Politico

President Joe Biden is “confident” that his son Hunter didn’t break the law, White House chief of staff Ron Klain said Sunday.

“Of course the president is confident that his son didn’t break the law,” Klain said on ABC’s “This Week.”

Hunter Biden’s international business dealings have been under investigation since 2020, but discussion about his conduct has accelerated in recent weeks with confirmation that a laptop dropped off at a repair shop in Delaware was indeed his. Among the questions is whether he exploited his family name to make dubious or illegal business deals, and whether his father was aware of what he is/was doing.

Klain said the president has had no contact with the Justice Department on the matter and that the White House is letting the matter play out in the legal system without interference.

“The president is confident that his family did the right thing,” Klain told host George Stephanopoulos. “But again, I want to just be really clear. These are actions by Hunter and his brother. They’re private matters. They don’t involve the president. And they certainly are something that no one at the White House is involved in.”

Saying Biden believes in an independent legal system, Klain also said he never heard the president speak in favor of the prosecution of former President Donald Trump.

“One reason why Joe Biden got elected,” Klain said, “was he promised he would take the decision over who got prosecuted and what away from the White House and put it in the Justice Department. Only Richard Nixon and Donald Trump in the modern era believed that prosecution decisions should be made in the Oval Office.”

White House chief of staff Ron Klain said Sunday the Ukrainians “are winning the war” in the northern part of their country but the overall war is nowhere near won.

Speaking on ABC’s “This Week,” Klain said Ukrainian forces “are winning the war around Kyiv and the northern part of the country” but the withdrawal of Russian forces from those areas is most likely a strategic redeployment by President Vladimir Putin and Russia’s military commanders.

“There’s a lot of evidence that Putin is simply taking his troops out of the northern part of the country to redeploy them to the eastern part of the country,” Klain told host George Stephanopoulos.

He added: “There have been victories for the Ukrainians so far, but this war, sadly, is far from over.”

Klain said the Ukrainians have fought bravely and valiantly in fending off Russia invaders. He also said the United States and its NATO allies have to continue to support President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his nation’s military.

“The military future of this attack has to be pushed back,” he said. “That’s why we’re doing so much to back President Zelenskyy and his military with the tools they need, with the weapons they need, with the other aid they need to oust the Russian invasion from their country.”

Speaking later on the same program, Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said he was curious to know what Putin thought of Ukraine’s robust resistance to February’s invasion.

“What would be interesting, I think, would be to know,” Blunt said, “was whether Putin was more surprised by the incredible resistance of the Ukrainians; the rallying around of NATO to the original and unified purpose of NATO, particularly the German change in attitude; or how poorly his own military has performed. I’m sure he’s surprised by all three of those.”

Blunt added: “I don’t think anybody could have anticipated those three big events.”

President Joe Biden on Wednesday held a meeting with the parents of Trevor Reed, a former U.S. Marine detained in Russia, during which he pledged to “continue to work to secure” their son’s release.

Joey and Paula Reed demonstrated outside of the White House on Wednesday, as they urged the president to do more to bring their son home. Their public efforts attracted media attention and resulted in the in-person meeting they’d been hoping for.

“During their meeting, the President reiterated his commitment to continue to work to secure the release of Trevor, Paul Whelan, and other Americans wrongfully held in Russia and elsewhere, and to provide all possible assistance until they and others are free and returned home to their families who are advocating so passionately for their release,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in a statement.

The meeting was Biden’s second interaction with the family this month, as Russia’s attack on Ukraine continues to dominate the news cycle and the Reed family takes its pleas for help to the airwaves. He held a call with Trevor Reed’s parents, as well as his sister, after a trip to Fort Worth, Texas, earlier this month. The family lives less than an hour from Fort Worth and waited for the president’s motorcade to pass, in hopes of holding an in-person meeting with the president.

Their demonstration in Washington on Wednesday had a different result, catching Biden’s attention earlier in the day.

“I’m going to see if I can get to see them,” Biden said after an event earlier on Wednesday, adding that the White House was working on coordinating a meeting. “They’re good people.”

Trevor Reed’s parents have been vocal on news networks from MSNBC to Newsmax, as they try to ramp up public pressure to secure their son’s release. Earlier on Wednesday, before they had the White House meeting, Joey Reed said on MSNBC that they hoped to tell Biden more about their son than he’d read in a report from the government.

“And remind him that our son was willing to die for him and his family when he guarded him as the vice president at Camp David,” Joey Reed said on MSNBC.

The family said its meeting with Biden lasted more than 30 minutes, according to CNN, adding that Biden listened “intently.”

“We couldn’t have asked for more,” Joey Reed said.

Paula Reed echoed her husband’s message and said they were able to “say what we wanted to say.” She also said the president listened closely, and that they were “grateful” for that.

Trevor Reed has been in prison in Russia for more than two years. He was arrested in Moscow in 2019 after a night of drinking and was sentenced to nine years in prison on assault charges for what the Russian authorities described as endangering the “life and health” of local police officers. Both Reed and his family have vehemently denied the charges; the U.S. ambassador to Russia, John Sullivan, has condemned them as “absurd.”

Reed’s parents say they last spoke to their son on July 15, 2021. They’ve recently expressed concerns about his deteriorating health, particularly worries that he has tuberculosis.

Psaki’s statement said Biden’s national security team would stay in contact with the Reeds, the Whelan family and other families of hostages or Americans detained in foreign countries. She also noted that national security adviser Jake Sullivan had met with the Reed family twice, once in a virtual group and another time privately.

“We understand the pain felt by all of Trevor’s families and friends enduring the nightmare of his absence, which we are committed to bringing to an end,” Psaki said.

An aide to Eric Garcetti is pushing back against a former colleague who accused the Los Angeles mayor of knowingly turning a blind eye to alleged sexual assult and harrassment in his office.

In email correspondence Monday sent to California Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Alex Padilla — and obtained by POLITICO — Garcetti’s chief speechwriter Becca MacLaren disputes sworn testimony from former Communications Director Naomi Seligman that is threatening to derail Garcetti’s nomination as ambassador to India.

Seligman accused longtime Garcetti former aide Rick Jacobs of grabbing and kissing her on the lips in 2016 in front of other city staffers. Writing to Feinstein and Padilla, MacLaren said she “was present on that day and, categorically, did not witness any such act.”

“The alleged incident as described by Ms. Seligman in her testimony would have been shockingly inappropriate and extremely unprofessional,” MacLaren continues. “I would have noticed such behavior. I would not have stayed silent and sought to cover it up. And I would not have forgotten.”

MacLaren’s email to senators challenging her former colleague’s allegations represents the most significant public rebuttal to date from Garcetti’s inner circle. It also is a reflection of how much the claims against Jacobs — including a 2020 lawsuit brought by an LAPD officer who was a bodyguard for the mayor — have thrown into doubt Garcetti’s posting in New Delhi.

Reached by phone on Wednesday, MacLaren said she decided to speak up because the public debate about Garcetti has been “one-sided” and she felt strongly “that I know the truth and that I have something to add to the story.” She added, “it’s not a comfortable thing for me to put myself forward and go on the record.”

MacLaren added that she was not asked by Garcetti or anyone else to write on his behalf.

Seligman has led the charge against Garcetti’s confirmation, enlisting the help of the nonprofit outfit Whistleblower Aid to file a perjury complaint against him and repeatedly arguing the Biden administration should rescind his nomination.

Her allegation is one of several Jacobs faces, including some contained in published text messages also reviewed by POLITICO. According to Seligman, Jacobs gave her the unwanted kiss on the day after a State of the City speech in 2016. A city commissioner, Rebecca Ninburg, testified that Seligman told her about the incident soon after.

Other staffers who were in the office that day have said they didn’t see Jacobs act inappropriately.

In an interview Wednesday, Seligman said she would not be deterred by those, including MacLaren, trying to refute her testimony.

“His staff lied under oath about not seeing anything so it’s no different that they lied about this,” Seligman said of her former Los Angeles city colleagues. “Those of us who have told the truth know that Mayor Garcetti witnessed the abuse and Rick Jacobs enacted it.”

“They have done whatever they can to discredit me and this is part of that pattern. They have retaliated against me and other whistleblowers and victims. Instead of focusing on the years of abuse and the victims they are focused on retaliation against me. Mayor Garcetti should be ashamed.”

On Tuesday, POLITICO reported that multiple Democratic senators have privately raised concerns over Garcetti’s professed lack of knowledge about the allegations against Jacobs. While the Biden administration continues to express confidence about the nomination’s prospects, losing Democrats would force the administration to rely on Republican support. Currently, two Republican Senators have said they’re putting a hold on the Garcetti nomination until a more thorough investigation of the matter is completed. A Democratic Hill aide said that at a legislative director briefing on Wednesday, it was made clear that 50 Senate Democratic votes do not currently exist for Garcetti.

The battle over Garcetti’s confirmation had mostly unfolded behind closed doors. But it surfaced in earnest after he sailed through the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, where the mayor testified to senators that he had no prior knowledge of Jacobs’ alleged behavior. Garcetti added in the hearing that had he known about Jacobs’ conduct he would have taken action.

In the ensuing weeks, however, Seligman and others have been imploring senators to look more closely at the record and challenge Garcetti’s claims.

MacLaren, who has worked for Garcetti for six years, said she didn’t initially come forward to challenge Seligman’s account because she was busy as a new mother. But MacLaren does reveal that, in February 2022 — not long after Seligman filed a complaint against Garcetti — she spoke on the record with The Los Angeles Times and shared her experience and perspective. The Times has yet to publish the story that details MacLaren’s pushback.

In the email to Feinstein and Padilla, MacLaren says she never cared much for Jacobs personally or professionally and would take steps to avoid him at the office. “I found him to be obnoxious and condescending — harsh in his criticism about the speechwriting team’s work, but unwilling to provide us with constructive feedback,” MacLaren writes.

But she describes the mood on the morning of Jacobs’ alleged unwanted kiss of Seligman as celebratory when he came by to offer his congratulations.

“I was deeply disturbed when I read her account — both because I believe her allegation to be untrue and because it suggests that her team (myself included) stood by and did nothing,” she writes.

MacLaren goes on to say that she doesn’t believe Garcetti would enable or ignore any claim of sexual misconduct.

President Joe Biden will receive his second Covid-19 booster shot, the White House announced Wednesday.

The president’s decision comes one day after the FDA authorized a second booster of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines for adults 50 years and older. Later the same day, the CDC recommended all adults age 50 and older receive an additional vaccine dose.

Biden, 79, received the first dose of the Pfizer vaccine in December 2020 and the second in January 2021, both on live television. The president received the Pfizer booster in September 2021 and will get his second booster shot on Wednesday after delivering remarks on his administration’s ongoing efforts to combat the pandemic.

“I’m doing this to demonstrate that people should be prepared when it’s available to take the vaccine,” Biden said while receiving his first dose. “There’s nothing to worry about.”

The White House has dealt with a series of Covid scares in recent weeks. Second gentleman Doug Emhoff tested positive in mid-March, as did Irish Taoiseach Micheál Martin, whose positive test came during a St. Patrick’s Day visit to Washington. White House press secretary Jen Psaki tested positive last week, and deputy press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre is currently isolating after to a positive test.

On Tuesday, White House communications director Kate Bedingfield said the president would receive a fourth dose “if his doctor recommends” it, emphasizing the decision would come “in consultation with his doctor.”

The White House on Tuesday reacted with deep skepticism to Russia’s promise to reduce violence in Ukraine as a means of paving the way for possible peace talks, with government officials suggesting that the Kremlin was simply redirecting, not ending, its invasion.

Negotiations in Istanbul between Ukrainian and Russian officials seemed to yield some progress to a possible meeting between Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Russia’s Vladimir Putin. As for a direct discussion between Putin and President Joe Biden himself, White House officials firmly underscored that Moscow would need to take more convincing steps toward curtailing the war before any such talk would take place, according to two administration officials not authorized to speak publicly about private deliberations.

The reaction from the White House was a veritable dousing of cold water on what, hours earlier, seemed like one of the first, sincere potential diplomatic breakthrough weeks into the bloody conflict. At the talks in Turkey, both Ukrainian and Russian sides said moves were being made toward a leaders’ summit, as Kyiv for the first time signaled a willingness to hold negotiations over territory seized by Moscow. Russian Deputy Defense Minister Alexander Fomin said his military planned to “fundamentally cut back” military activity near the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv and another northern city in an effort “to increase trust” around the peace talks.

But Biden administration officials cautioned that while they had seen a recent reduction in Russian attacks around Kyiv and Chernihiv, violence had continued unabated and even grown elsewhere, particularly in southern and eastern Ukraine. Moreover, the officials said that the pause near Kyiv may be a ruse to resupply troops and that the violence could ramp up at any time.

“I’ve not seen anything to suggest that this is moving forward in an effective way because we have not seen signs of real seriousness” from Russia, said Secretary of State Antony Blinken at a press conference in Morocco.

More vitally, even if Russia did silence its guns near the Ukrainian capital, it still very much was conducting an active assault on other regions — which would inherently undermine any sort of cease fire, according to the U.S. officials.

Feeding the new push for diplomacy has been the growing recognition that the Russian invasion has badly stalled, with Moscow taking huge manpower and equipment losses. Biden aides, buoyed by Ukraine’s military campaign to date, nevertheless scoffed at the suggestion that Putin was ending the war, instead believing he likely was temporarily focusing on a more winnable region, the officials said. The Donbas region — parts of which have been held by Kremlin-backed separatist forces since 2014 — appeared to be a particular target.

Putin’s campaign has gone so unexpectedly poorly that U.S. officials have begun reviewing their own intelligence assessments to determine how they could have so badly misjudged the strength of the Russian military. Despite pouring billions of dollars into modernizing Russia’s military, Putin’s forces have been saddled with poor equipment, communications and morale — all leading to, so far, a stalemate against a much smaller and overmatched foe.

To that point, one U.S. official bluntly said: “The Russians really fucked this up.”

Still, one U.S. official, who like others would only speak about sensitive geopolitical matters on condition of anonymity, said Tuesday that “no one should be fooled by Russia’s announcements” and added that the administration believes “any movement of Russian forces from around Kyiv is a redeployment, not a withdrawal, and the world should be prepared for a major offensive against other areas of Ukraine.”

Michael Kofman, research program director in the Russia Studies Program at the CNA think tank, said that even a retrenchment to focus on the Donbas could still leave Russia with “sufficient presence to fix Ukrainian forces around Kyiv.”

“We should see this as a sign that Russia is revising down its war aims,” said Kofman, “and expanding options to end this phase of the conflict while spinning it as a victory with domestic audiences.”

White House officials stressed that it was encouraged that peace negotiations were occurring. But earlier signals from Moscow about a willingness to negotiate were almost immediately proven to be a ruse, with Russian forces instead only ramping up their assaults. There has been no concrete signs of troop withdrawals back to Russia; the only movement so far has been different deployments within Ukraine.

“They have lied about everything else, why should we start believing them now?” asked a second U.S. official.

Though some analysts believe a conversation or summit between Biden and Putin may be needed to bring the war to a close, the White House has been unwilling to conduct any direct negotiations. Instead Biden officials have left it to other world leaders, such as French President Emmanuel Macron, to convey messages to and talk with the Russian leader. Macron and Putin had a conversation on Tuesday after Biden and Macron spoke as part of a larger call.

Officials said that a call between Biden and Putin would only be set up if Russia first shows tangible signs of winding down hostilities. The White House offered a conversation before the invasion but revoked it once Russian forces went into Ukraine. Aides made clear Tuesday that a presidential call carries significant diplomatic weight and should be used as a final or near-final step; they did not want to set up a summit only to see Putin ramp up the violence in its aftermath.

Putin’s ability to withstand the international pressure and heavy economic sanctions placed on his country has left Biden and his allies with limited options. The war to this point has killed thousands, left entire cities ruined and forced the displacement of millions of Ukrainians, but Biden has repeatedly stressed his unwillingness to risk a confrontation with Russia that would escalate into World War III.

U.S. officials theorize that the nod toward peace talks may be a feint to buy time to resupply Russia’s beleaguered forces. Moreover, a possible Russian move away from Kyiv, even a temporary one, may be a face-saving effort to cover for the extraordinary amount of losses Putin’s forces have taken. Moscow badly misjudged the strength of the Ukrainian resistance — as well as its own might — and has lost a huge amount of men and machines.

U.S. officials have warned against growing overconfident amid Russia’s stalled invasion. Biden, in a secure call Tuesday morning, urged the leaders of France, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom to keep the pressure on Moscow and continue sending arms and equipment to Ukraine.

Just back from a trip to Europe to rally the allies, Biden has escalated the rhetoric against Russia, refusing to back down from his off-the-cuff suggestion that Putin should leave power even though he insisted he was making a moral judgment and not calling for regime change.

Ukrainian officials signaled Tuesday that they would be willing to negotiate the status of Crimea — the Ukrainian peninsula that Moscow seized in 2014 — in talks to be conducted over a period of 15 years. And some military analysts believe Putin may soon pull out some ground forces from hot zones and instead settle in to conduct a lengthy, long-range bombing campaign to shatter Ukrainian cities.

But even that, though devastating to Ukraine, would be a far cry from Moscow’s early belief that it could topple Kyiv in a matter of days.

“It’s a huge retreat from Putin’s initial war aims,” said Jeffrey Edmonds, former Russia director on Obama’s National Security Council and now adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security think tank. “This is a huge defeat to Putin’s maximalist initial goals. The Russian leadership is trying to salvage a military fiasco.”

President Joe Biden on Tuesday said he would reserve judgment on Russia’s announcement that it plans to dramatically reduce its military assault around Ukraine’s capital, and that he would wait to “see if they follow through” on the pledge to de-escalate.

“We’ll see. I don’t read anything into it until I see what their actions are,” Biden told reporters at the White House, speaking at a joint news conference with Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

Following peace negotiations in Istanbul earlier Tuesday between Russian and Ukrainian delegations, Russian Deputy Defense Minister Alexander Fomin said Moscow had decided “to fundamentally cut back military activity in the direction of Kyiv and Chernihiv” in Ukraine’s north.

More than a month after Russian President Vladimir Putin launched his invasion, Russian forces remain stalled in the northern part of the country as well as in the south, where they had made earlier gains, according to U.S. officials.

Russian forces now appear to be prioritizing eastern Ukraine, particularly the breakaway Donbas region, in an effort to prevent Ukrainian forces there from reinforcing the western part of the country, U.S. officials assess.

Colonel General Sergei Rudskoy, first deputy chief of Russia’s General Staff, said last Friday that “the main tasks of the first stage” of Russia’s invasion “have been completed,” and that Russian forces now would focus their efforts in the Donbas.

Biden’s remarks on the latest Russian announcement came after he participated in a Ukraine-focused call earlier Tuesday with the leaders of France, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom.

Biden said there was an apparent “consensus” following the conversation that the Western nations should “just see what [the Russians] have to offer.”

“We’ll find out what they do,” Biden said. “But in the meantime, we’re going to continue to keep strong the sanctions, we’re going to continue to provide the Ukrainian military with the capacity to defend themselves, and we’re going to continue to keep a close eye on what’s going on.”

President Joe Biden’s mammoth budget request reflects the frustrations of an administration that can’t yet move past the pandemic, didn’t get to enact its huge social spending package, and now must add Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to its pile of national security challenges.

The multitrillion-dollar proposal released Monday also seeks to build on the achievements of Biden’s first year, including the passage of the new infrastructure law, while chipping away at long-term priorities such as climate change and competition with China.

The reality? Congress will, as always, enact its own spending priorities. And not only will that likely look pretty different from Biden’s request, but lawmakers also won’t necessarily get it done before the next fiscal year dawns in October.

Here’s a high-level look at what Biden’s proposal includes, and why that matters — especially as the midterm elections approach:

A more modest defense boost than many in Congress want

What Biden requested: The White House asked Congress for $813 billion for national defense on Monday — including $773 billion for the Pentagon, or $30 billion more than approved by Congress for this year. The administration is focusing on China as the “pacing challenge” for the Pentagon, its budget documents released in the morning say.

The impact of Russia’s invasion on Ukraine last month, however, will loom large over how the new request is received in Congress. Despite the high top-line request, considering inflation, it is only a 1.5 percent real increase from the fiscal 2022 budget — a fact that will draw the ire of many in Congress who have pushed for a 5 to 7 percent increase, citing Russian aggression and continued Chinese military modernization efforts. The national defense budget enacted for this year was $782 billion.

Why it matters: The budget will make new investments in the nation’s nuclear triad, and in building a new long-range stealth bomber and new nuclear-powered submarines. It will also increase investments in hypersonic weapons development and building up the defense industrial base, in particular, funding upgrades to the Navy’s public and private shipyards.

Overseas, the request includes $6.9 billion for the European Deterrence Initiative — up from a $3.6 billion request in 2022 — and $1.8 billion for expanding U.S. military presence in the Indo-Pacific region.

There is an additional $682 million for Ukraine, “to counter Russian malign influence and to meet emerging needs related to security, energy, cybersecurity issues, disinformation, macroeconomic stabilization, and civil society resilience,” according to a budget document.

Another shot at taxing the uber-rich

What Biden requested: Biden’s plan would require the top 0.1 percent of earners, those worth more than $100 million, to pay at least 20 percent in taxes on a combination of their income and their unrealized gains in assets like their stock portfolios. Those gains are not currently taxed.

The administration estimates the plan would raise $360 billion over the next decade.

Why it matters: This would be a dramatic change in the way the wealthy are taxed. Democrats are philosophically united in their desire to see the wealthy pay higher taxes, but they part ways over the details. In particular, some Democrats have balked at wealth taxes like the one Biden is proposing. Implementing such a plan would be complex and also raises arcane constitutional issues.

A ‘historic’ bump for antitrust enforcement

What Biden requested: He asked for a total of more than $200 million extra for the federal government’s two antitrust agencies, which are coping with a crush of corporate mergers while waging legal battles against the nation’s wealthiest tech giants.

Biden’s proposed budget includes $287 million for the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division, a 49 percent increase from what Congress has enacted for the fiscal current year, and $491 million for the Federal Trade Commission, up 30 percent. The White House described both as “historic increases.”

Why it matters: Both agencies have been asking for more money for years, and the FTC has been so short of cash that its leaders have discussed shrinking their staff and warned against taking on more cases.

At the same time, both agencies have taken on major antitrust battles in recent years, especially against the tech giants: DOJ sued Google in October 2020 and is expected to sue Apple sometime this year, while the FTC has filed suit against Meta and has been pursuing an investigation of Amazon. All these cases are likely to be expensive and lengthy.

Biden has also identified an assault on monopolies and concentrated corporate power as a major priority for his administration, issuing a sweeping executive order on the topic last summer. He has placed progressive anti-monopoly advocates in charge of both the antitrust division and the FTC. “The budget reflects the administration’s commitment to vigorous marketplace competition through robust enforcement of antitrust law,” reads a fact sheet the White House released on Monday.

But the antitrust agenda has received a rough reception from some members of Congress, including both Democrats and Republicans from Silicon Valley’s home state of California, as well as conservatives who have accused the FTC of pursuing “woke goals and policy priorities.”

A reined-in commitment on climate change

What Biden requested: Biden’s hugest climate ambitions have died in the Senate, but he’s still using this budget proposal to try to advance the cause — including $18 billion to help the country withstand the worsening wildfires, floods and storms fueled by rising temperatures.

The proposal would also devote $11 billion to help other nations transition to cleaner energy— nearly four times the amount that was pledged under the Obama administration.

Another $17 billion would go for climate research across its federal agencies, including $9 billion for Energy Department clean energy research, development and demonstration.

Spending at the Environmental Protection Agency would climb 25 percent from its 2022 level, with $1.5 billion for low-income areas and communities of color that have suffered disproportionately from pollution.

The Biden White House also called for eliminating several tax incentives for oil and gas producers — a frequent proposal from Democratic administrations — which the White House estimates would save the government $43.6 billion over 10 years. However, like in previous years, the plan is likely to get stripped out in Congress.

Why it matters: Biden has sought to make climate change a central part of his administration, but roadblocks in the Senate have prevented major efforts to combat rising temperatures or prepare for worsening disasters. The big picture: The money in the budget proposal is nowhere near the $550 billion in climate measures that would have come from Democrats’ defunct Build Back Better bill.

Looking ahead to the next pandemic as Covid lingers

What Biden requested: The Biden administration has asked for a roughly 15 percent increase for the Department of Health and Human Services, requesting a $127 billion sum that includes major increases for pandemic preparedness and public health surveillance.

Biden is requesting $81.7 billion over five years to bolster pandemic preparedness and biodefense — including $28 billion for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to overhaul its health data and $9.9 billion toward boosting state and local health departments’ capacity. There also would be $12.1 billion for the National Institutes of Health to research and develop vaccines, tests and treatments for biological threats.

But those sweeping figures don’t include the immediate Covid-19 purchasing needs, HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra told reporters. The administration has warned it will begin running out of coronavirus treatments in May without new relief funds.

“What we need to continue to finish the job on Covid, we need immediately. What we’re asking for in this budget for long-term preparedness is very separate,” Becerra said.

Why it matters: The request comes just as the nation surveys the threat of the subvariant BA.2.

Outside of the pandemic, Biden backs extending Medicare telehealth flexibilities beyond the public health emergency to study their impact but did not specify for how long. The spending package Biden signed into law this month included a five-month extension post-emergency.

The administration is also requesting significant funding and authority tied to mental health services, including a provision that all private health plans cover mental health and substance use disorder and a requirement that mental health costs be comparable to physical health fees.

The youth mental health crisis, in particular, has concerned Biden officials and lawmakers who are calling for counseling and education services as well as a crackdown on harmful social media use.

“We know this is something that we have to tackle as quickly as we can,” Becerra said as he highlighted requested funding bumps for in-school programs and a federal crisis hotline, 988.

The health department also wants $500 million for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ survey group, which the administration says would support safety inspections at American nursing homes. Such group homes have long faced safety complaints and became deadly for many seniors during the Covid-19 pandemic after the facilities failed to contain infections.

Building on the infrastructure law

What Biden requested: The administration is pushing forward with the Democrats’ biggest accomplishment so far — the big infrastructure law, enacted last fall, that included $550 billion in new money for roads, bridges, railways and more.

That vision is reflected in Biden’s fiscal 2023 budget request for the Transportation Department — including $68 billion for the highway program alone, which will go toward helping states fix roads and bridges, boost electric vehicle charging infrastructure and harden infrastructure against increasingly volatile weather events.

It also reflects a commitment to transit, with $21 billion going to the Federal Transit Administration, the bulk of which will be disbursed as grants for bus and transit system projects.

Because the budget largely reflects action Congress has already taken, unlike other years or requests for other agencies, this one is likely to stand.

Why it matters: Democrats will use the big boost to infrastructure dollars, and the shift to an express focus in climate and equity concerns, as they campaign in the coming elections.

Campus-based aid programs

What Biden requested: $880 million in funding for the Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant program.

Why it matters: The program provides funding to help low-income students attend college, and Biden’s proposal asks for a lower allotment. The current funding is $895 million.

What’s not included: marijuana protections (again)

What Biden requested: Biden’s proposed fiscal year 2023 budget does not include protections for recreational marijuana markets — despite promises to do so.

Why it matters: During the 2020 presidential campaign, Biden said he would let states set their own rules about recreational marijuana use. The federal budget has included protections for medical programs in states, territories and the District of Columbia since 2014, and the House twice voted to extend those to recreational markets.

The president’s budget, however, leaves out the language, which would prohibit the Department of Justice from spending money to crack down on state-regulated adult-use cannabis programs. The proposed budget retains a rider that limits the ability of the District of Columbia to tax and regulate the production and sale of marijuana. Commonly known as the “Harris Rider,” the budget language prohibits the District from using federal funding to establish an adult-use market.

Advocates and lawmakers in the District hoped that a Democratic-led government would remove those prohibitions for its weed industry, though neither branch of the federal government has yet accomplished the removal of the Harris Rider. D.C. residents voted to legalize recreational marijuana in 2014.

The budget proposal also does not make available any funds that would help carry out Biden’s campaign promises on marijuana policy. During the campaign, Biden said he wanted to make medical marijuana available, but no funds were set aside in the budget for any agency to prepare for legalizing and regulating medical marijuana — or even for HHS to conduct the process necessary for rescheduling under the Controlled Substances Act.

Biden also said no one should be in jail for marijuana convictions, and his campaign told POLITICO that as president, Biden would “decriminalize marijuana use [and] automatically expunge prior possession convictions.” The president’s fiscal 2023 budget, however, did not set aside any funding for DOJ or states to identify eligible candidates and process pardons, commutations or expungements of records.

Paul McLeary, Toby Eckert, Emily Birnbaum, Michael Stratford, Zack Colman, Alex Gullen, Ben Lefebvre, Natalie Fertig, Kathryn A. Wolfe, Sarah Owermohle, Ben Leonard and Rachael Levy contributed to this report.

“Regime change” in Russia is not American policy, the U.S. ambassador to NATO said Sunday.

Speaking on “Fox News Sunday,” Ambassador Julianne Smith said President Joe Biden’s statement Saturday that “For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power” was not meant to demand that President Vladimir Putin be toppled in Russia.

After Biden’s speech in Poland, his remarks sparked a round of clarifications from various American officials. On Sunday, Smith addressed those remarks as well.

“Let me be clear and just state right off the the bat that the U.S. does not have a policy of regime change toward Russia,” Smith told host John Roberts.

She added: “But I think what we all agree on is that President Putin cannot be empowered to wage war. He has attacked Ukraine in a premeditated, unprovoked conflict.”

When pressed further on Biden’s seemingly off-the-cuff statement, Smith seemed to suggest that the president’s statement might have been an emotional response to his encounters earlier in the day with refugees from the war now in Poland.

“He went to the national stadium in Warsaw and literally met with hundreds of Ukrainian refugees. He listened to their heroic stories about fleeing Ukraine in the wake of Russia’s brutal aggression there, and it was a very moving day,” she said. “We don’t want to see Putin continuing this war.”

Later on the same show, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) also suggested that Biden’s remark was based on his emotions.

“The president was speaking from his heart,” Khanna said.

Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho) told CNN’s Dana Bash that regardless of his motives, Biden needed to be more disciplined.

“As you pointed out already, there was a horrendous gaffe right at the end of it,” he said on “State of the Union.” “I wish he would stay on script. Whoever wrote that speech did a good job for him. My gosh, I wish they would keep him on script. I think most people who don’t deal in the lane of foreign relations don’t realize those nine words that he uttered would cause the kind of eruption that they did.”

“Any time you say or even, as he did, suggest that the policy was regime change, it’s going to cause a huge problem,” Risch said.