ReportWire

Tag: Democrats

  • These 6 House Democrats voted for bill to end government shutdown

    [ad_1]

    The funding package that ended the longest government shutdown in modern U.S. history picked up support from a half-dozen Democrats — mostly moderates who represent competitive districts — when it passed the House late Wednesday.

    The bill, which President Trump signed into law on Wednesday, will keep the government open until Jan. 30. It also reverses federal layoffs during the shutdown, and includes three-year-long funding bills that cover military construction and the Department of Veterans Affairs; the Department of Agriculture and FDA; and operations for the legislative branch.

    It passed the Senate earlier this week after negotiations between Republicans and eight members of the chamber’s Democratic caucus, who voted for the bill in exchange for a promise by the GOP to hold a separate vote on extending expiring health insurance tax credits.

    Here’s a look at the House Democrats who voted yes:

    Jared Golden of Maine

    Rep. Jared Golden attends an event in Lewiston, Maine, on Oct. 25, 2024.

    Robert F. Bukaty / AP


    Rep. Jared Golden of Maine, a moderate representing the largely rural northernmost reaches of New England, was the sole House Democrat to vote in favor of a GOP-backed measure in September that would have averted the government shutdown. When the shutdown began last month, he blamed it on “hardball politics” by “far-left groups.”

    In a social media post after Wednesday’s vote, he said he “voted to reopen the government, pay federal workers, and get food assistance and other critical programs up and running again.”

    He also urged lawmakers to “take immediate action” to extend the health insurance subsidies, which are set to expire at the end of this year.

    “We still have a window to pass bipartisan legislation to extend these credits,” he said.

    Golden won reelection last year by 0.6 percentage points, or just under 3,000 votes. In the same year, Mr. Trump won in Golden’s district by about 9 points. He said last week he will not run for reelection next year, a move he linked in part to the “unnecessary, harmful” shutdown.

    Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington

    Spending Reduction and Border Security Act Vote

    Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez leaves the U.S. Capitol on Sept. 29, 2023.

    Tom Williams


    Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington, who is known for occasionally breaking with her party, said in a statement she “voted to end this partisan car crash of a shutdown.”

    “Americans can’t afford for their Representatives to get so caught up in landing a partisan win that they abandon their obligation to come together to solve the urgent problems that our nation faces,” she wrote. “The last several weeks have been a case study in why most Americans can’t stand Congress. None of my friends who rely on SNAP would want to trade their dinner for an ambiguous D.C. beltway ‘messaging victory’ and I’m glad this ugly scene is in the rearview mirror.”

    She won reelection by 3.8 points last year, after initially getting elected to Congress by an 0.8-point margin in 2022.

    Henry Cuellar of Texas

    House Dem Meeting

    Rep. Henry Cuellar outside a meeting of the House Democratic Caucus on Nov. 17, 2022.

    Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images


    Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas, who has represented the Rio Grande Valley for over 20 years, said in a statement that “Washington’s inaction created unnecessary hardship for the communities I represent,” pointing to disruptions to food aid. He pressed Congress to extend the health insurance tax credits next.

    “The problem is, when Democrats or Republicans think they’re winning at the end of a long shutdown, it’s the American public that loses,” Cuellar told NewsNation after the vote.

    He won reelection by 5.6 points last year.

    Adam Gray of California

    US-NEWS-CALIF-REDISTRICTING-SEATS-4-MM

    Rep. Adam Gray speaks during a swearing-in ceremony at the Merced County Courthouse Museum on Jan. 30.

    Merced Sun-Star


    Rep. Adam Gray of California explained his vote in an op-ed in the Turlock Journal, a newspaper in his Central Valley congressional district. He said he voted yes because the bill will keep the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program funded until the end of September — preventing any more interruptions to food aid if there’s another shutdown.

    “No parent should have to choose between feeding their children and keeping the lights on because someone in Washington thinks chaos is a negotiating tactic,” he wrote, blaming the Trump administration for “using vulnerable Americans as political leverage.”

    He later said, “Is this a perfect deal? No. But lasting policy in this country is not born of hostage‑taking. It is born of compromise.”

    He pressed for an extension to health insurance tax credits, but wrote: “Protecting families from hunger today does not prevent us from lowering health care costs tomorrow.”

    Gray won his first term in Congress by just 187 votes in 2024, after losing by a razor-thin 564 votes two years earlier.

    Don Davis of North Carolina

    Key Speakers At DC Blockchain Summit

    Rep. Don Davis during the DC Blockchain Summit on March 26.

    Kent Nishimura / Bloomberg via Getty Images


    Rep. Don Davis of North Carolina, whose already-competitive district was redrawn this year and made more favorable to Republicans, said an “increasing number of families have shared with me that they have been suffering daily” over the course of the shutdown.

    He said in a statement he voted for the bill to “alleviate the suffering,” and in the hopes that negotiations can take place on extending the health insurance subsidies.

    “While some Washington politicians from both parties have failed rural communities, the battle for healthcare is not over,” Davis wrote.

    Davis won reelection by 1.7 points last year.

    Tom Suozzi of New York

    Harlem Hellfighters 9/3/25

    Rep. Tom Suozzi attends a Congressional Gold Medal event honoring the Harlem Hellfighters of World War I on Sept. 3.

    Tom Williams


    Rep. Tom Suozzi of New York said on X after the House vote he’s “relying on the representations of some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, that they want to get something done to extend the Premium Tax Credits.”

    But he added that “we cannot rely on the White House, which has chosen to make this process needlessly painful,” noting the interruptions to food aid. 

    Suozzi won reelection by 3.6 points in November. He previously represented his Long Island district for  three terms, left Congress in 2023 to run for governor, and returned to the House in an early 2024 special election to replace the expelled GOP Rep. George Santos.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Speaker Mike Johnson calls shutdown

    [ad_1]

    House Speaker Mike Johnson addressed reporters on Wednesday night after the lower chamber voted to pass a Senate-backed funding package to end the 43-day government shutdown, the longest in U.S. history. Johnson admonished Democrats over the impasse and touted Republicans’ achievements in the first 10 months of President Trump’s second term.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House passes bill to fund government and end shutdown

    [ad_1]



    House passes bill to fund government and end shutdown – CBS News










































    Watch CBS News



    The House passed a funding bill to end the government shutdown on Wednesday night, sending the measure to President Trump’s desk for final signature. CBS News congressional reporter Taurean Small has the latest.

    [ad_2]
    Source link

  • Democrat’s swearing-in tips scales for House battle to unseal Epstein documents

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    Rep. Adelita Grijalva, D-Ariz., was sworn into office on Wednesday, unlocking the needed support to force the House of Representatives into a vote over the Epstein files.

    Now having received the oath of office, Grijalva is free to become the 218th — and final signatory — to advance a discharge petition on a bill to instruct the Department of Justice (DOJ) to release its documentation on Jeffrey Epstein. If successful, the petition would bring the bill to the floor over the objection of the chamber’s leadership.

    EPSTEIN VICTIMS SET TO BREAK SILENCE AMID BIPARTISAN PUSH TO RELEASE FILES: ‘PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE OUTRAGED’

    Rep. Adelita Grijalva, a Democrat from Arizona, speaks to members of the media at the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Sept. 30, 2025. (Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

    Grijalva, who now fills the seat formerly held by her father, the late Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., said signing the petition would be her first act as a member of Congress.

    “I will sign the discharge petition right now to release the Epstein files. It’s past time for Congress to restore its role as the check and balance on this administration and fight for we, the American people,” Grijalva said.

    Epstein, a former businessman and financier, died in 2019 while jailed on federal sex-trafficking charges involving minors. During his career, he accrued an impressive social circle that included rich and powerful figures like former President Bill Clinton, President Donald Trump and the United Kingdom’s Prince Andrew.

    His sudden death, ruled a suicide by investigators, left unanswered questions about whether he had used his expansive social circle to facilitate illegal sexual encounters for some of his contacts.

    SPEAKER JOHNSON HIT WITH DEMOCRAT-LED LAWSUIT OVER DELAYED SWEARING-IN AMID HOUSE SHUTDOWN CHAOS

    Jeffrey Epstein embracing a smiling Ghislaine Maxwell

    Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were both indicted on federal sex trafficking charges stemming from Epstein’s years of abuse of underage girls.  (Joe Schildhorn/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images)

    After disappointing announcements from the DOJ that the investigation met a dead end earlier this year, lawmakers led by Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., demanded Congress vote to force the DOJ to release its documentation on the matter.

    Those demands went unheeded by House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., who said the DOJ was already conducting its own internal evaluation and complying with congressional requests for information.

    For Massie and three other Republicans, that wasn’t good enough.

    Massie joined Reps. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., — and all House Democrats — in signing the petition, falling just one signatory short of putting it over the needed 218 threshold.

    EPSTEIN VICTIMS PRESS LAWMAKERS TO SUPPORT BILL TO RELEASE HIDDEN FILES, SAY AMERICANS WILL BE ‘APPALLED’

    Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Thomas Massie, and Ro Khanna

    Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., speaks with Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., during a news conference with alleged victims of the late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein outside the U.S. Capitol on Sept. 3, 2025. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

    Two of Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged victims joined lawmakers in the House chamber for Grijalva’s swearing in.

    “Our democracy only works when everyone has a voice. This includes the millions of people across the country who have experienced violence and exploitation — including Liz Stein and Jessica Michaels, both survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse. They are here in the gallery here this evening,” Grijalva said.

    House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has said he supports the measure in principle but believes aspects of the legislation are poorly written or may provide insufficient protections for Epstein’s potential victims.

    With Grijalva’s support, Democrat leadership believes the petition will come to the floor sometime in December.

    Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., the ranking member on the House Rules Committee, noted that Johnson might try to derail its timeline.

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    “It should ripen in early December. That doesn’t mean that the Speaker of the House [won’t] try to do some shenanigans, but if all goes the way we want it to go, early December,” McGovern said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House is poised to approve measure to end longest government shutdown in U.S. history

    [ad_1]

    The longest government shutdown in U.S. history was poised to come to an end Wednesday as the House finalized a vote on a spending package that President Trump was ready to sign into law as soon as it reached his desk.

    “President Trump looks forward to finally ending this devastating Democrat shutdown with his signature, and we hope that signing will take place later tonight,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said at a press briefing earlier on Wednesday.

    The president’s signature will mark the end of a government shutdown that for 43 days left thousands of federal workers without pay, millions of low-income Americans uncertain on whether they would receive food assistance, and travelers facing delays at airports.

    The vote, which began Wednesday evening, also was a cap to a frenetic day in Capitol Hill in which lawmakers publicly released a trove of records from Jeffrey Epstein’s estate and welcomed the newest member of Congress, a Democrat from Arizona who was key in forcing a vote to demand the Justice Department release all the Epstein files.

    The spending package, when signed by the president, will fund the government through Jan. 30, 2026, and reinstate federal workers who were laid off during the shutdown. It will also guarantee backpay for federal employees who were furloughed or worked without pay during the budget impasse.

    The package does not include an extension to Affordable Care Act healthcare tax credits that are set to expire at the end of the year — a core demand Democrats tried to negotiate during the seven weeks the government was shut down.

    Ahead of the floor vote, House Democrats were steadfast in their opposition to a deal that did not address the lapsing healthcare subsidies.

    “We are not going to support a partisan Republican spending bill that continues to gut the healthcare of the American people,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said.

    If the tax credits expire, premiums will more than double on average for more than 20 million Americans who use the healthcare marketplace, according to independent analysts at the research firm KFF.

    Another point of contention during the floor debate was a provision in the funding bill that will allow senators to sue the federal government if their phone records are obtained without them being notified.

    The provision, which is retroactive to 2022, appears to be tailored for eight Republican senators who last month found their phone records have been accessed as part of a Biden-era investigation into the attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters on Jan. 6, 2021.

    If they successfully sue, each violation would be worth at least $500,000, according to the bill language.

    Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), one of the senators whose phone records were accessed, said Wednesday he will “definitely” sue when the legal avenue once it becomes available.

    “If you think I’m going to settle this thing for a millions dollars? No. I want to make it so painful, no one ever does this again,” Graham told reporters.

    Several Democrats slammed the provision on the House floor. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York said it was “unconscionable” to vote in favor of the spending bill with that language tucked in.

    “How is this even on the floor? How can we vote to enrich ourselves by stealing from the American people?” she said.

    Some House Republicans were caught off guard by the provision and said they disagreed with the provision. The concern was enough to get Speaker Mike Johnson to announced that House Republicans will plan to fast-track legislation to repeal the provision next week.

    Epstein files loomed large over vote

    The House began voting on the bill after Johnson swore Adelita Grijalva (D-Ariz.) into office, after refusing to do so for seven weeks.

    When Grijalva walked into the House floor and was greeted with applause by colleagues cheering her name, she immediately called out Johnson for delaying her taking the oath of office.

    “One individual should not be able to unilaterally obstruct the swearing in of a dully elected member of Congress for political reasons,” Grijalva said, while equating the decision to “an abuse of power.”

    After finishing her remarks, the Democrat immediately signed a petition to force a House floor vote demanding the full release of the Justice Department’s files on Jeffrey Epstein.

    Her signature was the final action needed to force a floor vote. The move is sure to reignite a pressure campaign to release documents tied to Epstein, just hours after House Democrats and Republicans released a trove of records from the Epstein estate.

    The documents included emails from the late sex trafficker that said Trump had “spent hours” with a victim at his house and Trump “knew about the girls.”

    “Justice cannot wait another day,” Grijalva said.

    In a social media post Wednesday, Trump accused Democrats of trying to use the “Jeffrey Epstein Hoax” as a distraction from their failed negotiations during the government shutdown.

    “There should be no deflections to Epstein or anything else, and any Republicans involved should be focused only on opening our Country, and fixing the massive damage caused by the Democrats!” Trump wrote.

    [ad_2]

    Ana Ceballos

    Source link

  • Epstein emails say Trump ‘knew about the girls’ and spent time with a victim

    [ad_1]

    More documents related to Jeffrey Epstein were handed over to the House Oversight Committee this week, including the letter and drawings signed with President Donald Trump’s name in the so-called birthday book. Now ahead of the public release on Monday, Democrats on the committee posted on social media revealing the page first reported on by the Wall Street Journal back in July. While old images circulating online of his signature on other documents do seem to resemble the signature in the. The president has repeatedly denied writing the letter and sued the Wall Street Journal for defamation. White House press secretary Caroline Levitt said in part, it’s very clear President Trump did not draw this picture, and he did not sign it. The committee also released Epstein’s last will and testament, entries from his address book and the 2007 non-prosecution agreement between Epstein and the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida. The panel has been investigating the Epstein case and subpoenaed the estate for documents as part of its ongoing probe. We’ve got *** lot more documents we expect to get in. Uh, we’re gonna bring *** lot of people in for depositions, so this investigation is moving along very rapidly and hopefully we’ll get some answers for and some justice very soon. But some say the committee isn’t going far enough. In *** separate effort, *** bipartisan pair of House lawmakers is working to force *** vote on *** measure calling for the full release of documents related to Epstein. They need 218 signatures on *** discharge petition in order to bypass leadership and force the vote, reporting at the White House, I’m Julie Vanbrook.

    Epstein emails released by Democrats say Trump ‘knew about the girls’ and spent time with a victim

    Updated: 8:11 AM PST Nov 12, 2025

    Editorial Standards

    Disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein wrote in a 2011 email that Donald Trump had “spent hours” at Epstein’s house with a victim of sex trafficking and said in a separate message years later that Trump “knew about the girls,” according to communications released Wednesday.The emails made public by Democrats on the House Oversight Committee add to the questions about Trump’s friendship with Epstein and about any knowledge he may have had in what prosecutors call a yearslong effort by Epstein to exploit underage girls. The Republican president has consistently denied any knowledge of Epstein’s alleged crimes and has said he ended their relationship years ago.The messages are part of a batch of 23,000 documents provided by Epstein’s estate to the Oversight Committee. The release resurfaces a storyline that had shadowed Trump’s presidency during the summer when the FBI and the Justice Department abruptly announced that they would not be releasing additional documents that investigators had spent weeks examining, disappointing conspiracy theorists and online sleuths who had expected to see new revelations.In an April 2, 2011, email to Ghislaine Maxwell, an Epstein girlfriend now imprisoned for conspiring to engage in sex trafficking, Epstein wrote, “I want you to realize that that dog that hasn’t barked is Trump. (Redacted name) spent hours at my house with him ,, he has never once been mentioned. police chief. etc. im 75 % there.”Maxwell replied the same day: “I have been thinking about that.”The name of the person said to have spent time with Trump was blacked out of the email, but House Democrats identified the person as a “victim.”In a separate 2019 email to journalist Michael Wolff, who has written extensively about Trump, Epstein wrote of Trump, “Of course he knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop.”White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt accused the Democrats of having “selectively leaked emails” to “create a fake narrative to smear President Trump.”She said in a statement that the unnamed person referenced in the emails is Virginia Giuffre, who had accused Britain’s Prince Andrew and other influential men of sexually exploiting her as a teenager and who died by suicide in April. Andrew has rejected Giuffre’s allegations and said he didn’t recall meeting her.Leavitt said in a statement that Giuffre had “repeatedly said President Trump was not involved in any wrongdoing whatsoever and ‘couldn’t have been friendlier’ to her in their limited interactions.”“The fact remains that President Trump kicked Jeffrey Epstein out of his club decades ago for being a creep to his female employees, including Giuffre,” the statement said. “These stories are nothing more than bad-faith efforts to distract from President Trump’s historic accomplishments, and any American with common sense sees right through this hoax and clear distraction from the government opening back up again.”Giuffre came forward publicly after an initial investigation ended in an 18-month Florida jail term for Epstein, who made a secret deal to avoid federal prosecution by pleading guilty instead to relatively minor state-level charges of soliciting prostitution. He was released in 2009.In subsequent lawsuits, Giuffre said she was a teenage spa attendant at Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Palm Beach, Florida, club, when she was approached in 2000 by Maxwell.Epstein took his own life in a New York jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal charges.Lawyers for Maxwell, a British socialite, have argued that she never should have been tried or convicted for her role in luring teenage girls to be sexually abused by Epstein. She is serving a 20-year prison term, though she was moved from a low-security federal prison in Florida to a minimum-security prison camp in Texas after she was interviewed in July by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche.

    Disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein wrote in a 2011 email that Donald Trump had “spent hours” at Epstein’s house with a victim of sex trafficking and said in a separate message years later that Trump “knew about the girls,” according to communications released Wednesday.

    The emails, made public by Democrats on the House Oversight Committee, add to the questions about Trump’s friendship with Epstein and about any knowledge he may have had in what prosecutors call a yearslong effort by Epstein to exploit underage girls. The Republican president has consistently denied any knowledge of Epstein’s alleged crimes and has said he ended their relationship years ago.

    In one 2011 email to Ghislaine Maxwell, an Epstein girlfriend now imprisoned for conspiring to engage in sex trafficking, Epstein wrote, “I want you to realize that that dog that hasn’t barked is Trump.” He added that Trump had “spent hours at my house” with a person whose name is blacked out of the emails but who House Democrats identified as a “victim.” Epstein wrote that Trump “has never once been mentioned.”

    In a separate email to journalist Michael Wolff, who has written extensively about Trump, Epstein wrote of Trump, “Of course he knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop.”

    The White House did not immediately return a message seeking comment Wednesday.

    Epstein died by suicide in a New York jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal charges.

    Lawyers for Maxwell, a British socialite, have argued that she never should have been tried or convicted for her role in luring teenage girls to be sexually abused by Epstein. She is serving a 20-year prison term, though she was moved from a low-security federal prison in Florida to a minimum-security prison camp in Texas after she was interviewed in July by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • A historic shutdown is nearly over. It leaves no winners and much frustration

    [ad_1]

    The longest government shutdown in history could conclude as soon as today, Day 43, with almost no one happy with the final result.Democrats didn’t get the health insurance provisions they demanded added to the spending deal. And Republicans, who control the levers of power in Washington, didn’t escape blame, according to polls and some state and local elections that went poorly for them.The fallout of the shutdown landed on millions of Americans, including federal workers who went without paychecks and airline passengers who had their trips delayed or canceled. An interruption in nutrition assistance programs contributed to long lines at food banks and added emotional distress going into the holiday season.The agreement includes bipartisan bills worked out by the Senate Appropriations Committee to fund parts of government — food aid, veterans programs and the legislative branch, among other things. All other funding would be extended until the end of January, giving lawmakers more than two months to finish additional spending bills.Here’s a look at how the shutdown started and is likely to end.What led to the shutdownDemocrats made several demands to win their support for a short-term funding bill, but the central one was an extension of an enhanced tax credit that lowers the cost of health coverage obtained through Affordable Care Act marketplaces.The tax credit was boosted during the COVID response, again through Joe Biden’s big energy and health care bill, and it’s set to expire at the end of December. Without it, premiums on average will more than double for millions of Americans. More than 2 million people would lose health insurance coverage altogether next year, the Congressional Budget Office projected.“Never have American families faced a situation where their health care costs are set to double — double in the blink of an eye,” said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.While Democrats called for negotiations on the matter, Republicans said a funding bill would need to be passed first.“Republicans are ready to sit down with Democrats just as soon as they stop holding the government hostage to their partisan demands,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said.Thune eventually promised Democrats a December vote on the tax credit extension to help resolve the standoff, but many Democrats demanded a guaranteed fix, not just a vote that is likely to fail.Thune’s position was much the same as the one Schumer took back in October 2013, when Republicans unsuccessfully sought to roll back parts of the Affordable Care Act in exchange for funding the government. “Open up all of the government, and then we can have a fruitful discussion,” Schumer said then.Democratic leaders under pressureThe first year of President Donald Trump’s second term has seen more than 200,000 federal workers leave their job through firings, forced relocations or the administration’s deferred resignation program, according to the Partnership for Public Service. Whole agencies that don’t align with the administration’s priorities have been dismantled. And billions of dollars previously approved by Congress have been frozen or canceled.Democrats have had to rely on the courts to block some of Trump’s efforts, but they have been unable to do it through legislation. They were also powerless to stop Trump’s big tax cut and immigration crackdown bill that Republicans helped pay for by cutting future spending on safety net programs such as Medicaid and SNAP, formerly known as food stamps.The Democrats’ struggles to blunt the Trump administration’s priorities has prompted calls for the party’s congressional leadership to take a more forceful response.Schumer experienced that firsthand after announcing in March that he would support moving ahead with a funding bill for the 2025 budget year. There was a protest at his office, calls from progressives that he be primaried in 2028 and suggestions that the Democratic Party would soon be looking for new leaders.This time around, Schumer demanded that Republicans negotiate with Democrats to get their votes on a spending bill. The Senate rules, he noted, requires bipartisan support to meet the 60-vote threshold necessary to advance a spending bill.But those negotiations did not occur, at least not with Schumer. Republicans instead worked with a small group of eight Democrats to tee up a short-term bill to fund the government generally at current levels and accused Schumer of catering to the party’s left flank when he refused to go along.“The Senate Democrats are afraid that the radicals in their party will say that they caved,” House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said at one of his many daily press conferences.The blame gameThe political stakes in the shutdown are huge, which is why leaders in both parties have held nearly daily press briefings to shape public opinion.Roughly 6 in 10 Americans say Trump and Republicans in Congress have “a great deal” or “quite a bit” of responsibility for the shutdown, while 54% say the same about Democrats in Congress, according to the poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.At least three-quarters of Americans believe each deserves at least a “moderate” share of blame, underscoring that no one was successfully evading responsibility.Both parties looked to the Nov. 4 elections in Virginia, New Jersey and elsewhere for signs of how the shutdown was influencing public opinion. Democrats took comfort in their overwhelming successes. Trump called it a “big factor, negative” for Republicans. But it did not change the GOP’s stance on negotiating. Instead, Trump ramped up calls for Republicans to end the filibuster in the Senate, which would pretty much eliminate the need for the majority party to ever negotiate with the minority.Damage of the shutdownThe Congressional Budget Office says that the negative impact on the economy will be mostly recovered once the shutdown ends, but not entirely. It estimated the permanent economic loss at about $11 billion for a six-week shutdown.Beyond the numbers, though, the shutdown created a cascade of troubles for many Americans. Federal workers missed paychecks, causing financial and emotional stress. Travelers had their flights delayed and at times canceled. People who rely on safety net programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program saw their benefits stopped, and Americans throughout the country lined up for meals at food banks.”This dysfunction is damaging enough to our constituents and economy here at home, but it also sends a dangerous message to the watching world,” said Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan. “It demonstrates to our allies that we are an unreliable partner, and it signals to our adversaries that we can’t work together to meet even the most fundamental responsibilities of Congress.”

    The longest government shutdown in history could conclude as soon as today, Day 43, with almost no one happy with the final result.

    Democrats didn’t get the health insurance provisions they demanded added to the spending deal. And Republicans, who control the levers of power in Washington, didn’t escape blame, according to polls and some state and local elections that went poorly for them.

    The fallout of the shutdown landed on millions of Americans, including federal workers who went without paychecks and airline passengers who had their trips delayed or canceled. An interruption in nutrition assistance programs contributed to long lines at food banks and added emotional distress going into the holiday season.

    The agreement includes bipartisan bills worked out by the Senate Appropriations Committee to fund parts of government — food aid, veterans programs and the legislative branch, among other things. All other funding would be extended until the end of January, giving lawmakers more than two months to finish additional spending bills.

    Here’s a look at how the shutdown started and is likely to end.

    What led to the shutdown

    Democrats made several demands to win their support for a short-term funding bill, but the central one was an extension of an enhanced tax credit that lowers the cost of health coverage obtained through Affordable Care Act marketplaces.

    The tax credit was boosted during the COVID response, again through Joe Biden’s big energy and health care bill, and it’s set to expire at the end of December. Without it, premiums on average will more than double for millions of Americans. More than 2 million people would lose health insurance coverage altogether next year, the Congressional Budget Office projected.

    “Never have American families faced a situation where their health care costs are set to double — double in the blink of an eye,” said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

    While Democrats called for negotiations on the matter, Republicans said a funding bill would need to be passed first.

    “Republicans are ready to sit down with Democrats just as soon as they stop holding the government hostage to their partisan demands,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said.

    Thune eventually promised Democrats a December vote on the tax credit extension to help resolve the standoff, but many Democrats demanded a guaranteed fix, not just a vote that is likely to fail.

    Thune’s position was much the same as the one Schumer took back in October 2013, when Republicans unsuccessfully sought to roll back parts of the Affordable Care Act in exchange for funding the government. “Open up all of the government, and then we can have a fruitful discussion,” Schumer said then.

    Democratic leaders under pressure

    The first year of President Donald Trump’s second term has seen more than 200,000 federal workers leave their job through firings, forced relocations or the administration’s deferred resignation program, according to the Partnership for Public Service. Whole agencies that don’t align with the administration’s priorities have been dismantled. And billions of dollars previously approved by Congress have been frozen or canceled.

    Democrats have had to rely on the courts to block some of Trump’s efforts, but they have been unable to do it through legislation. They were also powerless to stop Trump’s big tax cut and immigration crackdown bill that Republicans helped pay for by cutting future spending on safety net programs such as Medicaid and SNAP, formerly known as food stamps.

    The Democrats’ struggles to blunt the Trump administration’s priorities has prompted calls for the party’s congressional leadership to take a more forceful response.

    Schumer experienced that firsthand after announcing in March that he would support moving ahead with a funding bill for the 2025 budget year. There was a protest at his office, calls from progressives that he be primaried in 2028 and suggestions that the Democratic Party would soon be looking for new leaders.

    This time around, Schumer demanded that Republicans negotiate with Democrats to get their votes on a spending bill. The Senate rules, he noted, requires bipartisan support to meet the 60-vote threshold necessary to advance a spending bill.

    But those negotiations did not occur, at least not with Schumer. Republicans instead worked with a small group of eight Democrats to tee up a short-term bill to fund the government generally at current levels and accused Schumer of catering to the party’s left flank when he refused to go along.

    “The Senate Democrats are afraid that the radicals in their party will say that they caved,” House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said at one of his many daily press conferences.

    The blame game

    The political stakes in the shutdown are huge, which is why leaders in both parties have held nearly daily press briefings to shape public opinion.

    Roughly 6 in 10 Americans say Trump and Republicans in Congress have “a great deal” or “quite a bit” of responsibility for the shutdown, while 54% say the same about Democrats in Congress, according to the poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

    At least three-quarters of Americans believe each deserves at least a “moderate” share of blame, underscoring that no one was successfully evading responsibility.

    Both parties looked to the Nov. 4 elections in Virginia, New Jersey and elsewhere for signs of how the shutdown was influencing public opinion. Democrats took comfort in their overwhelming successes. Trump called it a “big factor, negative” for Republicans. But it did not change the GOP’s stance on negotiating. Instead, Trump ramped up calls for Republicans to end the filibuster in the Senate, which would pretty much eliminate the need for the majority party to ever negotiate with the minority.

    Damage of the shutdown

    The Congressional Budget Office says that the negative impact on the economy will be mostly recovered once the shutdown ends, but not entirely. It estimated the permanent economic loss at about $11 billion for a six-week shutdown.

    Beyond the numbers, though, the shutdown created a cascade of troubles for many Americans. Federal workers missed paychecks, causing financial and emotional stress. Travelers had their flights delayed and at times canceled. People who rely on safety net programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program saw their benefits stopped, and Americans throughout the country lined up for meals at food banks.

    “This dysfunction is damaging enough to our constituents and economy here at home, but it also sends a dangerous message to the watching world,” said Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan. “It demonstrates to our allies that we are an unreliable partner, and it signals to our adversaries that we can’t work together to meet even the most fundamental responsibilities of Congress.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jack Schlossberg, JFK’s grandson, enters race for Nadler’s NYC House seat

    [ad_1]

    John F. Kennedy’s grandson, Jack Schlossberg, is running for Congress, launching a campaign to replace retiring Democratic Rep. Jerry Nadler.

    The 32-year-old Democratic influencer announced his candidacy on his Instagram page, saying in part, “There is nowhere I’d rather be than in the arena fighting for my hometown. Over the next eight months, during the course of this campaign, I hope to meet as many of you as I can. If you see me on the street, please say hello. If I knock on your door, I hope we can have a conversation. Because politics should be personal. Thanks more to come soon, and I’ll see you on the trail New York 12.”

    Schlossberg, the only son of Caroline Kennedy, would represent parts of New York City if elected to succeed Nadler in the 12th Congressional District.

    This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • See how much health insurance costs would go up if expanded ACA subsidies are allowed to expire

    [ad_1]

    See how much health insurance costs would go up if expanded ACA subsidies are allowed to expire

    The expiration of expanded ACA subsidies could lead to higher health insurance premiums for millions of Americans.

    Updated: 5:36 PM PST Nov 11, 2025

    Editorial Standards

    The expanded Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies, initially passed by Democrats in 2021 as part of pandemic relief legislation, are set to expire at the end of this year, potentially increasing health insurance costs for many Americans.FactCheck.org has looked into competing claims of who benefits from the subsidies. Democrats first passed the expanded ACA subsidies in 2021 as part of pandemic relief legislation, with the enhanced subsidies initially set to last for two years. They were later extended through the end of this year via additional legislation passed by Democrats. Under the ACA, subsidies are available for people who buy their own insurance on the marketplace and if they earn up to 400% above the federal poverty level. Those eligible for coverage also can’t be enrolled in Medicare or have employer-sponsored health care. For an individual, this threshold is $62,000 annually, $84,000 for a couple, and $128,000 for a family of four, according to FactCheck.org. When the ACA subsidies expanded in 2021, it increased the financial help enrollees could get and eliminated the 400% income cap. If the subsidies expire, there would be no tax credit anymore for people who make more than 400% of the federal poverty level.Health policy research organization KFF looked at the changes families could see with the expiring ACA subsidies. According to FactCheck.org, premiums are based on income, and currently, people are paying up to 8.5% of their income for health insurance. If the subsidies expire, people would pay more for their premiums, from 2% to 10% of their income.For example, an individual who makes $35,000 is currently paying 3% of their income towards their health premium. If the subsidies expire, they would pay 7.5% of their income towards insurance, which would be a $1,500 increase. For a family of four earning $90,000 a year, they currently pay 5.2% of their income towards their health premium. If the subsidies expire, it would jump to 9.4%, resulting in a $3,700 increase. Prices could vary depending on age, income, family size, and location.Enrollment for health insurance through ACA has more than doubled since 2020, according to FactCheck.org. About 7% of the U.S. population, around 24 million people, enrolled this year, and the vast majority received subsidies. The Congressional Budget Office estimated 4.2 million people will not have health insurance in 2034 if the enhancement expires. They also estimate a permanent extension of these subsidies would cost nearly $350 billion over 10 years.See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    The expanded Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies, initially passed by Democrats in 2021 as part of pandemic relief legislation, are set to expire at the end of this year, potentially increasing health insurance costs for many Americans.

    FactCheck.org has looked into competing claims of who benefits from the subsidies.

    Democrats first passed the expanded ACA subsidies in 2021 as part of pandemic relief legislation, with the enhanced subsidies initially set to last for two years.

    They were later extended through the end of this year via additional legislation passed by Democrats.

    Under the ACA, subsidies are available for people who buy their own insurance on the marketplace and if they earn up to 400% above the federal poverty level. Those eligible for coverage also can’t be enrolled in Medicare or have employer-sponsored health care.

    For an individual, this threshold is $62,000 annually, $84,000 for a couple, and $128,000 for a family of four, according to FactCheck.org.

    When the ACA subsidies expanded in 2021, it increased the financial help enrollees could get and eliminated the 400% income cap. If the subsidies expire, there would be no tax credit anymore for people who make more than 400% of the federal poverty level.

    Health policy research organization KFF looked at the changes families could see with the expiring ACA subsidies.

    According to FactCheck.org, premiums are based on income, and currently, people are paying up to 8.5% of their income for health insurance. If the subsidies expire, people would pay more for their premiums, from 2% to 10% of their income.

    For example, an individual who makes $35,000 is currently paying 3% of their income towards their health premium. If the subsidies expire, they would pay 7.5% of their income towards insurance, which would be a $1,500 increase. For a family of four earning $90,000 a year, they currently pay 5.2% of their income towards their health premium. If the subsidies expire, it would jump to 9.4%, resulting in a $3,700 increase. Prices could vary depending on age, income, family size, and location.

    Enrollment for health insurance through ACA has more than doubled since 2020, according to FactCheck.org.

    About 7% of the U.S. population, around 24 million people, enrolled this year, and the vast majority received subsidies.

    The Congressional Budget Office estimated 4.2 million people will not have health insurance in 2034 if the enhancement expires.

    They also estimate a permanent extension of these subsidies would cost nearly $350 billion over 10 years.

    See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Republicans take a victory lap as House gathers to end shutdown

    [ad_1]

    President Trump and Republican lawmakers took a victory lap on Tuesday after securing bipartisan support to reopen the government, ending the longest shutdown in U.S. history without ceding ground to any core Democratic demands.

    House members were converging on Washington for a final vote expected as early as Wednesday, after 60 senators — including seven Democrats and an independent — advanced the measure on Monday night. Most Democratic lawmakers in the House are expected to oppose the continuing resolution, which does not include an extension of Affordable Care Act tax credits that had been a central demand during the shutdown negotiations.

    The result, according to independent analysts, is that premiums will more than double on average for more than 20 million Americans who use the healthcare marketplace, rising from an average of $888 to $1,904 for out-of-pocket payments annually, according to KFF.

    Democrats in the Senate who voted to reopen the government said they had secured a promise from Majority Leader John Thune, a Republican from South Dakota, that they would get a vote on extending the tax credits next month.

    But the vote is likely to fail down party lines. And even if it earned some Republican support, House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, has made no promises he would give the measure a vote in the lower chamber.

    An end to the shutdown comes at a crucial time for the U.S. aviation industry ahead of one of the busiest travel seasons around the Thanksgiving holiday. The prolonged closure of the federal government led federal employees in the sector to call out sick in large numbers, prompting an unprecedented directive from the Federation Aviation Administration that slowed operations at the nation’s biggest airports.

    Lawmakers are racing to vote before federal employees working in aviation safety miss yet another paycheck this week, potentially extending frustration within their ranks and causing further delays at airports entering the upcoming holiday week.

    It will be the first time the House conducts legislative work in over 50 days, a marathon stretch that has resulted in a backlog of work for lawmakers on a wide range of issues, from appropriations and stock trading regulations to a discharge petition calling for the release of files in the Jeffrey Epstein investigation.

    “We look forward to the government reopening this week so Congress can get back to our regular legislative session,” Johnson told reporters Monday. “There will be long days and long nights here for the foreseeable future to make up for all this lost time that was imposed upon us.”

    To reopen the government, the spending package needs to pass the House, where Republicans hold a slim majority and Democrats have vowed to vote against a deal that does not address healthcare costs.

    Still, Trump and Republican leaders believe they have enough votes to push it through the chamber and reopen the government later in the week.

    Trump has called the spending package a “very good” deal and has indicated that he will sign it once it gets to his desk.

    At a Veterans Day event on Tuesday, Trump thanked Thune and Johnson for their work on their work to reopen the government. Johnson was in the crowd listening to Trump’s remarks.

    “Congratulations to you and to John and to everybody on a very big victory,” Trump said in a speech at Arlington National Cemetery. “We are opening back our country. It should’ve never been closed.”

    While Trump lauded the measure as a done deal, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, the top Democrat in the chamber, said his party would still try to delay or tank the legislation with whatever tools it had left.

    “House Democrats will strongly oppose any legislation that does not decisively address the Republican healthcare crisis,” Jeffries said in a CNN interview Tuesday morning.

    Just like in the Senate, California Democrats in the House are expected to vote against the shutdown deal because it does not address the expiring healthcare subsidies.

    Rep. Nancy Pelosi said the shutdown deal reached in the Senate “fails to meet the needs of America’s working families” and said she stood with House Democratic leaders in opposing the legislation.

    “We must continue to fight for a responsible, bipartisan path forward that reopens the government and keeps healthcare affordable for the American people,” Pelosi said in a social media post.

    California Republicans in the House, meanwhile, have criticized Democrats for trying to stop the funding agreement from passing.

    “These extremists only care about their radical base regardless of the impact to America,” Rep. Ken Calvert of Corona said in a social media post.

    Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin) publicly called on Johnson to negotiate with Democrats on healthcare during the shutdown. He said in an interview last month that he thought there was “a lot of room” to address concerns on both sides of the aisle on how to address the rising costs of healthcare.

    Kiley said Monday that he was proposing legislation with Rep. Sam Liccardo (D-San José) that proposed extending the Affordable Care Act tax credits for another two years.

    He said the bill would “stop massive increase in healthcare costs for 22 million Americans whose premium tax credits are about to expire.”

    “Importantly, the extension is temporary and fully paid for, so it can’t increase the deficit,” Kiley said in reference to a frequent concern cited by Republicans that extending the credits would contribute to the national debt.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Wilner, Ana Ceballos

    Source link

  • Is the Government Shutdown Ending? Live Updates

    [ad_1]

    On Sunday night, the Senate successfully passed a test vote 60-40, clearing the way for a vote to pass a compromise bill which would fund the government at its current levels through January 1. Eight members of the Senate’s Democratic caucus voted with Republicans, including the three senators who negotiated the compromise: New Hampshire’s Maggie Hassan and Jeanne Shaheen and Maine’s Angus King. Senators Tim Kaine, John Fetterman, Dick Durbin, Catherine Cortez Masto, and Jacky Rosen were the other Democrats who voted with the GOP. Here’s what Democrats did and didn’t get as part of the compromise, per NBC News:

    The agreement contains a “minibus” — three full-year appropriations bills that will fund certain departments like the Agriculture Department through the end of the fiscal year next fall — and a continuing resolution to fund the rest of the government at existing spending levels through Jan. 30. It would also fully fund the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, once known as food stamps, through next September, a major flashpoint in the shutdown. The sources said the deal also reverses Trump’s attempted layoffs of federal workers during the shutdown through RIFs, or “reduction in force” notifications.

    But in a major concession from Democrats, it does not include an extension of expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies. Allowing the funds to lapse would raise insurance premiums for millions of Americans unless they are extended. Instead, the Democrats settled for a promise that the Senate will vote on a bill to extend the subsidies by the end of the second week of December, with the outcome uncertain, two of the sources said. Even then, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has said he won’t promise that the House will vote on extending the subsidies.

    It might take several days for Congress to reopen the government, but the end appears to be in sight.

    [ad_2]

    Intelligencer Staff

    Source link

  • Dems accuse EPA of trying to kill greenhouse gas reporting program that aids cap-and-trade

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    A group of climate-minded Democrats wrote Monday to EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, accusing the agency of improperly moving to terminate a federal greenhouse gas-tracking program that blue states have used as a model for their own carbon tax and cap-and-trade systems.

    The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, or GHGRP, was created under a congressional appropriation during the Obama administration. It funded an EPA rule requiring large energy producers and other high-emission industries to report their greenhouse gas output levels.

    Rep. Sean Casten, D-Ill., a green-energy engineer who had a key role in crafting the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) praised in blue states and criticized by conservatives, led the letter to Zeldin in his role as vice chair of a House caucus focused on sustainable energy.

    “We write to inform you that the Environmental Protection Agency is violating clear congressional directives by proposing to end the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program,” Casten’s letter read.

    TRUMP ADMIN SCORES LEGAL WIN IN $16B CLIMATE FIGHT AS FEDERAL APPEALS COURT LIFTS BLOCK ON GRANT TERMINATIONS

    EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin of New York speaks before Congress. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)

    “For more than a decade, this program has been the most important source of transparent and verifiable climate pollution data in the federal government, and the EPA has clear authority and obligation to continue maintaining it.”

    The letter, also signed by key energy coalition members Reps. Donald Beyer of Virginia, Paul Tonko of New York, Mike Quigley of Illinois, and Doris Matsui of California, all Democrats, said ending the program would undermine “evidence-based governance” at a key moment in climate change “challenges.”

    Casten’s group told Zeldin the move appears to be the latest strike in “scientific data censorship” by President Donald Trump and his administration, accusing the feds of restricting, hiding or defunding data-centered operations across the various agencies.

    EPA URGED TO AXE FUNDS FOR ‘RADICAL’ CLIMATE PROJECT ACCUSED OF TRAINING JUDGES, STATE AGS RALLY

    Sean Casten of Illinois

    Rep. Sean Casten, D-Ill., speaks to reporters in Washington. (Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images)

    Reached by Fox News Digital, an EPA official confirmed receipt of Casten’s letter and said the agency will respond through appropriate channels.

    A source familiar with the situation argued the GHGRP has no material impact on improving human health or protecting the environment, and is instead just another onerous regulation for the federal government to pass on to energy producers who would rather focus on providing efficiency to American consumers.

    Removing the rule and the program would save the private sector up to $2.4 billion in regulatory costs connected to reporting and statutory obligations, critics have said.

    California and New York have similar programs at the state level, and the Empire State’s DEP disclosed in a fact sheet that its version of GHGRP aims to be helpful in creating cap-and-trade — or as critics call cap-and-tax — levies.

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    Facilities emitting more than 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year must report their outputs to the EPA under the current rule. That rubric tends to envelop power plants, oil refineries, large-scale metallurgy, and waste management landfills.

    Elements considered reportable also include methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Op-Ed: Preventing Mass Layoffs in the Rust Belt, a Popular and Possible Initiative – Cleveland Scene

    [ad_1]

    As the Democrats have lost ground to the Republicans with noncollege educated and working-class voters, particularly among white and Latino populations, researchers have wondered how Democrats might regain these voters’ support. While some have proposed a more socially conservative platform and others have advocated an “abundance” agenda, the Center for Working-Class Politics (CWCP), in collaboration with the Labor Institute and Rutgers University, recently released a report looking at the possibility that economic populist appeals might win back voters, particularly in working-class heavy Rust Belt states.

    The study surveyed 3,000 Rust Belt residents, including 750 individuals from Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Overall, the report finds that economically populist appeals, such as those targeting economic elites and corporate greed, are broadly and deeply popular among Rust Belt voters. Economic populism played well with both Democrats and independents—and with Republicans when delivered by an independent, rather than a Democratic candidate. In addition, the survey tested specific messaging and proposals that might garner broad support among voters.

    One proposal that we think might appeal to Rust Belt voters is an initiative to stop involuntary mass layoffs by companies that receive federal tax dollars. Our perspective is that if companies are receiving taxpayer funding than they have a responsibility to ensure stability for those very same individuals who fund them. Over the past half century, mass layoffs have disproportionately affected the Rust Belt. For instance, from 1996 to 2012, mass layoffs affected 16% of the Ohio workforce, particularly around Northeast Ohio and the state’s river towns.

    While this might seem like a radical proposal, a comparative look at how Siemens layoffs simultaneously affected the U.S. and Germany is telling of how such a policy might play out. When the technological giant pursued mass layoffs in 2020, all American workers lost their jobs. In Germany, however, where workers have strong representation on the board of directors and unions have more influence, no one was involuntarily laid off. Instead, workers were offered buyouts. While American workers don’t have the same sort of influence, we believe that federal contracts and taxpayer dollars could provide the hook needed to ensure that mass layoffs do not ensue.

    To test the popularity of this idea, we surveyed voters asking them about their preference for 25 policy proposals. Among those proposals, stopping mass layoffs was tied for the 5th most popular proposal. Indeed, this proposal was more popular than tariffs and raising the minimum wage. More specifically, it was highly popular among manual workers, noncollege graduates, independents, Democrats, and families making under $50k per year.

    Despite this policy’s popularity, however, the report finds that support diminishes substantially when the proposal is delivered by Democratic politicians rather than independents. To address this partisan penalty, the survey also tested how such a proposal would fare as a non-partisan ballot initiative, which allows voters to show support for specific policies without getting bogged down in partisan polarization. Overall, support for the initiative substantially outpaced opposition, even after survey takers were shown counter-messages that critiqued the proposal in different ways.

    Over the past several decades, working-class populations have increasingly moved away from the Democrats and towards GOP candidates. Despite its historic reputation as the party of the working-class, the Democrats have now become a party of the college educated. To win back working-class voters, the CWCP report demonstrates that Democrats should embrace an economically populist agenda that confronts corporate greed and economic elites. Otherwise, we should not expect this trend to reverse any time soon.

    Tim Gill is a native Clevelander, Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Tennessee, and a Research Associate at the Center for Working-Class Politics.

    [ad_2]

    Tim Gill

    Source link

  • Did Democrats Win the Shutdown After All?

    [ad_1]

    The shutdown is not yet over: once the bill is through the Senate, it must pass the House—where Democratic leaders appear in no mood to compromise and the G.O.P. majority is slim—before Trump can sign off. But Senate Democrats’ resistance is over, and so this is an opportune moment to evaluate where the shutdown has left the Party. The impression that it contrived not only to snatch a snivelling defeat from the jaws of certain victory but to do so just as it had finally secured some electoral momentum is widespread, intuitive, and appealing—an exquisitely on-the-nose regression to the Party’s hapless recent mean. But I’m not sure that’s what happened here.

    First, if the central Democratic goal was to be seen to be fighting back, then the Party already did that: over the weekend, the shutdown passed the forty-day mark, making it the longest in U.S. history. (The previous longest was thirty-five days, in Trump’s first term.) And, at least to some extent, I think Democrats did succeed on the merits, too: not only in focussing attention on health care as a pocketbook issue but in tying it to broader concerns about Trump’s unprecedented corruption, albeit in a more roundabout way than the direct rhetorical fusion that Klein initially proposed. Trump himself helped with this, by hauling down a wing of the White House to build an opulent ballroom and hosting a “Great Gatsby”-themed party at Mar-a-Lago while attempting to withhold food aid from millions of low-income Americans. As the election results filtered in last week, a narrative emerged, including a version among Republicans, that Trump had lost because he had become more fixated on the trappings of power than on high prices.

    Presidents typically get a honeymoon period. Joe Biden’s seemed to end in August, 2021, when he was perceived as having botched the withdrawal from Afghanistan. Trump’s appeared to last longer, at least in terms of élite consensus. I’ve thought a lot about why this was, and have concluded that the diffuseness of crises that he provoked had a lot to do with it—preventing the concentration of attention on one singular debacle. The shutdown alone did not cut through this dynamic. But it played heavily into the story of the recent elections, which did. The media is now asking whether Trump, finally, might be walking and quacking like a lame duck.

    If Democrats’ goal was to guarantee Republican concessions on the health-care subsidies, then they would appear to have failed. Yet I’m not sure that Democrats holding out for longer would have got them much further. Trump did get the jitters, but responded, as The Atlantic’s Jonathan Chait noted, not by caving on health care but by ranting about the filibuster, ultimately picking a different way of doubling down. (And, as Klein has pointed out, at least in a very cynical political sense, a deal on the subsidies might not have been advantageous for Democrats politically, if it saved Republicans from an acute electoral vulnerability during next year’s midterms.)

    Both Chait and Klein argued this week that Democrats should nonetheless have fought on: Chait suggested that an internecine G.O.P. war over the filibuster would have intensified, possibly leading to its elimination (which Democrats ought to welcome, because the filibuster sucks); Klein wrote that the shutdown had only just succeeded in its goal of concentrating attention on Trump’s fecklessness, and that shutdown-induced chaos ruining people’s Thanksgiving trips would have underscored it. But I don’t think Senate Republicans would likely have scrapped the filibuster to end the impasse. (Their leader, John Thune, has at least been clear that the caucus wouldn’t have supported it.) And I don’t see why, at this point, the Democrats need this shutdown to continue marshalling attention—they have made sure that the health-care debate will continue outside that framework, and the Senate deal funds much of the government only through January, at which point Democrats could shutter it again. One could also make the case that by appearing to cave now, the Democrats have forfeited any credit they built for fighting in the first place. But pressing on with this particular fight forever wouldn’t have been costless: the shutdown has inflicted real harm on federal workers and SNAP recipients, among others. There are trade-offs, of course—rising Obamacare premiums will harm people, too.

    [ad_2]

    Jon Allsop

    Source link

  • Senate approves shutdown deal as Democrats balk at lack of healthcare relief

    [ad_1]

    The Senate gave final approval Monday night to a deal that could end the longest government shutdown in U.S. history, sending it to the House, where Democrats are launching a last-ditch effort to block the measure because it does not address healthcare costs.

    Senators approved the shutdown deal on a 60-40 vote, a day after Senate Republicans reached a deal with eight senators who caucus with Democrats. The movement in the Senate prompted Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) earlier on Monday to urge House members to start making their way back to Washington, anticipating that the chamber will be ready to vote on the bill later in the week.

    The spending plan, which does not include an extension of the Affordable Care Act subsidies that are set to expire at the end of the year, has frustrated many Democrats who spent seven weeks pressuring Republicans to extend the tax credits. It would, however, fund the government through January, reinstate federal workers who were laid off during the shutdown and ensure that federal employees who were furloughed receive back pay.

    Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) also promised senators a vote in December that would put lawmakers on record on the healthcare subsidies. Thune said in a speech Monday that he was “grateful that the end is in sight” with the compromise.

    “Let’s get it done, get it over to the House so we can get this government open,” he said.

    Senate Democrats who defected have argued that a December vote on subsidies is the best deal they could get as the minority party, and that forcing vulnerable Republicans in the chamber to vote on the issue will help them win ahead of next year’s midterm elections.

    As the Senate prepared to vote on the deal Monday, Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader of the chamber, continued to reiterate his opposition to what he called a “Republican bill.” Schumer, who has faced backlash from Democrats for losing members of his caucus, said the bill “fails to do anything of substance to fix America’s healthcare crisis.”

    House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) speaks to reporters about the government shutdown.

    (Mariam Zuhaib / Associated Press)

    Thune’s promise to allow a vote in the Senate does not guarantee a favorable outcome for Democrats, who would need to secure Republican votes for passage through the chamber. And the chance to address healthcare costs will be made even harder by Johnson, who has not committed to holding a vote on his chamber in the future.

    “I’m not promising anybody anything,” he said. “I’m going to let the process play out.”

    House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), meanwhile, told reporters that House Democrats will continue to make the case that extending the subsidies is what Americans are demanding from elected officials, and that there is still a fight to be waged in the chamber — even if it is a long shot.

    “What we are going to continue to do as House Democrats is to partner with our allies throughout America is to wage the fight, to stay in the Colosseum,” Jeffries said at a news conference.

    Some Republicans have agreed with Democrats during the shutdown that healthcare costs need to be addressed, but it is unlikely that House Democrats will be able to build enough bipartisan support to block the deal in the chamber.

    Still, Jeffries said the “loudmouths” in the Republican Party who want to do something about healthcare costs have an opportunity to act now that the House is expected to be back in session.

    “They can no longer hide. They can no longer hide,” Jeffries said. “They are not going to be able to hide this week when they return from their vacation.”

    Democrats believed that fighting for an extension of healthcare tax credits, even at the expense of shutting down the government, would highlight their messaging on affordability, a political platform that helped lead their party to victory in elections across the country last week.

    If the tax credits are allowed to lapse at the end of the year, millions of Americans are expected to see their monthly premiums double.

    In California, premiums for federally subsidized plans available through Covered California will soar by 97% on average next year.

    Two men.

    Senate Majority Leader John Thune answers questions Monday about a possible end to the government shutdown after eight members of the Democratic caucus broke ranks and voted with Republicans.

    (J. Scott Applewhite / Associated Press)

    California’s U.S. senators, Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla, were among the Democrats who voted against the deal to reopen the government because it did not address healthcare costs.

    “We owe our constituents better than this. We owe a resolution that makes it possible for them to afford healthcare,” Schiff said in a video Sunday night.

    Some Republicans too have warned that their party faces backlash in the midterm elections next year if it doesn’t come up with a more comprehensive health plan.

    “We have always been open to finding solutions to reduce the oppressive cost of healthcare under the unaffordable care act,” Johnson said Monday.

    Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, for one, supported an expeditious vote to reopen the government but insisted on a vote to eliminate language from the spending deal he said would “unfairly target Kentucky’s hemp industry.” His amendment did get a vote and was eventually rejected on a 76-24 vote Monday night.

    With the bill headed to the House, Republicans expect to have the votes to pass it, Johnson said.

    Any piece of legislation needs to be approved by both the Senate and House and be signed by the president.

    Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office on Monday, President Trump said he would support the legislative deal to reopen the government.

    “We’re going to be opening up our country,” Trump said. “Too bad it was closed, but we’ll be opening up our country very quickly.”

    Trump added that he would abide by a provision that would require his administration to reinstate federal workers who were laid off during the shutdown.

    “The deal is very good,” he said.

    Johnson said he spoke to the president on Sunday night and described Trump as “very anxious” to reopen the government.

    “It’s after 40 days of wandering in the wilderness, and making the American people suffer needlessly, that some Senate Democrats finally have stepped forward to end the pain,” Johnson said. “Our long national nightmare is finally coming to an end, and we’re grateful for that.”

    [ad_2]

    Ana Ceballos, Michael Wilner

    Source link

  • Schumer is pressured to step aside as Senate Democratic leader after shutdown vote

    [ad_1]

    Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York is facing mounting pressure to step aside as leader of the Senate Democratic caucus after eight members voted against his wishes Sunday, joining Republicans in a bid to end the longest government shutdown in history.

    The vote was just the latest development in a troubling week for the 74-year-old Schumer, who, after eight years as the top Senate Democrat, has faced growing calls from within the party to make way for a new generation of leadership.

    Elections last week revealed the emergence of a growing progressive movement in Schumer’s hometown, where the longtime senator declined to endorse Zohran Mamdani in his successful bid for New York City mayor.

    National progressive organizations on Monday urged him to step down and have encouraged a popular congresswoman in the state, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, to run for his Senate seat in 2029. Polls show Schumer faces the lowest approval numbers of any national leader in Washington.

    His leadership troubles come on the heels of Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), the first female speaker of the House, announcing her retirement, a decision that generated praise across the political aisle last week reflecting on her shrewd ability to control a sprawling House Democratic caucus during high-stakes votes.

    “Schumer is no longer effective and should be replaced,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) wrote on X after the Sunday night vote. “If you can’t lead the fight to stop healthcare premiums from skyrocketing for Americans, what will you fight for?”

    Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the top Democrat in the House, told reporters Monday that he strongly disapproved of the emerging deal in the Senate, where seven Democrats and one independent who caucuses with the party voted to proceed with government funding.

    For seven weeks, House and Senate Democrats said they would not vote for legislation to reopen the government unless they were able to secure an extension of health insurance subsidies. But the deal reached in the Senate indicated how some Democrats gave in on that bottom-line negotiation.

    Schumer reiterated his disapproval of the spending deal in a speech from the floor Monday. He criticized the compromise as a “Republican bill” even though members of his party helped broker the deal.

    “Republicans now own this healthcare crisis,” Schumer said. “They knew it was coming. We wanted to fix it and they said no, and now it is on them.”

    As Schumer delivered his speech, Jeffries spoke to reporters at a news conference on the other side of the Capitol.

    Asked whether he thought Schumer remained an effective leader and should remain in his position, Jeffries replied, “yes and yes.”

    When pressed to elaborate, Jeffries said “the overwhelming majority of Senate Democrats led by Chuck Schumer waged a valiant fight,” and turned his disapproval to the Democrats who voted with Republicans on the bill.

    “I am not going to explain what a handful of Senate Democrats have decided to do,” Jeffries said. “That’s their explanation to offer to the American people.”

    Now that the effort turns to the House, Jeffries said Democrats in the chamber will try to block a deal that does not address healthcare costs.

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom offered harsh criticism of Senate Democrats on Monday, who he said had “rolled over.”

    After speaking at the Milken Institute’s Global Investors’ Symposium in São Paulo, Newsom told The Times that the move blunted the momentum his party was experiencing following a string of victories last week.

    “You don’t start something unless you’re going to finish,” said Newsom, who next heads to the climate summit known as COP30 in Belém, Brazil. “Why the hell did we do this in the first place? We could have gotten this deal in 20 minutes. … Honestly, I don’t know what’s going on with my party.”

    Zach Wahls, a Democratic candidate for Senate in Iowa, said Schumer had “failed to lead this party in one of its most critical moments,” calling for him to step down. And Rep. Seth Moulton, a Democrat from Massachusetts, wrote that an effective leader would have been able to keep party members in line.

    “Tonight is another example of why we need new leadership,” Moulton wrote on X.

    The eight members who voted to reopen the government — 15% of the Senate Democratic caucus — voted directly against Schumer, who voted against the measure.

    Wahls speculated that the moderate members who voted with Republicans were privately given Schumer’s blessing to do so.

    “The fact that he voted against this deal, while he clearly gave it his blessing in private, is a perfect illustration of why people no longer trust the Democratic Party,” Wahls said, “and as long as he stays in a leadership role, it is going to be impossible for anybody — whether it’s in Iowa or any other swing state — to win a majority.”

    Times staff writers Wilner and Ceballos reported from Washington, and Gutierrez contributed from São Paulo.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Wilner, Ana Ceballos, Melody Gutierrez

    Source link

  • Commentary: Democrats crumble like cookies. Is this really the best they can do?

    [ad_1]

    Democrats just crumbled like soft-bake cookies.

    The so-called resistance party has given up the shutdown fight, ensuring that millions of Americans will face Republican-created skyrocketing healthcare costs, and millions more will bury any hope that the minority party will find the substance and leadership to run a viable defense against President Trump.

    Sunday night, eight turncoat Democrats sold out every American who pays for their own health insurance through the affordable marketplaces set up by President Obama.

    As has been thoroughly reported in past weeks, Republicans are dead set on making sure that insurance is entirely out of financial reach for many Americans by refusing to help them pay for the premiums with subsidies that are part of current law, offered to both low- and middle-income families.

    Republicans — for reasons hard to fathom other than they hate Obama, and apparently basics such as flu shots — have long desired to kill the Affordable Care Act and now are on the brink of doing so, in spirit if not actuality, thanks to Democrats.

    Trump must be doing his old-man jig in the Oval Office.

    The pain this craven cave-in will cause is already evident. Rates for 2026 without the government subsidies have been announced, and premiums have doubled on average, according to nonpartisan health policy researcher KFF. Doubled.

    Insurance companies are planning on raising their rates by about 18%, already devastating and symptomatic of the need for a total overhaul of our messed-up system. That increase, coupled with the loss of the subsidies beginning at the start of next year, means a 114% jump in costs for the folks dependent on this insurance. Premiums that cost on average $888 in 2025 will jump to $1,904 in 2026, according to KFF.

    But it’s the middle-income people who will really be hit.

    “On average, a 60-year-old couple making $85,000 … would see yearly premium payments rise by over $22,600 in 2026,” KFF warns, meaning that instead of paying 8.5% of their income toward health insurance, it will now jump to about 25%.

    Merry Christmas, America.

    Although the eight Democrats who broke from their party to allow this to happen are directly responsible (thankfully our California senators are not among them), Democratic leadership should also be held accountable.

    A party that can’t keep itself together on the really big votes isn’t a party. It’s a bunch of people who occasionally have lunch together. Literally, they had one job: Stick together.

    The failure of Democratic leadership to make sure its Senate votes didn’t shatter in this intense moment isn’t just shameful, it’s depressing. For all of the condemnation of the Republican members of Congress for failing to uphold their duty to be a check on the power of the presidency, here’s the opposition party rolling over belly up on the pivotal issue of healthcare.

    As Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) put it on social media, “Senator Schumer is no longer effective and should be replaced. If you can’t lead the fight to stop healthcare premiums from skyrocketing for Americans, what will you fight for?”

    If the recent elections had any lessons in them, it’s that Democrats — and voters in general — want courage. Love or hate Zohran Mamdani, his win as New York City mayor was due in no small part to his daring to forge his own path. Ditto on Gov. Gavin Newsom and Proposition 50.

    Mamdani put that sentiment best in his victory speech, promising an age when people can “expect from their leaders a bold vision of what we will achieve, rather than a list of excuses for what we are too timid to attempt.”

    Before you start angry-emailing me, yes, I do understand how much pain the shutdown in causing, especially for furloughed workers and people facing disruptions in their SNAP benefits. I feel for every person who doesn’t know how they will pay their bills.

    But here are the facts that we can’t forget. Republicans have purposefully made that pain intense in order to break Democrats. Trump has found ways to pay his deportation agents, while simultaneously not paying critical workers such as airport screeners and air traffic controllers, where the chaos created by their absence is both visible and disruptive. He has also threatened to not give back pay to some of those folks when this does end.

    And on the give-in-or-don’t-eat front, he’s actually been ordered by courts to pay those Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits and is fighting it. Republicans could easily band together and demand that money goes out while the rest is hashed out, but they don’t want to. They want people to go hungry so that Democrats will break, and it worked.

    But at what cost?

    About 24 million people will be hit by these premium increases, leaving up to 4 million unable to keep their insurance. Unable to go to the doctor for routine care. Unable to pay for cancer treatments. Unable to have that lump, that pain, the broken bone looked at. Unable to get their kid a flu shot.

    In many ways, this isn’t a California problem. The majority of these folks are in Southern, Republican states that refused to expand Medicaid when they had the chance. About 6 in 10 subsidy recipients are represented by Republicans, according to KFF, led by those living in Florida, Georgia and Mississippi. But Americans have been clear that we want access to care for all of us, as a right, not an expensive privilege.

    Which makes it all the more mystifying that Democrats are so eager to give up, on an issue that unites voters across parties, across demographics, across our seemingly endless divides.

    But I guess that’s just how the cookie crumbles.

    [ad_2]

    Anita Chabria

    Source link

  • The Democratic 8 Also Knifed The Hemp Industry

    [ad_1]

    The Democratic 8 Also Knifed The Hemp Industry — siding with prohibitionists to gut veterans’ healthcare and hemp innovation.

    They are the buzz on the internet and politics worlds over their betrayal to their political party, but did you know the Democratic 8 also knifed the hemp industry?  In a dramatic turn of events, 8 Senate Democrats have quietly helped push through a deal both re-criminalizes intoxicating hemp-derived THC products and strips out key medical-marijuana provisions previously cleared both chambers of Congress. The implications for both healthcare and cannabis policy are significant.

    Under the newly negotiated spending package, negotiators agreed to ban “intoxicating hemp-based or hemp-derived products, including Delta-8,” while preserving non-intoxicating CBD and industrial hemp. At the same time, the legislation omits the provisions the House and Senate earlier this year passed to enable physicians at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to recommend medical marijuana to veterans — language now excluded from this deal.

    RELATED: Study Reveals Stance By Physicians And Public About Cannabis

    From a healthcare standpoint, this is a two‐fold blow. First: healthcare access for veterans. The VA‐doctor recommendation language was seen as a breakthrough for veteran patients who seek alternatives to opioids or other pain management tools. Now it’s gone. Second: the broader THC market. By re-criminalizing intoxicating hemp THC products — despite their existence in a previously lawful grey-zone post-Agricultural Marketing Act of 2018 (the “2018 Farm Bill”) environment — Congress has signalled certain “hemp-derived” cannabinoids are being pulled back under prohibition.

    Senator Kaine voted to put in a knife in the Hemp industry

    the group of eight Senate Democrats who broke from the caucus to vote in favour of advancing a funding deal to end the government shutdown include:

    • Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.)
    • Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
    • John Fetterman (D-Pa.)
    • Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.)
    • Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
    • Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.)
    • Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) – whose daughter is also running for Congress
    • Angus King (I-Maine, caucuses with Democrats)

    What stands out is the ban on intoxicating hemp THC products came in the same spending package, even though earlier this year the House and Senate had passed language to allow VA doctors to recommend medical marijuana for veterans. The new deal reverses earlier momentum.

    For advocates of veteran healthcare this is a cold shower in addition to the failed promise to help with healthcare premiums.  It is also a deliberate smack at any real cannabis policy reform. The exclusion of VA-doctor recommendation language means veterans may have to continue navigating patchy state laws and federal prohibitions without help from the federal agency meant to serve them. Meanwhile, hemp business operators say the ban threatens a multibillion‐dollar industry built around hemp-derived cannabinoids.

    RELATED: The Feds Foul Play Around Cannabis

    The timing is also politically striking. By tying these policy reversals to a must-pass government-funding measure, negotiators effectively placed them in the envelope of “budget compromise” rather than standalone reform. This means Democrat 8 can gut healthcare in two separate ways at the same time…with the hemp being a hidden negative for veteran with PTSD, cancer patients and others who the American Medical Association say could benefit.

    On the hemp side, the language undercuts previous regulatory efforts by Democratic senators. In September, eight Senate Democrats had sent a letter urging party leaders not to re-criminalize hemp THC products. But given the opportunity the deal they signed onto does exactly did re-criminalize hemp.  You wonder if their early comments were just for votes and optics.

    The deal pushed by Democratic negotiators didn’t just fail to extend healthcare protection, it actively reversed course on veteran access to medical cannabis and tightened federal restrictions on hemp-derived intoxicants. Whether this will spark further legislative fights, or judicial ones, remains to be seen. What is clear is a policy moment earlier this year looked like progress has now been shunted aside hidden under cover of a budget compromise.

    [ad_2]

    Terry Hacienda

    Source link

  • Trump made inroads with Latino voters. The GOP is losing them ahead of the midterms

    [ad_1]

    President Trump made historic gains with Latinos when he won reelection last year, boosting Republicans’ confidence that their economic message was helping them make inroads with a group of voters who had long leaned toward Democrats.

    But in this week’s election, Democrats in key states were able to disrupt that rightward shift by gaining back Latino support, exit polls showed.

    In New Jersey and Virginia, the Democrats running for governor made gains in counties with large Latino populations, and overall won two-thirds of the Latino vote in their states, according to an NBC News poll.

    And in California, a CNN exit poll showed about 70% of Latinos voting in favor of Proposition 50, a Democratic redistricting initiative designed to counter Trump’s plans to reshape congressional maps in an effort to keep GOP control of the House.

    The results mark the first concrete example at the ballot box of Latino voters turning away from the GOP — a shift foreshadowed by recent polling as their concerns about the economy and immigration raids have grown.

    Democratic Rep. Mikie Sherrill celebrates with supporters after being elected New Jersey governor.

    (Michael Nagle/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

    If the trend continues, it could spell trouble for Republicans in next year’s midterm elections, said Gary Segura, a professor of public policy, political science and Chicana/o studies at UCLA. This could be especially true in California and Texas, where both parties are banking on Latino voters to help them pick up seats in the House, Segura said.

    “A year is a long time in politics, but certainly the vote on Prop. 50 is a very, very good sign for the Democrats’ ability to pick up the newly drawn congressional districts,” Segura said. “I think Latino voters will be really instrumental in the outcome.”

    Democrats, meanwhile, are feeling optimistic that their warnings about Trump’s immigration crackdown and a bad economy are resonating with Latinos.

    Republicans are wondering to what degree the party can maintain support among Latinos without Trump on the ticket. In 2024, Trump won roughly 48% of the Latino vote nationally — a record for any Republican presidential candidate.

    Some Republicans saw this week’s trends among Latino voters as a “wakeup call.”

    “The Hispanic vote is not guaranteed. Hispanics married President Donald Trump but are only dating the GOP,” Republican Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar of Florida said in a social media video the day after the election. “I’ve been warning it: If the GOP does not deliver, we will lose the Hispanic vote all over the country.”

    Economic issues a main driver

    Last year Trump was able to leverage widespread frustration with the economy to win the support of Latinos. He promised to create jobs and lower the costs of living.

    But polling shows that a majority of Latino voters now disapprove of how Trump and the Republicans in control of Congress are handling the economy. Half of Latinos said they expected Trump’s economic policies to leave them worse off a year from now in a Unidos poll released last week.

    In New Jersey, that sentiment was exemplified by voters like Rumaldo Gomez. He told MSNBC he voted for Trump last year but this week went for for the Democratic candidate for governor, Rep. Mikie Sherrill.

    “Now, I look at Trump different,” Gomez said. “The economy does not look good.”

    Gomez added he is “very sad” about immigration raids led by the Trump administration that have split up hardworking families.

    While Latino voters fear being affected by immigration enforcement actions, polling suggests they are more concerned about cost of living, jobs and housing. The Unidos poll showed immigration ranking fifth on the list of concerns.

    In New Jersey and Virginia, Democrats’ double-digit victories were built on promises to reduce the cost of living, while blaming Trump for their economic pain.

    Marcus Robinson, a spokesman for the Democratic National Committee, said Democrats “expanded margins and flipped key counties by earning back Latino voters who know Trump’s economy leaves them behind.”

    “These results show that Latino communities want progress, not a return to chaos and broken promises,” he said.

    Republicans see a different Trump issue

    GOP strategist Matt Terrill, who was chief of staff for then-Sen. Marco Rubio’s 2016 presidential campaign, said the election results are not a referendum on Trump.

    Latino voters swung left because Trump wasn’t on the ballot, he said.

    Last year “it wasn’t Latino voters turning out for the Republican party, it was Latino voters turning out for President Trump,” he said. “Like him or not, he’s able to fire up voters that the Republican party traditionally does not get.”

    With Trump barred by the Constitution from running for a third term, Republicans are left to wonder if they can get the Latino vote back when he is not on the ballot. Terrill believes Republicans need to hammer on the issue of affordability as a top priority.

    Mike Madrid, a “never Trump” Republican and former political director of the California Republican Party, has a different theory.

    “They’re abandoning both parties,” Madrid said of Latinos. “They abandoned the Republican party for the same reasons they abandoned the Democratic party in November: not addressing economic concerns.”

    The economy has long been the top concern for Latinos, Madrid said, yet both parties continue to frame the Latino political agenda around immigration.

    “Latinos aren’t voting for Democrats or Republicans — they’re voting against Democrats and against Republicans,” Madrid said. “It’s a very big difference. The partisans are all looking at us as if we’re this peculiar exotic little creature.”

    The work ahead

    Democrat Abigail Spanberger was elected governor in Virginia in part because of big gains in Latino-heavy communities. One of the biggest gains was in Manassas Park, where more than 40% of residents are Latino. She won the city by 42 points, doubling the Democrats’ performance there in last year’s election.

    The shift toward Democrats happened because Latinos believed Trump when he promised to bring down high costs of living and that he would only go after violent criminals in immigration raids, said Democratic strategist Maria Cardona, who worked with Spanberger’s campaign on outreach to Spanish-language media.

    Instead, she argued, Trump betrayed them.

    Cardona said Medicaid cuts under Trump’s massive spending package this year, along with the reduction of supplemental nutrition assistance amid the government shutdown, have Latinos families panicking.

    “What Republicans misguidedly and mistakenly thought was a realignment of Latino voters just turned out to be a blip,” she said. “Latinos should never be considered a base vote.”

    Political scientists caution that the election outcomes this week are not necessarily indicative of how races will play out a year from now.

    “It’s just one election, but certainly the seeds have been planted for strong Latino Democratic turnouts in 2026,” said Brad Jones, a political science professor at UC Davis.

    Now, both parties need to explain how they expect to carry out their promises if elected.

    “They can’t sit on their laurels and say, ‘well surely the Latinos are coming back because the economy is bad and immigration enforcement is bad,’” Jones said. “The job of the Democratic party is now to reach out to Latino voters in ways that are more than just symbolic.”

    [ad_2]

    Ana Ceballos, Andrea Castillo

    Source link

  • House Dem reveals why she hijacked Speaker Johnson’s presser with viral outburst

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., defended her interruption of Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson’s press conference that went viral this week, arguing her rage was justifiable because Johnson has been unwilling to negotiate with Democratic Party leaders to reopen the government.

    GOP lawmakers have argued the two warring parties could agree to a budget resolution and negotiate public healthcare subsidies – which Democrats are holding out for – down the road. But Houlahan suggested she disagreed despite Democratic Party Senate leader Chuck Schumer unveiling a plan Friday afternoon to extend the Obamacare subsidies in question for just a year and develop a committee to negotiate further how to handle the subsidies once the government is open. 

    “Because I believe that he’s our Speaker, the Speaker of the House and it’s important that he do his job,” Houlahan responded when asked why she decided to interrupt Johnson’s press conference. “And as near as I can tell, in the more than forty days [of the government shutdown], he hasn’t picked up a phone call and tried to speak to more than half of the country.”

    “Democrats could end this in the Senate if they would just pass the CR and then handle healthcare separate,” the congresswoman was then pressed. “Why do you see these as connected?” 

    SCHUMER, DEMS UNVEIL ALTERNATIVE SHUTDOWN PLAN, ASK FOR ONE-YEAR EXTENSION TO OBAMACARE SUBSIDIES

    Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., is blocked by Capitol Police while interrupting Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., during a House Republican news conference about the government shutdown on the House steps of the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, Nov. 5, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

    “I believe them to be inextricably connected,” Houlahan responded. “This is literally the healthcare – the livelihood and ability of people to thrive in our country, and I think this is the time to have this conversation.”

    Houlahan went on to say that the Trump administration “has been slowly strangling the American people” and said that by shutting down the government it is “trying to complete the job.”

    “Over the last nine months this administration has been slowly strangling the American people,” she said. “Shutting back down the government by itself and now it’s trying to complete the job.”

    When pressed further, Houlahan’s staff stepped in and said she needed to go and could not answer any more questions.

    THUNE SAYS ‘WHEELS CAME OFF’ AS REPUBLICANS MULL NEXT SHUTDOWN MOVE 

    The Democrat became viral earlier this week when House Speaker Johnson’s press conference outside the capitol building briefly descended into chaos once she got into a heated exchange with the Speaker demanding he meet with her caucus to end the shutdown. Houlahan was jeered back at and at a certain point Johnson told her to respect his free speech rights.

    Speaker Mike Johnson clashing with Rep. Chrissy Houlahan

    Democrat Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, right, crashed Speaker Mike Johnson’s daily government shutdown press conference on Nov. 5, 2025 (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images; Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

    “You should respect free speech,” Houlahan clapped back. “I’m asking you a question if you’re ready to have a conversation with the other side. You represent all of us. You are the speaker for all of us, sir.”

    Johnson attempted to take a question from a reporter but told them, “I can’t hear you because we have someone who doesn’t respect the rights of their colleagues.”

    Meanwhile, Houlahan kept shouting over the speaker even as he tried to call order.

    “You have an obligation not just to speak lies to the American people, you have an obligation to call the leadership of both parties and bring us together, and solve this problem together,” she yelled.

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    The following day, Houlahan participated in a Democratic Party press conference of her own on the steps of the capitol, during which no interruptions appeared to take place, according to recordings posted online. Houlahan referred to the viral moment between her and the speaker as a “dialogue,” during her comments. 

    “I like to think of it as a dialogue more than a confrontation,” she said of the pair’s exchange during the press conference. “He reminded me and the American people that he has literally not sat down and talked to Democratic leaders since before the shutdown. They refuse to sit down with us, and they refuse to tell the American public the truth.”

    Fox News Digital’s Elizabeth Elkind and Kelly Phares contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link