spanberger, and Chair [Pramila] Jayapal, Rep. [Andy] Kim, and Rep. [Angie] Craig all on the same team pushing forward on an issue of this substance, I'd bet that we're gonna get this done."Sen. <keyword id="12467485" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="jeff-merkley" source="Orion">Jeff Merkley</keyword>, a Democrat of Oregon, said on Thursday that his Democratic Senate colleagues were on board with the core goal of the legislation."On the Democratic side of the aisle, the principle of ending conflicted stock trading is essentially unanimous," he said, adding that there were still some issues to iron out, including when the new rules would take effect, exactly how blind trusts would be implemented, and how spouses would be affected."<h2>Numerous STOCK Act violations</h2>The Committee on House Administration hearing on stock trading represented a big step in lawmakers efforts to pass measures to restrict lawmakers trading individual stocks.It followed publication of Insider's "<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/conflicted-congress-key-findings-stock-act-finances-investing-2021-12">Conflicted Congress</a>" investigation in December, which found that <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/congress-stock-act-violations-senate-house-trading-2021-9">59 lawmakers</a> and <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/congress-staff-violated-stock-act-conflicts-of-interest-possible-2021-12">at least 182 senior-level congressional staffers</a> have violated the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act of 2012 by failing to disclose their stock transactions within a timely manner. "<keyword id="12727727" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="conflicted-congress" source="Orion">Conflicted Congress</keyword>" <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/congress-members-are-trading-defense-stocks-while-shaping-military-policy-2021-12">found</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/lawmakers-bought-sold-covid-19-related-stocks-during-pandemic-2021-12">numerous</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/congress-democrats-with-fossil-fuel-stocks-investments-2021-12">examples</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/lawmakers-investing-in-crypto-as-congress-weighs-regulations-2021-12">of</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/congress-holding-stocks-facebook-twitter-disney-fox-news-2021-12">conflicts</a> of interest among federal lawmakers, both Democrats and Republicans.But the hearing also revealed that significant obstacles remain. For example, will Democrats and Republicans work together in a bipartisan fashion, as some on both sides hope? Will the legislation itself seek to ban lawmakers alone from trading stocks — or extend to immediate family members? Will a bill include Pelosi's demand that the judicial branch be included in reforms?Will stock-ban legislation find itself in election year competition with other bills for scarce floor time in both the House and Senate?The final measure that Democrats introduce on stock trading could indeed get some Republican votes. Already, several of the proposed bills have garnered co-sponsorships from lawmakers such as Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, and Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida. Rep. Chip Roy, a Republican of Texas, <a href="https://spanberger.house.gov/posts/spanberger-roy-todays-stock-act-hearing-positive-step-but-meaningless-without-further-action">released a joint statement</a> Thursday with Spanberger, a Democrat, that touted their bipartisan bill, the TRUST in Congress Act, and in part lauded the Committee on House Administration's hearing."Today's hearing shows that pressure and public opinion can indeed force a reckoning with Washington's status quo," Roy and Spanberger wrote. "We are encouraged by this step."<h2>Stock-ban skepticism</h2>Nevertheless, Thursday's hearing and press conference <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/republicans-congress-stock-trade-ban-kevin-mccarthy-2022-4">made clear that significant objections from the right remain</a>."If we enact something like this, it will strip the rights and the freedoms of individuals, and everybody on this committee is a free American citizen that has rights," Rep. <keyword id="13570607" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="barry-loudermilk" source="Orion">Barry Loudermilk</keyword>, a Republican of Georgia, <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/post/preview?post_id=624f10858fde94217d78b208&amp;mode=desktop">said</a> at the committee hearing on stock trading. The Committee on House Administration's ranking Republican, Rep. <keyword id="12866487" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="rodney-davis" source="Orion">Rodney Davis</keyword> of Illinois, expressed skepticism about an outright congressional stock ban and said he's more inclined to back stronger disclosure rules and enhanced enforcement of current laws. <div type="image" title="Republican Reps. Rodney Davis of Illinois and Barry Loudermilk of Georgia at a House Administration subcommittee meeting in June 2021." height="1333" width="1777" msid="90716772" hostid="261"></div>Doug Andres, a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell declined to comment. In February, McConnell <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/mitch-mcconnell-ban-stock-trading-lawmakers-take-a-look-2022-2">said</a>: "We'll take a look at that kind of legislation and see what may be appropriate."Notably, House Republican Leader, Kevin McCarthy, had championed the notion of banning stock trading in Congress early this year. Republicans have also used the issue of stock trading as <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/stock-ban-congress-republicans-democrats-midterms-elections-2022-2">a political weapon</a> against some House Democrats who've run afoul of the STOCK Act. But McCarthy has been conspicuously quiet about stocks in recent weeks, and his office didn't reply to a request for comment. <h2>Working toward an endgame</h2>The bill Merkley originally introduced <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/nancy-pelosi-ossoff-kelly-spanberger-unsure-spouses-stock-trading-ban-2022-2">would not ban spouses from trading stocks</a>. But <a href="https://twitter.com/metzgov/status/1512054297915240454?s=20&amp;t=PMWMac5Ww8JcrReYuqDxhw">Insider learned</a> Thursday that Democratic Reps. Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois, as well as Ocasio-Cortez and Neguse, introduced <a href="https://krishnamoorthi.house.gov/sites/krishnamoorthi.house.gov/files/KRISHN_065_xml2.pdf">an amendment to their own bill</a>, the House companion of Merkley's legislation, that <a href="https://krishnamoorthi.house.gov/sites/krishnamoorthi.house.gov/files/An%20amendment%20to%20HR%201579%20the%20Ban%20Conflicted%20Trading%20Act.pdf">would broaden the legislation to include spouses and dependents</a>.It would also institute new restrictions on the implementation of blind trusts. Martina McLennan, a spokesperson for Merkley, told Insider that the senator was generally supportive of the proposal.<div type="image" title="Merkley, Ocasio-Cortez, and Neguse at Thursday’s press conference on a stock trading ban. All three are cosponsors of the Ban Conflicted Trading Act." height="1338" width="1784" msid="90716773" hostid="261"></div>In a <a href="https://krishnamoorthi.house.gov/sites/krishnamoorthi.house.gov/files/2022.04.06%20Letter%20to%20Chair%20Lofgren%20on%20amending%20the%20Ban%20Conflicted%20Trading%20Act.pdf">letter to Lofgren outlining the changes</a>, the trio of House Democrats urged the House Committee on Administration to "move without delay to mark up the Ban Conflicted Trading Act with the attached changes." "I think it's great," said Spanberger, the Democratic co-lead of the TRUST in Congress Act, when Insider asked her about the amendment. Her bill, co-sponsored with Roy, included a ban on spouses from the beginning. "It's helpful that they're just affirming that, you know, spouses are part of the discussion," said Spanberger, who attended Thursday's hearing as an audience member. But she and Roy <a href="https://spanberger.house.gov/posts/spanberger-roy-todays-stock-act-hearing-positive-step-but-meaningless-without-further-action">also called</a> for their TRUST in Congress Act to serve as the basis for further stock ban negotiations, adding that the hearing would "ultimately prove to be a meaningless delay tactic if not accompanied by action." That could portend an ongoing tug-of-war among Democrats over whose bill gets to be the main vehicle for reform or what specific reforms are included.Even Lofgren, the top Democrat at Thursday's hearing, at times expressed doubts about a full-blown congressional stock trading ban. At one point, Lofgren suggested focusing on harsher penalties for people who violate existing law and offering better compliance training for freshmen members of Congress.She also sarcastically asked witnesses why members' stocks should have to be treated differently from other assets, including their homes. She noted that her husband has a retirement account — it includes many individual corporate stocks, according to congressional disclosure records — managed "by some guy at a bank." <div type="image" title="Democratic Rep. Zoe Lofgren, the chair of the Committee on House Administration, at a hearing on December 1, 2021." height="1333" width="1777" msid="90716774" hostid="261"></div>And she questioned why members might have to either dump their stocks or create a blind trust rather than set up a similar arrangement as her husband. Additionally, upon reversing her prior <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/we-are-free-market-economy-pelosi-rejects-stock-ban-congress-2021-12">opposition to a stock trading ban</a>, Pelosi has insisted that the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/if-members-want-nancy-pelosi-reverses-on-stock-trade-ban-2022-1">judiciary must be included</a> in any reforms. "I say, when we go forward with anything, let's take the Supreme Court with us," she told reporters in January.That demand has been met with some skepticism from Democrats. Ocasio-Cortez told Insider on Thursday that while the idea made sense on principle, it was more important to address the issue as it applies to Congress."Do I think that the judiciary should have similar restrictions? Yes," said Ocasio-Cortez. "Do I think the inclusion of the judiciary is make or break in passing [the bill]? No."<keyword id="11893346" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="100" keywordseo="politics" source="Orion">Politics</keyword> won't be the only factor to slow consensus on the issue of congressional stock trading. Despite Capitol Hill's attempts to return to normal — following polling showing that's what voters prefer — several of its members have gotten COVID-19. The most recent is Pelosi herself, who <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/house-speaker-nancy-pelosi-tests-positive-for-covid-19-2022-4">tested positive</a> on Thursday. The diagnosis led to Pelosi canceling a planned weekly press conference, so she was not available to answer questions after the House hearing about whether she would support any specific STOCK Act reforms.Thursday's stock hearing itself was <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/congress-stock-ban-hearing-covid-postponed-zoe-lofgren-2022-3">originally scheduled</a> for March 16, then delayed after Lofgren got COVID-19. All the delays bring Congress to a moment ever-closer to Election Day, when it becomes more difficult to reach bipartisan consensus on most any topic as each side leverages their preferred policy narratives that they think will best motivate voters. "Let's not lose this opportunity," Merkley said. "Time is running out. Campaign season is upon us."

Democrats are struggling to unite on stock trading ban details as the window for reform narrows

The Centre intends to amend the <keyword id="95281" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="100" keywordseo="Essential-Commodities-Act">Essential Commodities Act</keyword> and Prevention of <keyword id="6735185" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="100" keywordseo="Black-Marketing">Black Marketing</keyword> and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act to curb hoarding and black marketing of essential commodities. 
 “The Essential Commodities Act will be made more stringent by making offences under the Act non-bailable. We have been waiting for the response of the State governments to the proposal since their consent is required to amend the Act,” Union Minister for Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution <keyword id="973" type="PERSON" weightage="80" keywordseo="Ram-Vilas-Paswan">Ram Vilas Paswan</keyword> said. 
 
Paswan also said that his ministry has asked the state governments to give their views on the proposed amendments to the Agriculture Produce Market Committees (APMC) Act. Perishable commodities like fruits and vegetables will not come under the ambit of the APMC Act. The amendment will enable farmers to sell their product directly to retailers or consumers, without any involvement of middlemen. 
 
The minister also emphasised on the need to set up scientific storehouses, particularly for items like onion and potatoes, to control food inflation. 
 Paswan further said that only two states – Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh – have fully implemented the National <keyword id="73138" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="80" keywordseo="Food-Security-Act">Food Security Act</keyword>.

Centre Mulling To Amend Laws To Check
Hoarding, Black Marketing

<ul class="summary-list"><li>President Joe Biden wants to increase the <keyword id="955358" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="60" keywordseo="Corporate-Tax-Rate">corporate tax rate</keyword>, and the US is working on a <keyword id="11051768" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="global-minimum-tax">global minimum tax</keyword>.</li><li>Right now, US multinational companies are reporting the majority of their foreign profits in <keyword id="112952" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Tax-havens">tax havens</keyword>.</li><li>A global minimum tax would make taxes around the world more uniform for those companies.</li></ul>When asked if corporations pay their fair share in federal taxes, two-thirds of respondents in a <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2019/03/14/americans-want-the-wealthy-and-corporations-to-pay-more-taxes-but-are-elected-officials-listening/">2018 Gallup poll</a> said they pay too little. In fact, Gallup found "the public consistently thinks that 'upper-income people' and corporations do not pay their fair share in federal taxes."In recent months, one of the people calling out <keyword id="497351" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="corporate-taxes">corporate taxes</keyword> paid - or lack thereof - has been President Joe Biden."I'm not trying to punish anybody, but damn it, maybe it's because I come from a middle-class neighborhood, I'm sick and tired of ordinary people being fleeced," Biden said <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-corporate-tax-hike-infrastructure-big-companies-average-americans-2021-4">in a recent speech</a>. He's also taken aim at 55 multinational companies that paid no income tax last year, citing a <a href="https://itep.org/55-profitable-corporations-zero-corporate-tax/">report</a> from the left-leaning Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.As president, he's trying to do something about it, proposing a suite of tax changes as part of his infrastructure package under which corporations would see their taxes climb from 21% to 28%, although <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/senate-democrats-to-seek-25-corporate-tax-rate-axios-2021-4">he may well compromise at 25%</a>.Also, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has been calling for <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/janet-yellen-corporate-tax-global-minimum-overhaul-oecd-treasury-2021-3">a global minimum corporate tax rate</a>, and is working with the G20 on it. Essentially, this would be a nonbinding rate for multinational companies - meaning that corporations would be disincentivized from leaving one country for another with more favorable tax rates.The truth is multinationals are still paying taxes, but they're increasingly paying into international tax havens such as Bermuda and Singapore."According to the US Treasury, of the top 10 foreign countries in which US multinationals report profits, seven are tax havens," the note said. "These are relatively small economies: Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Singapore and Switzerland."According to the note, those smaller economies still represented 60% of the foreign income multinationals reported in 2019 - "more than 1.5 times the rest of the world." In 2000, that amount was closer to 30%.<div type="image" title="Screen Shot 2021 04 20 at 2.00.35 PM" height="1070" width="1684" msid="82169884" hostid="261"></div>The chart notes that the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/tax-policy-center-analysis-of-final-trump-gop-tax-reform-bill-2017-12">2017 Tax Cuts and Job Acts</a> (TCJA) - Trump's signature tax package - did include a few measures meant to discourage this "profit sharing." That's the same package that included a decrease of the <keyword id="118200" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="60" keywordseo="corporate-tax">corporate tax</keyword> rate to <a href="https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/how-did-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act-change-business-taxes#:~:text=The%20Tax%20Cut%20and%20Jobs%20Act%20(TCJA)%20reduced%20the%20top,rate%20schedule%20(table%201).">21% from 35%</a>. After its passage, the amount of money pouring into these tax havens leveled out, and was no longer rising, "but the share did not decrease meaningfully and so profit shiſting remains a major concern."Biden's <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-2-trillion-infrastructure-plan-roads-bridges-broadband-power-2021-3">Made in America Tax Plan</a> specifically targets profit shifting, and "would also eliminate the tax laws embedded in the 2017 TCJA that incentivize the offshoring of assets," <a href="https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/MadeInAmericaTaxPlan_Report.pdf">according to the Department of Treasury</a>.Before a global minimum tax passes, it would need OECD members to agree on a framework for the policies they want to implement. As BofA notes, a few major tax havens are in the EU, which would have to pass any proposal unilaterally. And there could be resistance in America, with at least one Republican - Senator Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) - <a href="https://www.toomey.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/toomey-a-minimum-global-corporate-income-tax-will-likely-fail-and-is-non-binding">speaking out</a> against it.But change is probably still on the way."What is clearer, in our view, is that the current political environment is ripe for progress on the issue," BofA said. "Given the rise in global debt because of the pandemic and the fiscal response, taxes will likely have to increase in many countries. The US probably has the most leeway to continue running large deficits, but it is leading the charge on the global minimum tax."

American corporations are paying their fair share - to international tax havens

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Sen. <keyword id="213453" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Elizabeth-Warren">Elizabeth Warren</keyword> told Axios the much-scrutinized <keyword id="1585198" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="filibuster">filibuster</keyword> has "deep roots in racism."</li><li>Some Democrats have been eyeing a reform to the filibuster, which could block Biden's agenda.</li><li>Democrats' other option, reconciliation, can only be used once per fiscal year, and they've already done that.</li></ul>Democrats have had unified control in Washington again since the January runoff elections, and just like the last time they held the White House, Senate, and House, under former President Barack Obama, Republican use of the filibuster could block their plans.As Democrats increasingly say they're open to reforming the filibuster to enact Biden's agenda, some are questioning the procedure's role in American history.Sen. Elizabeth Warren <a href="https://www.axios.com/elizabeth-warren-senate-filibuster-racist-2a820f54-45d6-4047-bb91-96cdc6c296e8.html">told Axios</a> that it "has deep roots in racism, and it should not be permitted to serve that function, or to create a veto for the minority. In a democracy, it's majority rules."As she told Axios, the founders wanted the Senate and House to function as simple majorities; ending a Senate filibuster requires 60 votes, which is obviously greater than a simple majority."The filibuster is a later creation that was designed to give the South the ability to veto any effective civil rights legislation or anti lynching legislation," Warren also told Axios.Warren did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.Warren isn't the first Democrat to point to the filibuster's role in the potential obstruction of the Civil Rights Act. In January, <a href="https://twitter.com/RashidaTlaib/status/1353853736637112321">Rep. Rashida Tlaib tweeted</a>:"The longest filibuster ever held on the US Senate floor was 60 days in 1964 to prevent the passing of <a href="https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-filibuster-that-almost-killed-the-civil-rights-act/">the Civil Rights Act</a>. The filibuster is a tool of obstruction. It does not encourage debate, it does not allow for more voices to be heard, it is for suppression only. End it."In his eulogy for Rep. John Lewis, former President Barack Obama called to <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/obama-calls-for-abolishing-the-filibuster-in-john-lewis-eulogy-2020-7">abolish the filibuster</a> if the step would allow federal voting laws to be passed. In fact, the House just passed H.R. 1, a major voting rights bill, but the Senate version <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/us-house-passes-hr-1-democracy-reform-voting-rights-package-2021-3">currently faces the threat of a filibuster</a>.<h2>More pivotal Democrats are weighing in on the filibuster</h2>In an <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/biden-supports-reforming-senate-filibuster-abc-news-exclusive/story?id=76499156">ABC News interview</a>, President <keyword id="99719" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Joe-Biden">Joe Biden</keyword> said he supports reforming the filibuster and bringing back the talking filibuster - where senators have to keep talking throughout their filibuster.And a sweeping piece from <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-filibuster-reform/2021/03/17/13780bfa-872c-11eb-8a8b-5cf82c3dffe4_story.html?utm_source=feedly&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=wp_politicspolitics">The Washington Post</a> looks into the current debate over the filibuster following Biden's reform endorsement; there's still hesitancy among some Democrats, while others think a simple majority should be required to end a filibuster. As <a href="https://www.vox.com/2021/3/17/22336181/joe-manchin-filibuster-reform-41-votes-talking-jeff-merkley-senate-rules">Vox reported</a>, pivotal Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin has seemingly signaled some support for a talking filibuster, but doesn't support lowering the vote threshold from 60.Meanwhile, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell wrote in a <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-scorched-earth-senate-11616000875?utm_source=newsletter&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&amp;stream=topp;stream=top">Wall Street Journal op-ed</a> that if Democrats were to alter the filibuster "<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/mcconnell-says-dems-erasing-filibuster-will-release-furies-2021-3?utm_source=facebook.com&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_campaign=sf-bi-main&amp;fbclid=IwAR2Lifet-faVLqlO9X1nbMNunh8uYgTNxdItm2DK4FQ_fXtY590saXBGFWoY590saXBGFWo">they'll unleash furies they can barely imagine</a>."Insider's Joseph Zeballos-Roig <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/how-senate-filibuster-threatens-slam-brakes-biden-agenda-60vote-threshold-2021-1">previously reported</a> that the filibuster could prove to be a major barrier for the potential quick passage of Biden's policies. He also reported that, per the strict rules surrounding it, Democrats could only use reconciliation twice this fiscal year. That comes as they eye a <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/democrats-infrastructure-package-jobs-bill-after-biden-stimulus-bipartisan-talks-2021-3">larger infrastructure package</a>.And the Senate used reconciliation to pass <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-to-sign-19-trillion-american-rescue-plan-on-thursday-2021-3">Biden's American Rescue Plan</a> after <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/stimulus-no-republican-in-congress-voted-for-biden-stimulus-package-2021-3">no Republicans voted in favor of it</a> - meaning they essentially have <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2021/02/05/what-is-reconciliation-in-congress/">just one more use remaining this fiscal year</a>.

You Searched For "essential commodities act reform" and got 12 results

Monsoon session of Parliament: All you need to know about the Essential Commodities ordinance

BI India Bureau

Bernie Sanders says the Arizona Democratic Party was 'exactly right' in censuring Sen. Kyrsten Sinema over her vote to preserve the filibuster

John L. Dorman

Survey suggests scrapping of 'anachronistic' Essential Commodity Act 1955

PTI

Prices of alcohols used in making hand sanitizers capped under Essential Commodities Act: Govt

PTI

Masks, hand santizers declared 'essential commodities'

PTI

Modi is using the COVID-19 crisis to push through APMC reforms he has wanted for long⁠— but states may oppose

Rounak Jain

Govt notifies hand sanitizers, surgical masks, gloves as essential commodities

PTI

The CFTC just gave $200 million to a whistleblower in its biggest-ever award to a single individual

Matthew Fox

Democrats are struggling to unite on stock trading ban details as the window for reform narrows

Bryan Metzger,Camila DeChalus…

Centre Mulling To Amend Laws To Check Hoarding, Black Marketing

BI India Bureau

American corporations are paying their fair share - to international tax havens

Juliana Kaplan

Elizabeth Warren says the filibuster has 'deep roots in racism'

Juliana Kaplan

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides