[ad_1]
[ad_2]Source link
[ad_1]
Erika Kirk, Charlie Kirk’s widow, spoke Sunday at the memorial service for her husband.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
Watch CBS News
[ad_1]
Mikey McCoy, Tyler Bowyer, Justin Streiff and Stacy Sheridan spoke about their slain colleague, Charlie Kirk, Sunday at the conservative activist’s memorial service in Arizona.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
In the aftermath of conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s assassination, a debate about political rhetoric and its impact on recent spates of political violence has taken hold on Capitol Hill and across the country.
While both Republicans and Democrats have condemned political violence of all kinds, their views vary on how much inflammatory political rhetoric plays a role. Some Republicans have accused the left’s rhetoric of fostering an “assassination culture” on the left, while Democrats have accused Republicans of attacks on free speech.
One member of Congress, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., attempted to steer the conversation towards gun control as opposed to rhetoric as the cause for the increase in political violence.
“This isn’t just about what happened to Charlie Kirk. At the same time his tragic killing was happening, three kids were getting shot in school, and that was one or two weeks after another couple of kids were getting shot, in church, at mass, at a Catholic school,” Ocasio-Cortez said.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., suggested gun control was more to blame than violent rhetoric when asked about the potentially growing ‘assassination culture’ in the United States. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
But GOP firebrand Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., did not mince words about those who continue to foment hatred for conservatives with inflammatory rhetoric.
“We need to shame these people out of polite society, shame them out of existence. They need to be fired from their jobs. They are putting lives in danger,” Mace said. “They are denying that they’re celebrating the political assassination and murder of Charlie Kirk, but they’re liars. They’re lying through their teeth.”
Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have called on others to “turn down the heat” in the wake of Kirk’s assassination. Americans from all walks of life have been facing repercussions over their decision to mock, or praise, Kirk’s death, including K-12 education officials, college professors, healthcare professionals, political pundits, writers and a list of other professionals from various sectors and major companies, such as the law firm Perkins Coie, the company behind the New York Stock Exchange, NASDAQ, and Office Depot, among others.

Memorials honoring Charlie Kirk have been held across the country and overseas, including in Berlin. Kirk was assassinated on Sept. 10, 2025. ( Ilkin Eskipehlivan /Anadolu via Getty Images)
Rep. Ritchie Torres, D-N.Y., said that everyone should have “the right to speak freely, otherwise America’s democratic tradition could be threatened.
“Look, there’s a limit to what Congress can do, because, you know, we have the First Amendment, which protects all forms of speech, including hate speech, but we should have a culture of condemning any rhetoric that glorifies violence. I see violence as the downfall of American democracy,” Torres said. “We all should have the right to speak freely, to think freely, without fear of harassment or intimidation or violence. And once we lose the ability to speak freely in the public square then democracy as we know it has come to an end.”

Rep. Ritchie Torres, D-N.Y., said political violence may become the “downfall of American democracy.” (Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., suggested possible remedies Congress could take to help reduce inflammatory rhetoric and its potential impact on violence.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
“You have to look at the role that social media companies play in allowing violent rhetoric to be on their sites. And what more can we do so that law enforcement can see these attacks sooner?” Swalwell asked. “I wait, and stand ready to learn, where there are signs that were missed by law enforcement. Because if that’s the case, we have to do better, because the temperature is only increasing.”
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
Democratic U.S. Representative Ilhan Omar of Minnesota was confronted on Friday about whether she regrets the timing of her comments immediately following the death of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
Omar said in an interview on CNN, “It’s one thing to care about his life because obviously so many people loved him, including his children and wife. But I am not going to sit here and be judged for not wanting to honor any legacy this man has left behind. That should be in the dustbin of history, and we should hopefully move on and forget the hate that he spewed every single day.”
Newsweek reached out to Turning Point USA via online form for comment.
The Democratic congresswoman said that she does not align with Kirk’s legacy, saying it was filled with “hate” and “rage baiting.”
Kirk, 31, a staunch supporter of President Donald Trump and a voice of MAGA for younger generations, had a significant social media following, with a podcast as co-founder of Turning Point USA.
He was fatally shot last week on the campus of Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah, during a question and answer session.
Omar also spoke with CNN’s Kaitlan Collins on Friday night about the congresswoman’s ongoing feud with Trump and Republican U.S. Representative Nancy Mace of South Carolina, which resulted in a failed censure vote this week in the House.
On September 18, the House narrowly rejected the resolution to censure Omar over her remarks and social media posts following the assassination of Kirk. The vote, which failed 214-213, blocked a proposal led by Mace that also called for Omar’s removal from her committee positions, including the House Committee on Education and the Workforce and the House Budget Committee.
The day after’s Kirk’s death, Omar spoke with journalist Mehdi Hasan on his Zeteo show, telling him: “There are a lot of people who are out there talking about him just wanting to have a civil debate. These people are full of s***, and it’s important for us to call them out while we feel anger and sadness.”
Four Republican lawmakers joined Democrats in opposing the censure, which Mace said was justified because of what she labeled as Omar’s disrespectful comments on Kirk.
“When we say we want a country that’s united, it starts with all of us and all of our actions and we’re not seeing that on the other side of the aisle right now,” Omar told Collins on Friday night.
The Minnesota Democrat also said that she extends “grace” to Kirk’s wife and kids in the interview with CNN, adding, “I cannot imagine what they are going through. But the reality is, his wife sat by him as he said those things.”
The Democratic lawmaker also called out Trump for urging her impeachment. A two-thirds vote is required to oust members of Congress; they cannot be impeached.
Trump, on Truth Social Thursday: “Ilhan Omar’s Country of Somalia is plagued by a lack of central Government control, persistent Poverty, Hunger, Resurgent Terrorism, Piracy, decades of Civil War, Corruption, and pervasive Violence. 70% of the population lives in extreme Poverty, and widespread Food Insecurity.
“Somalia is consistently ranked among the World’s Most Corrupt Countries, including Bribery, Embezzlement, and a Dysfunctional Government. All of this, and Ilhan Omar tells us how to run America! P.S. Wasn’t she the one that married her brother in order to gain Citizenship??? What SCUM we have in our Country, telling us what to do, and how to do it.
“Thank you for your attention to this matter. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”
Democratic Senator Tina Smith of Minnesota, on X Wednesday: “Just took a dip into the cesspool that is Nancy Mace’s social media. It’s shameful the way she is vilifying my friend Ilhan Omar to raise money for herself. Honestly, what Representative Mace has been doing illustrates all that is wrong with our politics right now.”
The failure of the censure motion leaves Omar in her current House committee posts, but Republican lawmakers have signaled that similar efforts could resume.
Update 9/19/25, 11:09 p.m. ET: This article has been updated with additional information.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
Former Vice President Kamala Harris revealed details of a phone conversation she held with President Donald Trump after conceding the 2024 presidential election.
Newsweek reached out to the White House via email Thursday night for comment.
Harris’ concession, her phone call with Trump and the new memoir carry political and historical significance.
The book documents the end of a 107-day campaign that placed the sitting vice president atop the Democratic ticket after former President Joe Biden withdrew, and offers an inside account of strategic decisions that shaped the race—notably Harris’ choice of running mate and calculations on electability and coalition-building.
These decisions, and how she recounts them, could shape how Democrats assess strategy moving forward.
According to excerpts reviewed by The New York Times, Harris said that during her concession phone call, she asked Trump to help bring the country together but knew in the moment it was “a lost cause.”
According to the Times, Trump said, “I am going to be so nice and respectful.”
“You are a tough, smart customer, and I say that with great respect. And you also have a beautiful name. I got use of that name, it’s Kamala,” Trump said, per the Times.
Harris said that Trump also pronounced her name correctly on the call after mispronouncing it while campaigning, the outlet added.
The former vice president also highlighted her selection of a running mate, saying she felt the world was not ready for a Black woman and a gay man on one ticket, so she did not choose former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg.
“He would have been an ideal partner,” Harris wrote, “if I were a straight white man. But we were already asking a lot of America: to accept a woman, a Black woman, a Black woman married to a Jewish man. But knowing what was at stake, it was too big of a risk,” per an excerpt reported by the Times.
Conservative commentator Scott Jennings, on X Thursday: “Kamala Harris claims she couldn’t pick Pete Buttigieg as her VP because he’s gay, so she settled for buffoon Tim Walz. So to her, being gay is a bigger liability than endorsing taxpayer-funded sex changes for minors?! This logic is incoherent. Voters made the right choice.”
This is a developing story that will be updated with additional information.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
The multimillion-dollar jousting over redrawing California’s congressional districts to boost Democrats and counter President Trump was on full display in recent days, as both sides courted voters less than a month before ballots begin arriving in mailboxes.
Gov. Gavin Newsom, national Democratic leaders including Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and a slew of political influencers held an hours-long virtual rally Tuesday afternoon, urging Californians to support Proposition 50 in the Nov. 4 special election. Speakers framed the stakes of the ballot measure as nothing short of existential — not just for Democratic interests, but also for democracy.
“It’s all at stake. This is a profound and consequential moment in American history. We can lose this republic if we do not assert ourselves and stand tall at this moment and stand guard to this republic and our democracy. I feel that in my bones,” Newsom said Tuesday afternoon.
If passed, Proposition 50 would gerrymander the state’s congressional districts to favor Democrats, bolstering the fates of several Democrats in vulnerable swing districts and potentially cost Republicans up to five House seats.
California’s congressional districts are drawn by a voter-approved independent commission once a decade after the U.S. census. But Newsom and other state Democrats proposed a rare mid-decade redrawing of the districts to increase the number of Democrats in Congress in response to similar efforts in GOP-led states, notably Texas.
Tuesday’s virtual rally, which was emceed by progressive influencer Brian Tyler Cohen, was a cross between an old-school money-raising telethon and new media streaming session. Popular podcasters and YouTubers such as Crooked Media’s Jon Favreau and Tommy Vietor (alumni of former President Obama’s administration), Ben Meiselas of MeidasTouch and David Pakman shared the screen with political leaders, with an on-screen fundraising thermometer inching higher throughout.
Cohen argued that people like him had been “begging” Democrats to fight Trump. And now elected officials had done their part by getting Proposition 50 on the ballot, he said, urging viewers to donate to support the effort.
Warren argued that Trump was a “would-be king” — but if Democrats could retake control of either house of Congress, that would be stopped, she posited.
“And if we have both houses under Democratic control,” Warren continued, “now we are truly back in the game in terms of making our Constitution work again.”
The exhaustive list of speakers represented the spectrum of the modern left, with standard-bearers such as Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York, alongside rising stars including Reps. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) and Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.). A number of California delegates, including Sen. Alex Padilla and Reps. Ted. Lieu, Robert Garcia, Pete Aguilar, Jimmy Gomez and Sydney Kamlager-Dove, also spoke.
The event had been scheduled to take place Sept. 10 but was postponed after the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk earlier that day.
Jessica Millan Patterson, the former leader of the California Republican Party and chair of an anti-Proposition 50 committee, accused Newsom of “scrambling for out-of-touch messengers to sell his scheme.”
“For Gavin Newsom, it’s all distraction and deflection. Instead of addressing the $283 million price tag taxpayers are stuck with for his partisan power grab, he’s hosting a cringeworthy webinar packed with DC politicians, out-of-state influencers, and irrelevant podcasters, all lining up to applaud his gerrymandered maps,” Millan Patterson said in a statement Tuesday.
Former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who championed the creation of the independent redistricting commission while in office and has campaigned to stop gerrymandering across the nation after his term ended, forcefully denounced Proposition 50 on Monday.
“They are trying to fight for democracy by getting rid of the democratic principles of California,” Schwarzenegger told hundreds of students at an event celebrating democracy at the University of Southern California. “It is insane to let that happen.”
The former governor, a Trump foe who has prioritized good governance at his institute at USC, said the effort to dismantle the independent commission’s congressional districts to counter Trump are anti-democratic.
“They want to get rid of it under the auspices of we have to fight Trump,” Schwarzenegger said. “It doesn’t make any sense to me because we have to fight Trump, [yet] we become Trump.”
And on the morning of Sept. 10, opponents of the ballot measure rallied in Orange County, speaking about how redrawing congressional districts would dilute the voice of communities around the state.
“We’re here because Prop. 50 poses a serious threat to Orange County’s voice, to our communities and to our taxpayers. This measure is not about fairness. It’s about power grab,” said Orange County Supervisor Janet Nguyen during a rally at the Asian Garden Mall in Little Saigon, a Vietnamese hub in Westminster. “And it comes at the expense of our taxpayers, our small businesses and our minority communities.”
She noted that Little Saigon would be grouped with Norwalk in Los Angeles County if the ballot measure passes.
“Ask anybody in this area if they even know where Norwalk is,” Nguyen said.
[ad_2]
Julia Wick, Seema Mehta
Source link
[ad_1]
The Senate has approved one of President Donald Trump’s top economic advisers for a seat on the Federal Reserve’s governing board, giving the White House greater influence over the central bank just two days before it is expected to vote in favor of reducing its key interest rate.The vote to confirm Stephen Miran was largely along party lines, 48-47. He was approved by the Senate Banking Committee last week with all Republicans voting in favor and all Democrats opposed.Miran’s nomination has sparked concerns about the Fed’s longtime independence from day-to-day politics after he said during a committee hearing earlier this month that he would keep his job as chair of the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers, though would take unpaid leave. Senate Democrats have said such an approach is incompatible with an independent Fed.Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said ahead of the vote that Miran “has no independence” and would be “nothing more than Donald Trump’s mouthpiece at the Fed.”The vote was along party lines, with Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski the only Republican to vote against Miran.Miran is completing an unexpired term that ends in January, after Adriana Kugler unexpectedly stepped down from the board Aug. 1. He said if he is appointed to a longer term he would resign from his White House job. Previous presidents have appointed advisers to the Fed, including former chair Ben Bernanke, who served in president George W. Bush’s administration. But Bernanke and others left their White House jobs when joining the board.Miran said during his Sept. 4 hearing that, if confirmed, “I will act independently, as the Federal Reserve always does, based on my own personal analysis of economic data.”Last year, Miran criticized what he called the “revolving door” of officials between the White House and the Fed, in a paper he co-wrote with Daniel Katz for the conservative Manhattan Institute. Katz is now chief of staff at the Treasury Department.Miran’s approval arrives as Trump’s efforts to shape the Fed have been dealt a setback elsewhere. He has sought to fire Fed governor Lisa Cook, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden to a term that ends in 2038. Cook sued to block the firing and won a first round in federal court, after a judge ruled the Trump administration did not have proper cause to remove her.The administration appealed the ruling, but an appeals court rejected that request late Monday. Members of the Fed’s board vote on all its interest rate decisions, and also oversee the nation’s financial system.The jockeying around the Fed is occurring as the economy is entering an uncertain and difficult period. Inflation remains stubbornly above the central bank’s 2% target, though it hasn’t risen as much as many economists feared when Trump first imposed sweeping tariffs on nearly all imports. The Fed typically would raise borrowing costs, or at least keep them elevated, to combat worsening inflation.At the same time, hiring has weakened considerably and the unemployment rate rose last month to a still-low 4.3%. The central bank often takes the opposite approach when unemployment rises, cutting rates to spur more borrowing, spending and growth.Economists forecast the Fed will reduce its key rate after its two-day meeting ends Wednesday, to about 4.1% from 4.3%. Trump has demanded much deeper cuts.
The Senate has approved one of President Donald Trump’s top economic advisers for a seat on the Federal Reserve’s governing board, giving the White House greater influence over the central bank just two days before it is expected to vote in favor of reducing its key interest rate.
The vote to confirm Stephen Miran was largely along party lines, 48-47. He was approved by the Senate Banking Committee last week with all Republicans voting in favor and all Democrats opposed.
Miran’s nomination has sparked concerns about the Fed’s longtime independence from day-to-day politics after he said during a committee hearing earlier this month that he would keep his job as chair of the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers, though would take unpaid leave. Senate Democrats have said such an approach is incompatible with an independent Fed.
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said ahead of the vote that Miran “has no independence” and would be “nothing more than Donald Trump’s mouthpiece at the Fed.”
The vote was along party lines, with Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski the only Republican to vote against Miran.
Miran is completing an unexpired term that ends in January, after Adriana Kugler unexpectedly stepped down from the board Aug. 1. He said if he is appointed to a longer term he would resign from his White House job. Previous presidents have appointed advisers to the Fed, including former chair Ben Bernanke, who served in president George W. Bush’s administration. But Bernanke and others left their White House jobs when joining the board.
Miran said during his Sept. 4 hearing that, if confirmed, “I will act independently, as the Federal Reserve always does, based on my own personal analysis of economic data.”
Last year, Miran criticized what he called the “revolving door” of officials between the White House and the Fed, in a paper he co-wrote with Daniel Katz for the conservative Manhattan Institute. Katz is now chief of staff at the Treasury Department.
Miran’s approval arrives as Trump’s efforts to shape the Fed have been dealt a setback elsewhere. He has sought to fire Fed governor Lisa Cook, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden to a term that ends in 2038. Cook sued to block the firing and won a first round in federal court, after a judge ruled the Trump administration did not have proper cause to remove her.
The administration appealed the ruling, but an appeals court rejected that request late Monday.
Members of the Fed’s board vote on all its interest rate decisions, and also oversee the nation’s financial system.
The jockeying around the Fed is occurring as the economy is entering an uncertain and difficult period. Inflation remains stubbornly above the central bank’s 2% target, though it hasn’t risen as much as many economists feared when Trump first imposed sweeping tariffs on nearly all imports. The Fed typically would raise borrowing costs, or at least keep them elevated, to combat worsening inflation.
At the same time, hiring has weakened considerably and the unemployment rate rose last month to a still-low 4.3%. The central bank often takes the opposite approach when unemployment rises, cutting rates to spur more borrowing, spending and growth.
Economists forecast the Fed will reduce its key rate after its two-day meeting ends Wednesday, to about 4.1% from 4.3%. Trump has demanded much deeper cuts.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
Among all the troublemaking members House Republican leaders have to deal with, Rep. Jen Kiggans isn’t on their list of problem children. That might be changing.
A former Navy helicopter pilot, nurse practitioner and mother of four, the 54-year-old Virginian is seen in the Republican Conference as something of a model member, hailing from one of the toughest swing districts in the country. She is viewed by her peers as personable and a team player. Of all the places Mike Johnson might have gone on the eve of the 2024 elections, the speaker chose to spend time with Kiggans — a strong show of leadership support for a freshman.
But Kiggans, now in her second term, has decided to stick her neck out on what’s shaping up to be one of the most politically explosive policy fights of the fall: the battle over extending boosted Affordable Care Act insurance subsidies that are due to expire on Dec. 31. Congressional budget forecasters are predicting major premium hikes if the subsidies sunset, which would force millions of people to drop health insurance coverage.
Twelve Republicans and seven Democrats are backing legislation that would enact a one-year extension of the subsidies, which are implemented in the form of enhanced tax credits. Kiggans is the lead sponsor and the GOP face of the effort.
In an interview, she called an extension good politics — and good for her constituents.
“In six weeks or so, people will get a notice that their health care premiums are going to go up by thousands of dollars,” said Kiggans. “And at the end of the year … for people that either have this type of insurance and work in small businesses, are self-employed, you know, I worry about their access to health care.”
The latest Capitol Hill clash over preserving health care policies enacted by Democrats, however, is shaping up to be a central battle in government funding negotiations ahead of a Sept. 30 shutdown deadline — and driving a rift inside the GOP in ways that echo party infighting over scaling back Medicaid in President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill.” The dispute is also now pitting centrists like Kiggans against conservatives who have fought for years to undo the Affordable Care Act. And it carries major political stakes for Republicans as they gear up for their fight to keep control of the House next year.
The Democrats’ 2010 health law first provided for tax credits to help make premiums more affordable under the new insurance plans. But the 2021 Covid relief package supercharged those credits, making them more generous for people with lower incomes but also accessible to individuals making up to $600,000 a year. It’s that “enhanced” version of the credits that will expire at the end of the 2025 without congressional action.
One senior House Republican, granted anonymity to share their private view of Kiggans’ support for the subsidies, suggested she’ll be given latitude by her colleagues and leadership to follow her instincts on the credits’ fate: “Kiggans does her homework, and she understands her base or constituency and what needs to be done.”
Still, she’s finding herself caught in the middle of warring factions that could test the positive relationships she’s built during her short time in office, while also putting her political future at risk.
She’s going up against a swath of hard-liners who in the coming days plan to ramp up their coordinated campaign against any extension, in part by arguing that the subsidies are used to cover abortions. Conservatives also say the tax credits are too expensive, and they are generally loath to support any policy tied to the Affordable Care Act.
Rep. Eric Burlison (R-Mo.), a member of the House Freedom Caucus, said in an interview Thursday it would be “awful” if Johnson capitulates to demands from moderates like Kiggans to extend the enhanced ACA credits. Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), chair of the hard-line contingent, called the subsidies “free giveaways to insurance companies.”
Mindful of the intraparty fissures around this issue, Johnson has so far been careful not to say whether he endorses an extension, and certainly isn’t tying it to a government funding package needed to avert a shutdown before Oct. 1. Republicans who support Kiggans’ crusade privately believe their best bet for victory is securing the extension in a second funding measure at the end of the year, but Democrats are making this linkage a condition of their support for the immediate stopgap spending measure.
“There’s a range of opinion on it,” Johnson said in a brief interview earlier this month. “It doesn’t expire until the end of the year, so we have time to figure it out.”
Kiggans has a track record of breaking with her party on some big issues but not tanking legislation to gain leverage. For instance, she was among the most vocal critics of the GOP megabill’s targeting of clean energy tax credits that are benefitting her district, but she still voted for the new law. She said this past week she didn’t plan to shut down the government to get her way on the ACA tax credits, either.
“I represent a big military district,” she explained, “and people who rely on those federal paychecks.”
But Democrats, who see Kiggans’ seat as a prime pick-up opportunity in 2026, accuse her of being duplicitous.
“Jen Kiggans cast a decisive vote to rip away health care from 350,000 Virginians, and just this week three health care clinics in the Commonwealth were forced to shutter as a direct result of her vote,” said Eli Cousin, a spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, in a statement that referred to Kiggans’ vote for the GOP megabill.
“Kiggans wants to trick voters before she is up for reelection, then sell them out right after,” Cousin added. “She is everything wrong with Washington politicians.”
Kiggans is working to thread the needle. She said she agrees with fellow Republicans that the credits are expensive and need to expire eventually. But she also made the case that her party needs to create “a longer runway” to discuss how to soften the blow of phasing out the enhanced credits completely.
“It’s time to end these tax credits, but when it comes to health care, it’s not quite as easy as letting them expire, especially when it’s something at the end of the calendar year,” Kiggans said. “And I’m not alone. There’s people on both sides of the aisle that feel the same way. And these are common-sense members of Congress that care about health care.”
Democratic co-sponsors of her bill include Reps. Jared Golden of Maine and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington, the co-chairs of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition. Among the Republican supporters are Reps. David Valadao of California, Juan Ciscomani of Arizona and Mike Lawler of New York — some of the most endangered incumbents of the election cycle.
But senior House Republicans have questioned the strategy Kiggans and her group is pursuing, according to three people granted anonymity to speak candidly about private conversations. These Republicans are, in particular, critical of the rollout of her bill, which did not include any of the reforms Kiggans acknowledged are needed to the larger program.
This “clean” extension, many in the GOP feel, could put Republicans in a tough spot, including Kiggans’ fellow frontliners who have not signed onto her effort.
“Full credits with high wage earners is too far for most Republicans,” said one of the senior House GOP Republicans, referring to how Kiggans’ bill would fully extend the premium tax credit for one year rather than to put new income limits on an extension, as some Republicans have suggested doing.
Some vulnerable GOP incumbents who haven’t yet signed onto Kiggans’ bill also acknowledged an income cap and other reforms will likely be part of any compromise.
“We want to make sure that affordability is maintained as best as possible for people,” Rep. Ryan Mackenzie (R-Pa.) said in an interview, while adding, “I know there are some concerns that some have expressed about high-income individuals being eligible.”
Kiggans said the value of her one-year extension bill is that it would, indeed, force a discussion about how to either continue the subsidies responsibly or wind them down in a thoughtful way. She advocated for a scenario where members could come to the table and hash out a long-term solution, recalling the consensus-building exercise that took place around making changes to Medicaid as part of the megabill.
“That took a lot of meetings, a lot of late nights, a lot of discussions with people who happen to have skin in the game,” said Kiggans.
There are plenty of Republicans who believe Kiggans should stay the course and leadership should follow, warning an expiration of the premium tax credits could cost the GOP dearly in the midterms.
A July poll by veteran GOP pollster Tony Fabrizio found that Republicans have an “opportunity to overcome a current generic ballot deficit” in 2026 if they allow an extension. Letting them expire, according to that same survey, would cause an expected three-point deficit for a generic Republican to plunge to 15.
Rep. Richard Hudson of North Carolina, the chair of the National Republican Congressional Committee, said that “everybody’s voice is being heard” on whether to extend the ACA subsidies.
“I think we’re having internal discussions now about, kind of, where we are as a conference and what’s feasible and what’s not feasible,” Hudson said in a brief interview last week. “I’ll wait and see how that develops before I say anything publicly.”
Kiggans insisted her party can’t afford to wait.
“Republicans need to lead on this issue,” she said. “And we can.”
Cassandra Dumay and Mia McCarthy contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat, spoke to state Sen. Sarah Trone Garriott, who is running for Iowa’s 3rd Congressional District in 2026 at the Polk County Democrats Steak Fry in Des Moines Sep. 13, 2025. (Photo by Robin Opsahl/Iowa Capital Dispatch)
U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Maryland, and Iowa congressional candidates took time Saturday at the Polk County Democrats’ Steak Fry to condemn political violence in the wake of conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s killing in Utah.
The Polk County Democrats Steak Fry, an annual fundraiser, featured speeches from Democratic candidates for Iowa’s U.S. Senate race, as well as from the 3rd and 4th congressional district races. Van Hollen, who gave a keynote address at the event, spoke about Kirk’s death, saying the shooting is a reminder of “how fragile our democracy can feel,” while criticizing Trump’s response to the issue.
On Wednesday, Kirk, the co-founder of Turning Point USA, was shot while answering a question at an event at Utah Valley University. The suspected gunman was identified and taken into custody Friday. Politicians and leaders mourned Kirk’s death and called for a change to prevent future politically motivated violence.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
“The answer cannot be more violence,” Van Hollen said. “The answer cannot be vengeance. And sadly, the president is using this moment not to unite America against political violence, but to engage in finger pointing. But we will not be silenced. We will speak out for what we believe vigorously, courageously and peacefully.”
Iowa Democratic Party Chair Rita Hart said it has been a “really hard week” in light of Kirk’s death, and that Democrats, and all Americans, need to take steps to ensure these threats are eliminated.
“We don’t have to look very far to see other examples of violence that has occurred because of political leanings,” Hart said, in part referring to the fatal shooting of Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman in June. “And none of us find that to be acceptable, because it simply isn’t. We live in a country that was founded on the principle that we could stand up in a place like this and express our feelings, our thoughts, our attitudes, our beliefs and our political leanings, and not get shot because we have an opinion or a thought that’s different than somebody else’s.”
In Iowa, there has been an outpouring of sympathy for Kirk’s family and calls to stop political violence. Speaking with reporters, Democratic candidates for U.S. Senate called for an end to political violence.
In recent days, there has been some criticism from Republicans and others of Iowans, including some teachers, who have made controversial social media posts about Kirk’s death.
Democratic Senate candidate Jackie Norris, the school board president for the Des Moines Public Schools, said political violence was unacceptable, and that teachers — alongside most people — should be more cognizant of what their are publicly posting on social media. However, Norris added, “we have to respect that people have different views,” including teachers.
“It is important that we tone down the rhetoric, but we also have to respect that (teachers) have strong feelings too,” Norris said. “It’s a balance.”
Van Hollen also told Iowans at the event winning in 2026 elections will mean Democrats must be outspokenly in support of Democratic candidates running in 2025 races — including New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani.
The Maryland Democrat said Iowa would play an important role in the 2026 midterms — but that supporting Democrats in 2025 races for governor in Virginia and New Jersey, as well as for New York City mayor, will help build “momentum” for 2026.
Van Hollen criticized New York Democrats for not supporting Mamdani, who is a member of the Democratic Socialists of America. He said many Democrats representing New York in the U.S. House and Senate have “stayed on the sidelines” as President Donald Trump and others have mobilized to defeat the Democratic candidate.
“That kind of spineless politics is what people are sick of,” Van Hollen said. “They need to get behind him and get behind him now.”
Van Hollen criticized other aspects of the Democratic Party, saying the Biden administration was “feckless” in holding the Israeli government under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accountable to U.S. and international law. But he largely focused his remarks on Trump and Republicans in control of Congress.
In addition to talking about Medicaid cuts and criticizing Trump’s foreign policy decisions, Van Hollen said the Trump administration was violating people’s constitutional rights by pursuing mass deportations. The Maryland Democrat gained a significant national platform earlier in 2025 for his work involving Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland resident who was deported to El Salvador erroneously and held in the country’s megaprison.
Van Hollen was one of the major advocates for returning Abrego Garcia to the country and allowing his case to go through the U.S. court system. At the Saturday event, Van Hollen told Iowans he was advised not to pursue the issue as immigration was not a winning topic for Democrats — but he said he continued to fight for Abrego Garcia’s due process rights because “our democracy cannot survive on silence or equivocation.”
“And lo and behold, Americans across the political spectrum do believe in the red, white and blue essential right to due process in the United States of America,” he said. “They do believe in the principle that no one in America — I mean, no one — should be disappeared by the state without having a chance before a court of law. And Americans understand this is not about one man. It’s about all of us. Because when you strip away the rights from one person, you threaten the rights of all, of all of us.”
Abrego Garcia has been returned to the U.S., though the Trump administration has stated they intend to deport him again, potentially to the country of Eswatini.
Van Hollen said he would “never, ever apologize for standing up for anybody’s constitutional rights,” and said Democrats need to do more to speak out on issues they believe are important, even if polls or pundits say the topics are not politically advantageous. This will be especially important in states like Iowa, he said.
“We can and we will win here again, if — if — we speak to our core values, if we show people what we will stand up for and we will fight for,” Van Hollen said. “That’s why it’s great to be here to flip steaks and flip seats.”
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle were in agreement that political discourse in the United States has reached a startling level following the assassination of Charlie Kirk and other recent acts of political violence.
Kirk’s assassination is the latest in a string of political violence that has left several high-profile figures dead or injured since July 2024, when President Donald Trump was shot while campaigning for his second term in Butler, Pennsylvania. Trump was targeted again by a would-be assassin just months later. In April, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro was the victim of an arson attack. And in June, two Minnesota lawmakers and their families were attacked, leaving two dead.
The political violence has had a chilling effect on the nation, with some lawmakers going so far as to cancel public appearances amid fears of physical violence.
“We have a climate right now where people who are frankly unhinged … like the two guys who tried to shoot President Trump, one who did shoot him, the person – whoever it is – who killed Charlie, the person who went after the Minnesota lawmakers – these people are nuts,” Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., told Fox News Digital. “But they are egged on by a climate that says, ‘Hey, you know, it’s okay basically to go out and shoot your opponents because they’re really Hitler.'”
Charlie Kirk appears alongside an image of President Donald Trump after he was shot in Butler, Pennsylvania. (Getty Images)
The sentiment was echoed by Democratic lawmakers on the Hill as well.
“It’s really sad and just scary, you know, honestly, just how dire things have gotten in this country in terms of our political discourse,” said Sen. Andy Kim, D-N.J. “I was actually just remarking the other day how, in a survey, over 50% of Americans surveyed said that they would call people in the other political party ‘the enemy.’ I just think that’s terrifying, that’s so dangerous of a place for our country to be.”
Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon added that in order for this Republic to work, people must be able to “passionately share [their] viewpoints and do so knowing that we resolve our differences through advocacy and voting, not through violence.”

New Jersey Democratic Sen. Andy Kim speaks during a hearing on Capitol Hill. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
“I don’t know what it says about political discourse, but it certainly says something about violence, and it has no business in political discourse. You can have a robust disagreement with people, but when it turns to violence, something’s gone badly wrong,” responded Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., when asked about what Kirk’s death said about the current state of political discourse.
Kirk was known for engaging passionately, but also respectfully, with students of all political stripes on college campuses as part of Turning Point USA, the grassroots organization he co-founded in 2012. He would regularly visit college campuses all around the country and debate with students from different perspectives on various issues of the day. Oftentimes, Kirk would hold “Prove Me Wrong” events, where he would give students a chance to do just that – prove him wrong.
“I mean, that’s the shame of this. Charlie Kirk was polite, he had a message, and he spread that message, and he engaged people to speak and debate, and then he lost his life for that,” said Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky. “That’s the thing about this country, we have freedom of speech. Nobody should ever take out violence based on something somebody said.”

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., is seen outside the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, Dec. 18, 2024 (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
“I would hope that all people would take a moment, reflect, and bring down this political rhetoric,” Rep. Jonathan Jackson, D-Ill., told Fox News Digital. “These violent words precede violent actions.”
Hawley, meanwhile, suggested a tactic to help solve the issue.
“I’ll just say again, part of the way we stop it, is we realize that there’s stuff in life that’s more important than politics,” he told reporters.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
In this deeply divided nation, the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk has brought two young men who are on opposite sides of the aisle together. Nicole Sganga reports on how they are joining forces to fight political violence.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump suggested Republicans should walk away from spending negotiations with Democrats, arguing the majority party will rely on itself to avoid a shutdown later this month — despite the math indicating otherwise.
In an appearance on “Fox and Friends” on Friday morning, Trump balked at top Democrats’ demands to include some health care policies in whatever stopgap funding measure Congress passes later this month. Trump pushed back against any requirements from Democrats in Congress, claiming that nothing would be enough to satisfy the other party.
“If you gave them every dream, they would not vote for it,” Trump said. “Don’t even bother dealing with them. We will get it through because the Republicans are sticking together for the first time in a long time.”
Instead, Trump suggested that Republicans would keep the government open themselves, claiming GOP leaders “have to get Republican votes. That’s all.”
However, any spending deal will be subject to the 60-vote filibuster requirement in the Senate, meaning at least seven Democrats will need to side with Republicans to advance the measure. But Trump brushed off that math — without explaining how he could avoid a shutdown absent the needed Democratic support.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks to a joint meeting of Congress at the Capitol in Washington, Wednesday, July 24, 2024, as House Speaker Mike Johnson of La., and Senate Foreign Relations Chair Ben Cardin, D-Md., watch. | Manuel Balce Ceneta
“No. We’re gonna do a — probably a continuing resolution, or we’re gonna do something. So we’re gonna do something,” he said. “Here is the problem. The Democrats have — they’re sick. There is something wrong with them. Schumer is at the end of the rope.”
The government is scheduled to shut down at midnight on Oct. 1, after which funding will lapse for a slew of federal agencies. Top appropriators are still negotiating how to avoid the spending freeze, although it’s likely they will take a two-pronged approach to pass three of the 12 annual appropriations bills in one package known as a “minibus” and then temporarily extend the deadline for the remaining nine bills.
Details of the temporary extension, known as a continuing resolution, are not yet finalized, sources familiar with talks told the Deseret News. Appropriators have floated punting the deadline until mid-November to keep the pressure on, but White House officials confirmed to the Deseret News that Trump has suggested a Jan. 31 deadline.
Also unclear is whether the continuing resolution will be “clean,” meaning it extends current government funding levels with no other policies or spending attached. Republicans are pushing for such a measure, but Democrats are demanding that the measure either includes extensions for expiring Obamacare subsidies or increased spending for Medicaid after the program experienced cuts in Trump’s massive tax bill.
Meanwhile, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., has indicated he is willing to risk a shutdown if neither of those demands are met — raising the risk of a funding lapse later this month.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., accompanied by other members of congress, including Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif, left, speaks during a rally against Elon Musk outside the Treasury Department in Washington, Tuesday, Feb. 4, 2025. | Jose Luis Magana
That prompted top Republicans such as Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., to accuse Democrats of politicizing the appropriations process, which has, except in recent years, been a typically bipartisan process.
“But they don’t have a good reason to do it,” Thune told Punchbowl News. “And I don’t intend to give them a good reason to do it.”
The House could move forward with voting on a continuing resolution as early as next week, according to House Appropriations Committee Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla. The House and Senate are also expected to conference to hash out the final details on the minibus legislation as early as next week.
Rep. Celeste Maloy, R-Utah, will be on the 19-member panel to work with the Senate, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., announced on Friday.
[ad_2]