ReportWire

Tag: Republicans

  • Democrats scramble for a redistricting counteroffensive against Trump

    Democrats are scrambling to keep their nascent crusade against President Donald Trump’s national redistricting push from fizzling out.

    House Democrats are considering establishing an organization to raise and spend for their remapping efforts as they look to counter an aggressive Republican move that could determine control of the chamber next year, according to three people granted anonymity to describe private conversations. And House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has privately discussed redistricting with blue-state governors, according to another person.

    The Center for American Progress is urging blue states to abandon their independent redistricting commissions. And, through private strategy sessions and public appeals, Texas House Democratic Caucus Chair Gene Wu is asking Democrats across red and blue states to take a no-holds-barred approach to resisting GOP redistricting. Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin praised Wu during a meeting in Minneapolis last week for “igniting a national movement within this party.”

    “This is an all-out call to arms,” Wu, who helped lead Texas Democrats’ quorum break, said in an interview. “That chorus of ‘everyone needs to get off their ass and do something’ is growing louder and louder. And more and more elected Democrats who are seen as doing nothing — their commitment to our country is going to be questioned.”

    But Democrats face a lopsided fight.

    They’re hamstrung by constitutional restrictions or independent commissions in some states, while Republicans are generally free of those legal barriers and have leadership trifectas in Indiana, Florida, Missouri and Ohio, promising state lawmakers fewer restrictions to draw Democratic rivals out of their seats.

    Against this backdrop, Democrats are grasping for ways to counter Trump’s maximalist campaign to redraw congressional maps to protect Republicans’ three-seat House majority in the midterms. With a counteroffensive already underway in California, Democrats are turning to other blue states to take up the charge — and finding some open-minded participants in governors with 2028 ambitions.

    Democrats see the promise of netting three seats in Maryland and Illinois, whose governors — Wes Moore and JB Pritzker, respectively — have spoken with Jeffries about redistricting, according to one person granted anonymity to describe those private conversations. The minority party is also eyeing a pickup opportunity in Utah, after a judge ruled the state must redraw its map. Jeffries has also spoken with New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, though any changes in the Empire State are unlikely before 2028 and thus wouldn’t impact the upcoming midterms.

    The blowback started as a tit-for-tat response to Trump’s efforts to grow the GOP’s majority next year, kicking off with a push for five more red House seats in Texas. Now Missouri is moving ahead with a new map as the White House bears down on Indiana.

    One national Democratic operative, granted anonymity to speak candidly about the tumultuous situation, described jumping into the redistricting arms race as “the price for entry to the 2028 presidential primary.”

    Caifornia Gov. Gavin Newsom, whose popularity is soaring as he emerges as Democrats’ remapping champion, has been encouraging his counterparts to follow his lead, saying at POLITICO’s California Summit Wednesday, “We’re going to have to see other governors move in a similar direction.”

    An array of party officials and organizations are lining up.

    The National Democratic Redistricting Committee is fielding calls, providing technical support and legal expertise to state leaders looking at their own congressional maps, according to a person directly familiar with their efforts.

    Wu, the Texas House Democrats leader, discussed messaging and other tactics with legislators from seven states where Republicans are eyeing redistricting during a Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee strategy session last week, per a summary of the call provided to POLITICO. And former President Barack Obama called Texas state Rep. James Talarico — a potential U.S. Senate candidate — to voice support for his role in his state’s redistricting battle.

    But in some states, messaging is all Democrats can do. Republicans in Indiana, for example, hold a supermajority and can pass any map without a single Democrat in the chamber.

    It’s not just Democratic officials who are getting involved. Unions that banded together to condemn Republicans’ gerrymandering in Texas are now pledging to put manpower behind Newsom’s ballot campaign in California and holding strategy discussions about combating Trump’s next moves in other states. And activists affiliated with the progressive group Indivisible have made roughly 5,000 calls to governors and lawmakers across 15 states with Democratic trifectas urging them to responsively redistrict.

    “This isn’t something we had to go pitch people on the importance of. This is something people were banging down our doors about,” said Andrew O’Neill, Indivisible’s national advocacy director.

    And it “does seem that this is something that has broken through with these governors and has the potential to create what I’ve been calling a productive ambition,” O’Neill said. “These people might be thinking about future job prospects for themselves and they view being a leader in this fight as a route to do that.”

    Democrats’ pressure campaign is struggling in Colorado, Washington and Oregon, whose governors have all but closed the door to redistricting, and the party lacks the legislative means or the interest to change their maps.

    Colorado Democratic Party Chair Shad Murib sent a recent memo to county officers outlining the near-insurmountable challenges in mimicking California’s ballot campaign, according to a copy obtained by POLITICO. Petitions attempting to circumvent the state’s independent redistricting commission are being filed without the state party’s backing.

    Washington Senate Majority Leader Jamie Pedersen shut down the possibility in a letter to a concerned constituent shared with POLITICO, noting Washington’s Democratic-heavy congressional delegation already does not reflect the political makeup of the state. And state Democratic Party Chair Shasti Conrad acknowledged “lots of pressure and desire” to take up redistricting, but pointed to a broad recognition that it’s “practicably impossible.”

    On the East Coast, New Jersey Democrats are similarly hamstrung by state constitutional issues and though Moore told POLITICO “everything’s on the table” when it comes to redistricting, a state court tossed Maryland Democrats’ previous attempt to gerrymander.

    But Democratic activists are increasingly discontent to let anyone in their party sit on the sidelines as they fight what they view as Trump’s latest power grab.

    “These are serious times, and I’m not sure how much more serious things have to be for [Democratic governors] to get off their ass and get in the batters box and swing for the fences,” said California-based Democratic strategist Michael Trujillo. “This is infuriating.”

    Natalie Fertig and Brakkton Booker contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • Millions of dollars of special-election redistricting TV ads scheduled to start airing Tuesday

    Millions of dollars worth of political TV ads are expected to start airing Tuesday in an effort to sway Californians about a November ballot measure seeking to send more Democrats to Congress and counter President Trump and the GOP agenda, according to television airtime purchases.

    The special-election ballot measure — Prop. 50 — will likely shape control of the U.S. House of Representatives and determine the fate of many of Trump’s far-right policies

    The opposition to the rare California mid-decade redistricting has booked more than $10 million dollars of airtime for ads between Tuesday and Sept. 23 in media markets across the state, according to media buyers who are not affiliated with either campaign. Supporters of the effort have bought at least $2 million in ads starting on Tuesday, a number expected to grow exponentially as they are aggressively trying to secure time in coming weeks on broadcast and cable television.

    “This early start is a bit stealthy on the part of the no side, but has been used as a ploy in past campaigns to try to show strength early and gain advantage by forcing the opposing side to play catch up,” said Sheri Sadler, a veteran Democratic political media operative who is not working for either campaign. “This promises to be an expensive campaign for a special election, especially starting so early.”

    Millions of dollars have already flowed into the nascent campaigns sparring over the Nov. 4 special-election ballot measure that asks voters to set aside the congressional boundaries drawn in 2021 by California’s independent redistricting commission. The panel was created by the state’s voters in 2010 to stop gerrymandering and incumbent protection by both major political parties.

    The campaign will be a sprint — glossy multi-page mailers arrived in Californians’ mailboxes before the state legislature voted in late August to call the special election. Voters will begin receiving mail ballots in early October.

    Redistricting, typically an esoteric process that takes place once a decade following the U.S. Census, is receiving an unusual level of attention because of partisan efforts to tilt control of Congress in next year’s midterm election. Republicans have a narrow edge in the U.S. House of Representatives, but the party that wins control of the White House often loses congressional seats in the following election.

    Earlier this summer, Trump asked Texas Gov. Greg Abbott to redraw his state’s congressional districts to add five GOP members to the House, setting off a redistricting arms race across the nation. California Gov. Gavin Newsom launched a campaign to redraw the state’s congressional districts in an effort to boost the number of Democrats in Congress, negating the Texas gains for Republicans, but it must be approved by voters.

    The coalition opposing the effort is an intriguing mix: former Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, wealthy Republican donor Charles Munger Jr., former GOP House Speaker Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield, Assemblyman Alex Lee (D-San Jose), the chair of the Legislative Progressive Caucus, and Gloria Chun Hoo, the president of the League of Women Voters of California.

    Many partisans — in both political parties — opposed independent redistricting when it was championed by Schwarzenegger and Munger in 2010.

    Jessica Millan Patterson, the former state GOP chairwoman who is leading McCarthy’s effort to oppose new congressional boundaries, demurred when asked about the dissonance. Voters, she said, made their choice clear at the ballot box about their preference to have an independent commission draw congressional districts rather than Sacramento politicians.

    “The people of California have spoken,” she said, adding that most voters agree that an independent commission is preferable to partisan politicians drawing districts.

    The “Stop Sacramento’s Power Grab” committee that Patterson leads plans on focusing on conservative and right-of-center voters, and will be well funded, she said.

    McCarthy was a prodigious fundraiser while in Congress and his long-time friend, major GOP fundraiser Jeff Miller, is raising money to oppose the ballot measure.

    Schwarzenegger is not part of the McCarthy effort, instead backing the good-government message of the Munger team. Patterson argues that anything the former governor does only brings more attention to their shared goal, even if he isn’t part of their effort.

    “Gov. Schwarzenegger is Gov. Schwarzenegger,” Patterson said, pointing to an X post of the global celebrity wearing a T-shirt that said “Terminate Gerrymandering” while working out on Aug. 15. “He is a celebrity, a box-office guy. He’s going to make sure reasonable people know that we don’t want to put this power back in Sacramento. He will bring the glitz and glamour, like he always does.”

    Schwarzenegger has long championed political reform. During his final year as governor, he prioritized the ballot measure that created independent congressional redistricting. Since leaving office, he made good governance a priority at his institute at the University of Southern California and campaigned for independent redistricting across the nation.

    “Here are some of the things that are more popular than Congress: hemorrhoids, Nickelback, traffic jams, cockroaches, root canals, colonoscopies, herpes,” Schwarzenegger said in a 2017 Facebook video. “Even herpes, they couldn’t beat herpes in the polls,”

    The former governor is reportedly backing the effort by Munger, the son of a billionaire, who bankrolled the ballot measure that created independent congressional redistricting in 2010. Munger has donated more than $10 million to an effort opposing the November ballot measure; the organization he funded has booked more than $10 million in television spots through Sept. 23.

    “These ads are the start of our campaign’s effort to communicate directly with voters about the dangers of allowing politicians to choose their voters and abandoning our gold standard citizen-led redistricting process,” said Amy Thoma, a spokesperson for the Munger-backed Voters First Coalition.

    Supporters of the effort to redraw the districts argued that Republicans are trying to cement GOP control of the nation’s policies.

    “Trump cronies … are spending big to defeat [Prop.] 50 and help Trump rig the 2026 election before a single person [has] voted,” said Hannah Milgrom, a spokesperson for the campaign. “They are spending big — and early — to trick California voters into allowing Trump to keep total control over the federal government for two more years. “

    Seema Mehta

    Source link

  • HOA ban for millions of Americans gets closer

    A potential ban on homeowners associations (HOAs) in Florida is edging closer after a state Republican said he was considering filing legislation about the matter.

    Juan C. Porras, who represents Miami-Dade County has called to repeal the associations, calling them “authoritarian bonds.”

    Newsweek contacted Porras by website form to comment on this story.

    Why It Matters

    Some 9.5 Floridians, or nearly half the state’s population, live in HOA communities. These organizations comprise a group of residents elected to a board which creates community rules, maintains common areas and collects funds to do so.

    HOAs have caused headaches for some residents. According to a September 2024 survey by home repair and maintenance services company Frontdoor, 70 percent of people would prefer to purchase a home in a community without an HOA.

    In this Tuesday, Sept. 13, 2016, file photo, a home is listed for sale in Surfside, Fla.

    AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee, File

    They are also on the rise. U.S. Census data shows the proportion of single-family homes built within HOAs has increased from 49 percent in 2009 to 65 percent in 2023.

    What To Know

    Posting on X, Porras said: “I am seriously considering legislation to repeal Homeowner Associations (HOA’s). In the Free State of Florida, we should not have authoritarian boards dictate your day to day life with no accountability.”

    According to local outlets, he also shared a petition calling for enforcement and transparency over HOAs. At the time of writing it has been signed 1,551 times.

    Porras has not drafted legislation or announced details about how he would propose a ban but he told local press he wants to work on it before the state legislative session ends in January 2026.

    What People Are Saying

    Homeowner Sharon Siebert told Tampa Bay 28: “I understand that it’s a business, I understand that the business is to make sure the properties are maintained. But at the same time, when you’ve been here a long time and always maintained your property, it’s difficult when you find yourself in a tough situation and there’s no help.”

    Porras told Tampa Bay 28: “It might just be time we take a look if HOAs are really even necessary. Maybe we should just do away with homeowner associations as a whole.”

    He added: “You’re being charged $500, $600 plus a month when in reality you don’t see a lot of that money going back to even your own community.”

    “It was a failed experiment,” he said.

    What Happens Next

    Whether Porras advances legislation and whether it is then well received by other lawmakers in the legislature remains to be seen.

    Any legislation would have to pass the Florida House and Senate before being approved by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.

    Source link

  • RFK Jr. faces call to be questioned over CDC exodus

    Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr. is facing a call to be questioned on the heels of the firing of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Director Susan Monarez on Wednesday.

    Newsweek reached out to HHS via online form Thursday for comment.

    Why It Matters

    Monarez’s exit signals an extraordinary rupture between scientific leadership at the CDC and political leadership at HHS during a period of major policy change to vaccine advisory structures and funding.

    President Donald Trump nominated RFK Jr. to head the department, which he has since pushed forward under the campaign of Making America Healthy Again.

    What To Know

    In a statement posted to X on Thursday, Independent Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders said in part, “In just six months, Secretary Kennedy has completely upended the process for reviewing and recommending vaccines for the public… He has unilaterally narrowed eligibility for COVID vaccines approved by the FDA, despite an ongoing surge in cases. He has spread misinformation about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines during the largest measles outbreak in over 30 years. He continues to spread misinformation about COVID vaccines. Now he is pushing out scientific leaders who refuse to act as a rubber stamp for his dangerous conspiracy theories and manipulate science,” Sanders said.

    The senator also asked HELP Committee Chairman Bill Cassidy, a Louisiana Republican, to initiate a public hearing to “compel” both Secretary Kennedy and Monarez, along with recently resigned CDC officials, to testify about the firing, the statement noted.

    The dispute over Monarez’s employment status unfolded on Wednesday evening after HHS posted on social media that Monarez was “no longer director,” while her lawyers stated that she had not resigned and had not received notice of termination.

    The White House then announced late Wednesday that it had fired Monarez as the head of the CDC.

    The confrontation coincided with the resignations of multiple senior CDC officials.

    The three other senior CDC officials who resigned around the same time—Dr. Debra Houry, Dr. Daniel Jernigan and Dr. Demetre Daskalakis—cited concerns about the politicization of science and changes in agency direction.

    Democratic Senator Patty Murray of Washington also called for RFK Jr. to be fired in the aftermath of the news. “I had serious doubts about CDC Director Monarez’s willingness to stand up against RFK Jr.’s personal mission to destroy public health in America—I’m glad that I was wrong. If there are any adults left in the White House: we cannot let RFK Jr. burn what’s left of CDC. FIRE HIM,” the lawmaker said in part on X Wednesday night.

    What People Are Saying

    Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky on X on Thursday: “Good riddance to these extremists at CDC. There is NO medical evidence that the COVID vaccine changes transmission or health outcome for healthy children. Senior CDC officials quit after director ousted by RFK Jr.”

    Rapid Response 47 X account on X on Thursday: “The President and @SecKennedy are committed to restoring trust and transparency and credibility to the CDC… We’re going to make sure that folks that are in positions of leadership there are aligned with that mission.”

    Daskalakis on X in part on Wednesday: “This decision has not come easily, as I deeply value the work that the CDC does in safeguarding public health and am proud of my contributions to that critical mission. However, after much contemplation and reflection on recent developments and perspectives brought to light by Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., I find that the views he and his staff have shared challenge my ability to continue in my current role at the agency and in the service of the health of the American people. Enough is enough.”

    Sanders, in his letter to Cassidy, in part: “Enough is enough. We have got to make it clear to Secretary Kennedy that his actions to double down on his war on science and disinformation campaign must end. Too many lives are at stake. Yesterday, you called for oversight of the firings and resignations at the agency. I agree. As a start, the American people should hear directly from Secretary Kennedy and Dr. Monarez and every member of our committee should be able to ask questions and get honest answers from them. I urge you to call a hearing immediately on these actions.”

    Read Sanders’ full letter here.

    What Happens Next

    The Trump Administration named Jim O’Neill, a top deputy to RFK Jr., as the new acting chief of the CDC after Monarez’s ouster.

    Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. can be seen speaking during a cabinet meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump in the Cabinet Room of the White House on August 26, 2025, in…


    Source link

  • SCOOP: House Republicans ready slew of DC crime bills as Trump promises end to city violence

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    FIRST ON FOX: The House Oversight Committee is planning to advance several bills next month to back up President Donald Trump’s crackdown on crime in Washington, D.C., Fox News Digital has learned.

    A source familiar with the committee’s work told Fox News Digital that the panel will mark up bills to “combat juvenile crime in D.C., address the D.C. education system, and end restrictive policing policies enacted by the D.C. Council that prevent law enforcement from keeping residents and visitors safe.”

    It’s a significant step toward congressional Republicans lining up with Trump’s effort to combat crime in the national capital.

    The House Oversight Committee is one of two congressional panels that has jurisdiction over the national capital and its operations, so most House-wide legislation dealing with D.C. crime and other similar matters is likely to originate there.

    COMER DISMISSES BIDEN DOCTOR’S BID FOR PAUSE IN COVER-UP PROBE: ‘THROWING OUT EVERY EXCUSE’

    The House Oversight Committee, led by Rep. James Comer, is preparing to consider a slew of D.C. crime bills. (Getty Images)

    The committee is also holding a hearing next month on D.C. crime, scheduled for Sept. 18, with D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson, and D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb slated to appear.

    House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., did not elaborate on the legislation in a statement to Fox News Digital but vowed that his panel is working to help further Trump’s goals.

    “President Trump and House Republicans are committed to making our nation’s capital safe for every resident and visitor. Thanks to President Trump’s swift action, crime in the District of Columbia has dropped dramatically,” Comer said.

    148 DEMOCRATS BACK NONCITIZEN VOTING IN DC AS GOP RAISES ALARM ABOUT FOREIGN AGENTS

    Donald Trump

    President Donald Trump speaks with reporters in the James Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House on Aug. 11, 2025. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

    “The House Oversight Committee stands ready to advance reforms that give D.C. law enforcement the tools they need to protect the public and address the growing juvenile crime crisis. Every person in our nation’s capital deserves to feel safe, and with President Trump, we will make D.C. safe again.”

    Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., a member of the committee, previously introduced a bill taking on the issue of juvenile crime by lowering the city’s definition of “youth” from 24 years old to 18, meaning that anyone aged 18 or over would be tried as adults.

    It’s not clear if that specific bill is among those being marked up by the committee next month, however.

    The House Oversight Committee’s latest plans come after the president announced he was federalizing D.C.’s police force for a period of 30 days as part of an effort to combat crime and beautify the city.

    DC's Union Station as National Guard troops stand watch

    The National Guard ramped up its presence in the nation’s capital, including dozens who stood guard outside D.C.’s Union Station. (FOX NEWS DIGITAL)

    CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

    He’s also deployed the National Guard from both D.C. and around the country to patrol the nation’s capital, in addition to other federal forces.

    Trump said overnight Wednesday that House and Senate GOP leaders “are working with me, and other Republicans, on a Comprehensive Crime Bill.”

    Meanwhile, a leadership aide told Fox News Digital on Tuesday that House Republicans are working with the White House on a package of bills “to fix the many problems with D.C. governance and crime.”

    Source link

  • The Magic Phrase Behind Donald Trump’s Power Grab

    Hi, I’m Tim Marchman, WIRED’s director of politics, science, and security, and I’m filling in for Jake this week.

    On August 7, the White House issued an executive order giving political appointees authority over federal grant-making. This made the nonpartisan experts who have long decided how agencies like the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation direct funds subordinate to, well, commissars.

    Nestled in the order was a phrase that’s become increasingly familiar to me over the past seven months as I’ve read piles of boring documents issuing from the administration, trying to figure out what it’s doing.

    “Discretionary awards must, where applicable,” it read, “demonstrably advance the President’s policy priorities.”

    This phrase, and variants, come up a lot. It has popped up everywhere from the White House’s description of the Office of Presidential Scheduling (it works to “create an agenda that strategically advances the President’s priorities,” apparently) to a website where the Coast Guard explains that its secretary is assigned to “fully align the Service to execute the President’s priorities.”

    “It’s become a sort of all-purpose catchphrase from this administration,” says Zachary Price, a professor at UC Law San Francisco, “and they’re also particularly assertive about claiming this power of the unitary executive branch to direct how different agencies perform their functions. So it fits into the general style of this administration, of wanting pretty strong top-down control.”

    Examples abound. A February executive order, for instance, said that going forward, the director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) would “review independent regulatory agencies’ obligations for consistency with the President’s policies and priorities.” An April memo from the acting administrator of the OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) offering guidance to bureaucrats at affected agencies on implementing the order explains what happens when a significant regulatory action is submitted to OIRA for review: “Executive Branch reviewers review the materials for consistency with the President’s priorities, adherence to statutory requirements, and analytic cohesion.”

    What exactly the president’s priorities are go unstated; the emphasis the president’s paper pushers put on them, though, raises questions about what happens when they conflict with those of others—including the authors of the Constitution.

    The Importance of Showerheads

    Talk about the president’s priorities certainly didn’t originate with President Donald Trump. His predecessors, including in the Biden and Obama administrations, used the phrase, and setting priorities for the part of the federal government they oversee is a central part of the president’s job.

    That doesn’t mean there isn’t something new in the expansive use of the phrase and its variants, though, or that there aren’t issues with defining the job of officials throughout the executive branch as intuiting the priorities of a man who on a given day may be focusing on the Cracker Barrel logo, Roger Clemens’ Hall of Fame case, or his long-standing feud with Rosie O’Donnell.

    “Agencies like the Coast Guard have a strategic priority-setting process,” says Jody Freeman, a professor at Harvard Law School. “It isn’t normally a bunch of officials sitting around and wondering what the president thinks today. It’s a really weird instruction.”

    Tim Marchman

    Source link

  • On U.S. direction under Trump, Californians split sharply along partisan lines, poll finds

    California voters are heavily divided along partisan lines when it comes to President Trump, with large majorities of Democrats and unaffiliated voters disapproving of him and believing the country is headed in the wrong direction under his leadership, and many Republicans feeling the opposite, according to a new poll conducted for The Times.

    The findings are remarkably consistent with past polling on the Republican president in the nation’s most populous blue state, said Mark DiCamillo, director of the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies Poll.

    “If you look at all the job ratings we’ve done about President Trump — and this carries back all the way through his first term — voters have pretty much maintained the same posture,” DiCamillo said. “Voters know who he is.”

    The same partisan divide also showed up in the poll on a number of hot-button issues, such as Medicaid cuts and tariffs, DiCamillo said — with Democrats “almost uniformly” opposed to Trump’s agenda and Republicans “pretty much on board with what Trump is doing.”

    Asked whether the sweeping tariffs that Trump has imposed on international trading partners have had a “noticeable negative impact” on their family spending, 71% of Democrats said yes, while 76% of Republicans said no.

    “If you’re a Republican, you tend to discount the impacts — you downplay them or you just ignore them,” while Democrats “tend to blame everything on Trump,” DiCamillo said.

    Asked whether they were confident that the Trump administration would provide California with the nearly $40 billion in wildfire relief aid it has requested in response to the devastating L.A.-area fires in January, 93% of Democrats said they were not confident — compared with the 43% of Republicans who said they were confident.

    In a state where registered Democrats outnumber Republicans nearly 2 to 1, the effect is that Trump fared terribly in the poll overall, just as he has in recent presidential votes in the state.

    The poll — conducted Aug. 11-17 with 4,950 registered voters interviewed — found 69% of likely California voters disapproved of Trump, with 62% strongly disapproving, while 29% approved of him. A similar majority, 68%, said they believed the country is headed in the wrong direction, while 26% said it’s headed in the right direction.

    Whereas 90% of Democrats and 75% of unaffiliated voters said the country is on the wrong track, just 20% of Republicans felt that way, the poll found.

    The White House did not respond to a request for comment on the poll.

    Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) said the findings prove Trump’s agenda “is devastating communities across California who are dealing with the harmful, real life consequences” of the president’s policies.

    “The Trump Administration does not represent the views of the vast majority of Californians and it’s why Trump has chosen California to push the limits of his constitutional power,” Padilla said. “As more Americans across the nation continue to feel the impacts of his destructive policies, public support will continue to erode.”

    G. Cristina Mora, co-director of the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, or IGS, said the findings were interesting, especially in light of other recent polling for The Times that found slightly more nuanced Republican impressions — and more wariness — when it comes to Trump’s immigration agenda and tactics.

    On his overall approval and on other parts of his agenda, including the tariffs and Medicaid cuts, “the strength of the partisanship is very clear,” Mora said.

    Cuts to Medicaid

    Voters in the state are similarly divided when it comes to recent decisions on Medicaid health insurance for low-income residents, the poll found. The state’s version is known as Medi-Cal.

    For instance, Californians largely disapprove of new work requirements for Medicaid and Medi-Cal recipients under the Big Beautiful Bill that Trump championed and congressional Republicans recently passed into law, the poll found.

    The bill requires most Medicaid recipients ages 18 to 64 to work at least 80 hours per month in order to continue receiving benefits. Republicans trumpeted the change as holding people accountable and safeguarding against abuses of federal taxpayer dollars, while Democrats denounced it as a threat to public health that would strip millions of vulnerable Americans of their health insurance.

    The poll found 61% of Californians disapproved of the change, with 43% strongly disapproving of it, while 36% approved of it, with 21% strongly approving of it. Voters were sharply divided along party lines, however, with 80% of Republicans approving of the changes and 85% of Democrats disapproving of them.

    Californians also disapproved — though by a smaller margin — of a move by California Democrats and Gov. Gavin Newsom to help close a budget shortfall by barring undocumented immigrant adults from newly enrolling in Medi-Cal benefits.

    A slight majority of poll respondents, or 52%, said they disapproved of the new restriction, with 17% strongly disapproving of it. The poll found 43% of respondents approved of the change, including 30% who strongly approved of it.

    Among Democrats, 77% disapproved of the change. Among Republicans, 87% approved of it. Among voters with no party preference, 52% disapproved.

    More than half the poll respondents — 57% — said neither they nor their immediate family members receive Medi-Cal benefits, while 35% said they did. Of those who receive Medi-Cal, two-thirds — or 67% — said they were very or somewhat worried about losing, or about someone in their immediate family losing, their coverage due to changes by the Trump administration.

    Nadereh Pourat, associate director of the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, said there is historical evidence to show what is going to happen next under the changes — and it’s not good.

    The work requirement will undoubtedly result in people losing health coverage, just as thousands did when Arkansas implemented a similar requirement years ago, she said.

    When people lose coverage, the cost of preventative care goes up and they generally receive less of it, she said. “If the doctor’s visit competes with food on the table or rent, then people are going to skip those primary care visits,” she said — and often “end up in the emergency room” instead.

    And that’s more expensive not just for them, but also for local and state healthcare systems, she said.

    Cuts to high-speed rail

    Californians also are heavily divided over the state’s efforts to build a high-speed rail line through the Central Valley, after the Trump administration announced it was clawing back $4 billion in promised federal funding.

    The project was initially envisioned as connecting Los Angeles to San Francisco by 2026, but officials have since set new goals of connecting Bakersfield to Merced by 2030. The project is substantially over budget, and Trump administration officials have called in a “boondoggle.”

    The poll found that 49% of Californians support the project, with 28% of them strongly in favor of it. It found 42% oppose the project, including 28% who strongly oppose it.

    Among Democrats, 66% were in favor of the project. Among Republicans, 77% were opposed. Among voters with no party preference, 49% were in favor while 39% were opposed.

    In Los Angeles County, 54% of voters were in favor of the project continuing, while 58% of voters in the Bay Area were in favor. In the Central Valley, 51% of voters were opposed, compared with 41% in favor.

    State Sen. Dave Cortese (D-San José), who chairs the Senate Transportation Committee, said political rhetoric around the project has clearly had an effect on how voters feel about it, and that is partly because state leaders haven’t done enough to lay out why the project makes sense economically.

    “Healthy skepticism is a good thing, especially when you’re dealing with billions of dollars,” he said. “It’s on legislators and the governor right now in California to lay out a strategy that you can’t poke a lot of holes in, and that hasn’t been the case in the past.”

    Cortese said he started life as an orchard farmer in what is now Silicon Valley, knows what major public infrastructure investments can mean for rural communities such as those in the Central Valley, and will be hyperfocused on that message moving forward.

    “There is no part of California that I know of that’s been waiting for more economic development than Bakersfield. Probably second is Fresno,” he said.

    He said he also will be stressing to local skeptics of the project that supporting the Trump administration taking $4 billion away from California would be a silly thing to do no matter their politics. Conservative local officials who understand that will be “key to help us turn the tide,” he said.

    Last month, California’s high-speed rail authority sued the Trump administration over the withdrawal of funds. The state is also suing the Trump administration over various changes to Medicaid, over Trump’s tariffs and over immigration enforcement tactics.

    Mora said the sharp divide among Democrats and Republicans on Trump and his agenda called to mind other recent polling that showed many voters immediately changed their views of the economy after Trump took office — with Republicans suddenly feeling more optimistic, and Democrats more pessimistic.

    It’s all a reflection of our modern, hyperpartisan politics, she said, where people’s perceptions — including about their own economic well-being — are “tied now much more closely to ideas about who’s in power.”

    Kevin Rector

    Source link

  • Trump says he is working with Republicans on ‘comprehensive crime bill’

    (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that he is working with House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, both Republicans, on a “comprehensive crime bill.”

    “Speaker Mike Johnson, and Leader John Thune, are working with me, and other Republicans, on a Comprehensive Crime Bill. It’s what our Country needs,” Trump said in a Truth Social post.

    Citing a purported wave of lawlessness, Trump seized control this month of the police force in Washington, D.C., and is allowing National Guard troops to carry weapons while on patrol in the city. He has threatened to expand the U.S. military presence to Democrat-controlled cities like Baltimore and Chicago.

    Trump said earlier this week that the U.S. military might deploy to Chicago and is ready to go anywhere on short notice to crack down on crime.

    Trump also ordered the Department of Defense to ensure that every state has some National Guard troops who are ready to rapidly mobilize to help quell civil disturbances and assist in public safety.

    (Reporting by Mrinmay Dey in Bengaluru; Editing by Jacqueline Wong and Stephen Coates)

    Source link

  • Colorado’s legislature has filled a third of budget shortfall by slashing tax breaks. Here’s what comes next.

    More than $250 million down, another $530 million to go.

    That’s how much of a projected $783 million state budget hole the Colorado legislature filled by the time a special session called to address the impact of the federal tax bill ended Tuesday afternoon — and the larger amount that still remains. Erasing the rest of the red ink will fall to Gov. Jared Polis, who plans to rebalance this year’s budget in the coming days through a mix of cuts to state funding and a big dip into the rainy-day fund.

    Over six days, the legislature’s majority Democrats fulfilled their part of a plan worked out with the governor’s office: to pass legislation that is expected to generate enough revenue to close about a third of the shortfall projected for the state’s budget in the current fiscal year, which began July 1. They ended tax breaks and found other ways to offset declining state income tax revenue, while leaving spending cuts largely for Polis to decide.

    “What we did here in this special session is soften the blow,” said Sen. Jeff Bridges, a Greenwood Village Democrat who chairs the legislature’s budget committee. “But when the federal government cuts $1.2 billion in revenue from the state with a stroke of a pen, after we’ve already cut $1.2 billion (from the budget) in the regular session, that’s a tough deficit to come back from in a way that doesn’t impact the people of Colorado.”

    The special session ended with 11 bills going to Polis for final approval. Five sought to fill the budget gap, largely by ending tax incentives for businesses and high-income earners.

    The single largest revenue-raising measure, House Bill 1004, will auction off tax credits that can be claimed in future tax years for a discount. Backers expected that bill to bring in an additional $100 million to state coffers this year, at the expense of about $125 million in future years.

    Together, those measures add up to $253 million in revenue to reduce the projected deficit — money that Democrats say represents averted cuts to Medicaid, schools and hospitals.

    “Colorado legislators stepped up and helped protect children’s food access and minimized the devastating cost increases to health insurance premiums across the state, to the best of our ability,” Polis, who signed two of the new bills earlier Tuesday, said in a statement.

    The legislature’s Joint Budget Committee expects to meet Thursday to hear Polis’ plan to address the remaining $500 million or so, including mid-year spending cuts. 

    As part of his call for a special session on Aug. 6, Polis announced a statewide hiring freeze. He said in an interview before the session started that he hoped to avoid cuts to K-12 education, but he has left all other options on the table, including Medicaid program spending. 

    The plan also factors in a significant use of reserves to offset some of the remaining gap.

    Partisan debates

    Over the past week, Republicans fought the Democrats’ bills, but strong Democratic majorities in both legislative chambers all but preordained the outcome. 

    “Not only did we increase taxes, we’re balancing the budget on the back of small businesses,” said Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer, a Brighton Republican on the budget committee.

    One of the bills heading to Polis would erase a fee paid by the state to businesses for collecting sales taxes — an outdated subsidy, according to Democrats, and an unnecessary new burden now put on businesses, according to Republicans.

    Republicans said before the session that they’d likely challenge several bills in court over allegations that they violate provisions in the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights that require voter approval for tax increases. Kirkmeyer and Rep. Rick Taggart, a Grand Junction Republican who’s also on the budget committee, said bills going to the governor that would eliminate some tax credits and allow the sale of tax credits against future collections seemed particularly vulnerable to a challenge under TABOR.

    Debate throughout the special session took a distinctly partisan edge. Democrats laid the cuts on congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump and called the federal tax bill a de facto theft of benefits from the poorest Coloradans to benefit the wealthiest.

    Republicans countered that the federal bill delivered much-needed tax cuts, and they said Democrats sought to yank those away instead of cutting partisan priorities.

    Legislators begin to gather in the Senate Chambers before the start of another day of the special legislative session at the Colorado State Capitol in Denver on Aug. 26, 2025. (Photo by RJ Sangosti/The Denver Post)

    Bills on wolves, artificial intelligence

    Other bills passed sought to respond to different aspects of the federal bill, formerly known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” as well as other priorities.

    Lawmakers stripped general fund money away from the voter-approved program to reintroduce wolves in the state, though releases are expected to continue this winter. They tweaked ballot language for a measure about taxes for universal school meals to allow that money to go to general food assistance, as well, if voters approve it in November.

    Nick Coltrain, Seth Klamann

    Source link

  • Redistricting battles intensify California, Texas and now Indiana

    The feud over redistricting continues across the country with new developments in Indiana, California and Texas. Multiple media outlets are reporting that Indiana state lawmakers are in Washington, D.C., Tuesday to meet with President Donald Trump, who has been pushing for more Republican seats in Congress. This comes after Vice President J.D. Vance met privately with Indiana Gov. Mike Braun earlier this month. For any redrawing of the congressional map in Indiana, Braun would have to call a special session to start the process, but lawmakers have the power to draw new maps. Republicans in the U.S. House outnumber Democrats in Indiana, limiting the chances they can pull off an additional seat.Things are also heating up in California. On Monday, Trump threatened to sue California over its plan to allow voters to decide whether to redistrict before next year’s election. Gov. Gavin Newsom posted on social media responding to the president with two words: “Bring it.” Newsom approved a special election that will take place in November for residents to vote on a redrawn congressional map. Republican lawmakers in California filed a lawsuit Monday aiming to remove Newsom’s redistricting plan from the November ballot. If the congressional map is approved, it could help Democrats win five more seats in the House next year.In Texas, Gov. Greg Abbott is planning to sign into law a new congressional map that includes five more districts, favoring Republicans. Trump has pushed for the map to help the GOP maintain its slim majority in Congress in 2026. The timing of this is noteworthy because Republicans normally lose seats in the House during the midterms. Democrats are expected to challenge the new Texas map in court.Keep scrolling for the latest from the Washington News Bureau:

    The feud over redistricting continues across the country with new developments in Indiana, California and Texas.

    Multiple media outlets are reporting that Indiana state lawmakers are in Washington, D.C., Tuesday to meet with President Donald Trump, who has been pushing for more Republican seats in Congress. This comes after Vice President J.D. Vance met privately with Indiana Gov. Mike Braun earlier this month.

    For any redrawing of the congressional map in Indiana, Braun would have to call a special session to start the process, but lawmakers have the power to draw new maps.

    Republicans in the U.S. House outnumber Democrats in Indiana, limiting the chances they can pull off an additional seat.

    Things are also heating up in California. On Monday, Trump threatened to sue California over its plan to allow voters to decide whether to redistrict before next year’s election. Gov. Gavin Newsom posted on social media responding to the president with two words: “Bring it.”

    Newsom approved a special election that will take place in November for residents to vote on a redrawn congressional map. Republican lawmakers in California filed a lawsuit Monday aiming to remove Newsom’s redistricting plan from the November ballot.

    If the congressional map is approved, it could help Democrats win five more seats in the House next year.

    In Texas, Gov. Greg Abbott is planning to sign into law a new congressional map that includes five more districts, favoring Republicans.

    Trump has pushed for the map to help the GOP maintain its slim majority in Congress in 2026. The timing of this is noteworthy because Republicans normally lose seats in the House during the midterms.

    Democrats are expected to challenge the new Texas map in court.

    Keep scrolling for the latest from the Washington News Bureau:

    Source link

  • Polling memo reveals risk for Indiana Republicans as they weigh redistricting

    A majority of Indiana voters oppose mid-decade redistricting in their state, a new poll shows, as White House officials host Hoosier Republicans in Washington Tuesday amid President Donald Trump’s redistricting pressure campaign.

    The survey from left-leaning firm Change Research — which was commissioned by Count US IN, an Indiana-based nonprofit focused on increasing voter turnout and was obtained by POLITICO — shows several vulnerabilities for Republicans as Trump’s push to protect the GOP’s House majority sparks a nationwide redistricting arms race.

    Fifty-two percent of registered voters in Indiana — which Trump won by 19 points last year — said they are against Republicans revising their maps, with 43 percent “strongly” opposing the effort.

    That opposition rises to 60 percent after voters are informed of arguments for and against redistricting. The memo summarizing the survey breaks down some responses by party affiliation, but not all. The poll of 1,662 registered voters was conducted online between Aug. 18 to 21 and has a margin of sampling error of 2.6 percent.

    The unfavorable views of redistricting come as some four dozen of Indiana’s GOP lawmakers visit the White House on Tuesday for what’s being billed as a state leadership conference to coach legislators on how to sell the president’s agenda back home. The lawmakers are slated to meet with the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, per a person familiar with the planning. The group is expected to include Indiana House Speaker Todd Huston, whose daughter, Liz Huston, is one of White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt’s assistants.

    The visit was put on the books before Vice President JD Vance and administration officials traveled to Indiana to prod Gov. Mike Braun and top state lawmakers into redistricting. But it falls against the backdrop of the White House ratcheting up pressure on red states to redistrict.

    Meanwhile, the Indiana poll gives Democrats some potential messaging guidance as they race to counter Texas’ new map and the potential for more GOP pickups across Indiana, Missouri, Ohio and Florida — even thought Republicans hold a supermajority in Indiana’s Legislature. GOP lawmakers outnumber Democrats there four-to-one in the Senate, and hold 70 seats in the House to Democrats’ 30.

    Nearly two-thirds of the survey respondents said gerrymandering should be illegal. And a full two-thirds expressed opposition to Washington politicians meddling in their state’s politics. While Indiana is considered ruby-red, registered independents make up a larger share of the electorate than Republicans or Democrats.

    Meanwhile, an overwhelming 81 percent of respondents agreed with a Democratic argument in the survey that redistricting “should be conducted in a balanced way to ensure fairness and that our communities are not disenfranchised for political gain” — versus the Republican argument provided to respondents that because Indiana is a mostly Republican state, “the majority should be able to draw our districts in a way that benefits Republicans whenever they want.” That included 68 percent of Republicans, and more than 90 percent of independents and Democrats.

    And 45 percent of respondents said they’d be “somewhat” or “much” less likely to vote for their state representative for reelection if they elect to pass a redrawn congressional map.

    That’s higher among Democrats — a whopping 88 percent — versus 55 percent of independents and just 12 percent of Republicans. Conversely, 40 percent of GOP respondents said they were somewhat or much more likely to vote for someone who voted for redistricting, while 34 percent said it would not change their vote and 14 percent were unsure.

    The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    The potential for backlash comes as Trump’s push drives a rift among Indiana’s Republican officials. Some, like the state’s lieutenant governor, Micah Beckwith, have embraced Trump’s effort. All nine of Indiana’s GOP members of Congress have backed it. But several Republican state lawmakers have openly opposed it, with one hard-right representative panning it as “politically optically horrible.” Former Republican Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels said a mid-decade redistricting effort would “just be wrong.”

    Meanwhile, Braun, the state’s current governor, has remained noncommittal on calling a special legislative session to consider a new map.

    The White House isn’t letting up on its pressure campaign. Along with outreach from top administration officials, Trump’s political operation and MAGA influencers like Charlie Kirk have threatened to support primary challenges of GOP state lawmakers who don’t fall in line.

    Source link

  • Judge rules Utah’s congressional map must be redrawn for the 2026 elections

    The Utah Legislature will need to rapidly redraw the state’s congressional boundaries after a judge ruled Monday that the Republican-controlled body circumvented safeguards put in place by voters to ensure districts aren’t drawn to favor any party.Related video above — Get the Facts: Redistricting or Gerrymandering? The current map, drawn in 2021, divides Salt Lake County — the state’s population center and a Democratic stronghold — among the state’s four congressional districts, all of which have since elected Republicans by wide margins.District Court Judge Dianna Gibson made few judgments on the content of the map but declared it unlawful because lawmakers had weakened and ignored an independent commission established by voters to prevent partisan gerrymandering. The nature of the violation lies in “the Legislature’s refusal to respect the people’s exercise of their constitutional lawmaking power and to honor the people’s right to reform their government,” Gibson said in her ruling.New maps will need to be drawn quickly for the 2026 midterm elections. Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson, the state’s top elections official, asked the courts for the case to be finalized by November to leave time for the process before candidates start filing in early January. But appeals promised by Republican lawmakers could help them run out the clock to possibly delay adopting new maps until 2028.The ruling creates uncertainty in a state that was thought to be a clean sweep for the GOP as the party is preparing to defend its slim majority in the U.S. House. Nationally, Democrats need to net three seats next year to take control of the chamber. The sitting president’s party tends to lose seats in the midterms, as was the case for President Donald Trump in 2018.Trump has urged several Republican-led states to add winnable seats for the GOP. In Texas, a plan awaiting Gov. Greg Abbott’s approval includes five new districts that would favor Republicans. Ohio Republicans already were scheduled to revise their maps to make them more partisan, and Indiana, Florida and Missouri may choose to make changes. Some Democrat-led states say they may enter the redistricting battle, but so far only California has taken action to offset GOP gains in Texas.

    The Utah Legislature will need to rapidly redraw the state’s congressional boundaries after a judge ruled Monday that the Republican-controlled body circumvented safeguards put in place by voters to ensure districts aren’t drawn to favor any party.

    Related video above — Get the Facts: Redistricting or Gerrymandering?

    The current map, drawn in 2021, divides Salt Lake County — the state’s population center and a Democratic stronghold — among the state’s four congressional districts, all of which have since elected Republicans by wide margins.

    District Court Judge Dianna Gibson made few judgments on the content of the map but declared it unlawful because lawmakers had weakened and ignored an independent commission established by voters to prevent partisan gerrymandering. The nature of the violation lies in “the Legislature’s refusal to respect the people’s exercise of their constitutional lawmaking power and to honor the people’s right to reform their government,” Gibson said in her ruling.

    New maps will need to be drawn quickly for the 2026 midterm elections. Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson, the state’s top elections official, asked the courts for the case to be finalized by November to leave time for the process before candidates start filing in early January. But appeals promised by Republican lawmakers could help them run out the clock to possibly delay adopting new maps until 2028.

    The ruling creates uncertainty in a state that was thought to be a clean sweep for the GOP as the party is preparing to defend its slim majority in the U.S. House. Nationally, Democrats need to net three seats next year to take control of the chamber. The sitting president’s party tends to lose seats in the midterms, as was the case for President Donald Trump in 2018.

    Trump has urged several Republican-led states to add winnable seats for the GOP. In Texas, a plan awaiting Gov. Greg Abbott’s approval includes five new districts that would favor Republicans. Ohio Republicans already were scheduled to revise their maps to make them more partisan, and Indiana, Florida and Missouri may choose to make changes. Some Democrat-led states say they may enter the redistricting battle, but so far only California has taken action to offset GOP gains in Texas.

    Source link

  • Trump says he’s fired Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook

    President Trump announced Monday that he’s fired Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook after months of public attacks against the central bank. In a letter posted on social media, Trump accused Cook of making false statements on mortgage documents, actions he claimed were “gross negligence” and “potentially criminal.”

    Source link

  • DNC chair says Democrats can’t be only party that plays by the rules, urges members to fight

    Top Democrats emphasized party unity and railed against President Trump’s policies on the first day of the Democratic National Committee’s annual summer meeting in Minneapolis Monday. CBS News correspondent Nidia Cavazos has more.

    Source link

  • DNC vice chair Malcolm Kenyatta on Trump, Democratic Party’s future

    Leaders of the Democratic National Committee have a lot to grapple with as they gather this week in Minneapolis for their annual summer meeting. DNC vice chair and Pennsylvania State Representative Malcolm Kenyatta Joins “The Takeout” to discuss.

    Source link

  • Redistricting Map May Not Be the Success Story Republicans Think It Is

    Texas Republicans celebrated a victory last week as the House and Senate approved new congressional districts amid criticism that the lines are racially gerrymandered. But the success of the redistricting effort hinges heavily on whether previous GOP voters will stay true to their party in 2026.

    House Bill 4, introduced by Rep. Todd Hunter, R-Corpus Christi, was approved August 20 in an 88-52 vote. During an eight-hour discussion in Austin, Hunter stood firm in his position that although mid-decade redistricting is unusual, it’s not illegal, nor is drawing new boundaries in an effort to gain more GOP congressional seats, which was his intent when he introduced the legislation.

    The Senate adopted the new map along party lines in an 18-11 vote early Saturday morning. Sen. Carol Alvarado, D-Houston, was planning a filibuster but Republicans blocked it in a rare procedural motion that ended the debate.

    “The One Big Beautiful Map has passed the Senate and is on its way to my desk, where it will be swiftly signed into law,” Gov. Greg Abbott said in a statement. “I promised we would get this done, and delivered on that promise.”

    University of Houston law professor David Froomkin agreed that a state is entitled under existing federal law to engage in “extreme partisan gerrymandering for partisan advantage,” but it doesn’t appear that’s what’s happening, he said.

    “If the state were in fact doing that, the map would be perfectly legal, but I think there’s strong reason to think that’s not in fact what the state has done,” he said. “They’re invoking that logic, but likely disingenuously. The premise underlying this redistricting plan was that there was a racial problem with the prior map that needed to be corrected.”

    “That’s the position that the Department of Justice took in demanding that the state of Texas engage in this redistricting effort,” he added. “It’s a rationale that the governor accepted as the original justification for a mid-decade redistricting. Republicans backed off of that logic once it became clear that it would pose a legal obstacle to the new map. A court will have to determine whether the new rhetoric that the map is motivated by politics not race is the true motive.”

    The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the 2017 Cooper v. Harris case that the North Carolina General Assembly “used race too heavily” in redrawing two Congressional districts following the 2010 Census.

    In modern-day Texas, Republicans originally theorized that the state’s prior congressional maps, approved after the 2020 Census, were racially gerrymandered and in order to resolve that problem, it was necessary to engage in race-conscious redistricting, Froomkin said.

    Democrats were quick to point out that at the time the maps were approved in 2021, Republicans testified under oath that they were “race blind.”

    The 2021 map is being challenged in federal court, with civil rights groups alleging they violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The U.S. Department of Justice was originally among the plaintiffs in that case and withdrew when Donald Trump became president.

    “In fact, the state and the Department of Justice were incorrect to think that the prior map was a racial gerrymander,” Froomkin said, adding that he believes the map approved last week is a racial gerrymander. “To be clear, I also think they’ve violated section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which is a separate issue but one that no doubt will be litigated.”

    “It’s not just a power grab, it’s an attack on free society,” he added. “What Texas and other states are doing with these gerrymanders is trying to insulate an authoritarian government from democratic accountability.”

    Texas Democrats — bolstered by constituents who oppose the map and party officials including former President Barack Obama, former Vice President Kamala Harris, and U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries — avoided voting on the map for about two weeks, fleeing the state to break quorum. A few Democratic legislators, including Rep. Jolanda Jones, D-Houston, didn’t come back. Those who did voted against the map and vowed to challenge it in court.

    The new Texas map is poised to add five GOP seats in 2026 primaries, an effort to retain President Trump’s narrow majority in Congress. California Gov. Gavin Newsom promptly launched a redistricting effort in his state to add more blue seats and counter the effort in Texas. Under California law, this still has to be approved by voters in November.

    The districts planned for a flip from blue to red are District 9 (held by Rep. Al Green of Houston), District 28 (held by Rep. Henry Cuellar of Laredo), District 32 (held by Rep. Julie Johnson of Farmers Branch), District 34 (held by Rep. Vicente Gonzalez of McAllen), and District 35 (held by Rep. Greg Cesar of Austin). At least six other districts were redrawn to improve GOP performance. Almost all of Texas’ 38 districts were altered.

    “Four of the five new districts are majority-minority Hispanic,” Hunter said before last week’s vote in the House. “Each of these newly-drawn districts now trend Republican in political performance. While there’s no guarantee in electorate success, Republicans will now have an opportunity to potentially win these districts.”

    click to enlarge

    The Texas House of Representatives approved new congressional districts on August 20, with Democrats vowing to challenge the map in court.

    Texas Legislative Council

    But the new map doesn’t guarantee Republican victories in the 2026 midterms, Froomkin said.

    “The new map is premised on a guess about the voting behavior of Latino Texans, and that guess might turn out to be wrong,” he said. “The maps will go into effect. The question is, will the people put up with it? We can already see a backlash taking place. The Trump administration is horrifically unpopular. Guesses about how people are going to vote in 2026 based on the 2024 numbers may be misleading.”

    Members of the Texas Majority PAC, which advertises that it is dedicated to electing a Democrat to statewide office, gathered for a Zoom call last week to analyze redistricting data. Katherine Fischer, director of the PAC, said Republicans will almost certainly flip Districts 9 and 32.

    “We think it is possible, though challenging, to hold CD 35,” she said. “We think it is very possible to hold CD 28 and CD 34. Those are the Valley and South Texas ones. We believe that CD 15, which is currently a Republican district, will be the most competitive it’s been since 2020 redistricting and is a potential flip for Democrats.”

    The strategy behind the new map is based on the assumption that Trump’s 2024 numbers are an accurate metric to determine how competitive the districts are, Fischer said, adding that she thinks the Republicans overplayed their hand.

    “[Governor] Abbott was tasked with finding five new seats for Trump, but there are too many Democrats in Texas to gerrymander them away completely,” she said. “The data tells us that Texas Democrats can compete to hold most of these seats, and may have new flip opportunities. We intend to fight for every single seat.”

    Former Texas Sen. Wendy Davis joined the call and said the maps reveal the likelihood that the GOP’s “voter suppression efforts” will backfire. “Communities that Republicans hoped to suppress are energized, and Democrats are ready to turn that energy into real, competitive elections,” she said.

    Froomkin said once Governor Abbott signs the bill into law, the maps will be used for the 2026 midterm elections. No member of Congress loses their seat immediately but some, if not all, of the five Democrats in the seats slated for flips will not seek re-election in their now heavily Republican districts.

    Rep. Al Green has said he could run in Congressional District 18, where a special election is planned in November to fill the seat vacated by Rep. Sylvester Turner’s death earlier this year. Harris County Attorney Christian Menefee, Rep. Jolanda Jones, and former Houston City Councilwoman Amanda Edwards are among more than 20 candidates who have filed for the CD 18 seat. Former candidates Corisha Rogers and Rain Eatmon dropped out of the race last week, saying they would endorse Menefee.

    Referencing the fact that the 2021 map is still under review in federal court, Froomkin said such cases take a long time to adjudicate.

    “They involve the presentation of a lot of factual information that takes time to gather,” he said. “I expect that Voting Rights Act challenges to the new map, similarly, will take a lot of time to adjudicate.”

    While the plaintiffs won’t necessarily be just the Democratic lawmakers who fought fiercely against the legislation at the Capitol last week, many of those legislators are likely to be involved and are attorneys who appear prepared to gather technical information about the decomposition of districts and the voting behavior of those who live there.

    Once the new map is approved, the case against the 2021 version doesn’t necessarily become moot just because it’s no longer in effect, Frromkin explained.

    “It could be the case that a court would grant preliminary relief to plaintiffs challenging the new map and say that map can’t immediately go into effect, in which case the old maps, at least for the time being, would still be in effect,” he said.

    Republicans Double Down

    Prior to the passage of the bill, some GOP lawmakers appeared to be frustrated with their party leaders. Governor Abbott, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, Attorney General Ken Paxton, and Speaker of the House Dustin Burrows threatened to remove quorum-breaking Democrats from their seats, assess hefty fines, and arrest them. Not much of that has happened, leading some GOP legislators and watchdogs to believe that the party was rolling over for the Dems.

    Letters were issued Friday afternoon notifying Texas House Democrats who fled the state that they’d have to pay about $9,000 each in fines for “impeding the action of the House.”

    Shortly after the Speaker’s opening remarks early last week, the quorum breakers were asked to sign permission slips so a DPS trooper could tail them until the Legislature reconvened a couple of days later. Rep. Nicole Collier, D-Fort Worth, refused and spent two nights in the House of Representatives. At least six other lawmakers joined her on the second night.

    When Collier went into a House bathroom for a Zoom call with Newsom and U.S. Sen. Cory Booker, D-New Jersey, during the August 20 floor debate, authorities accused her of committing a felony.

    Froomkin, the law professor, said Abbott and other Republicans have made some threats, particularly that of criminal prosecution, that they weren’t authorized to make. And when the July 7 letter came from Trump’s Department of Justice strongly suggesting that Texas redraw its map, Abbott didn’t have to do it, Froomkin said.

    “The governor clearly made a number of threats that were beyond his legal power,” he said. “It seems like those threats were effective. The Democrats returned sooner than a lot of people expected they would, and I think that is likely attributable to the governor’s threats of criminal prosecution, which I found shocking. The suggestion that state officials would use their official powers to persecute members of the opposition simply for taking positions on legislative matters is extremely unusual and disturbing.”

    “It seems like we’re entering a new era in politics in which incumbents try to use every ounce of their power in order to try to maintain their power,” he added. “There’s no doubt that the goal of the new map is straightforwardly to dilute and diminish the political power of communities of color, and it is part of a broader plan to do that on the national stage.”

    But most Republican lawmakers have doubled down on the decision to redistrict, lauding the measure as a historic victory for the right and sharing their endorsements from Trump and Abbott.

    Reps. Briscoe Cain, R-Deer Park, and Cody Vasut, R-Angleton, announced a celebratory dinner toasting the passage of the maps last week, and Cain promptly filed the day after the House vote to run for the newly drawn Congressional District 9.

    Burrows said when the House convened on August 18 that his responsibility now that a quorum was established was to maintain an atmosphere of decorum and respect until “the job is finished.”

    “No one here needs a reminder that the last few weeks have been contentious,” he said, referencing the walkout of at least 50 Democrats in early August. “From this point forward, the rules of engagement are clear. Debate is welcome but personal attacks and name-calling will not be tolerated.”

    Name-calling ensued almost immediately, primarily accusations from Democrats that the bill was racist and that some of its authors and supporters were too.

    Hunter emphasized that the law allows redistricting for political performance. He repeatedly explained that the map was developed by Butler Snow LLP law firm at his direction and became frustrated with several Democratic legislators who questioned him about the process, saying they were permitted to interrupt and talk over him.

    “I’m standing with Republican members,” he said. “What’s wrong with Republicans standing up and stepping up and being honest, which you don’t like? The Supreme Court says we can do political and partisan redistricting. We will not agree on this issue. We will push forward.”

    Rep. Katrina Pierson, R-Rockwall, also took issue with the accusations.

    “You call my voters racist, you call my party racist, but yet we’re expected to follow the rules,” she said. “Well, that double standard ends today. I have traveled all over this country for the better part of a decade and I can tell you that more and more minority voters are voting their values, not their skin color. And many of them are moving to Texas to escape the blue states because their values have been successfully gerrymandered into suppression.”

    click to enlarge

    Rep. Katrina Pierson, R-Rockwall, said the new redistricting map is not racist but reflects the will of the people and the majority party.

    Screenshot

    Pierson further pointed out that Trump won Hispanic voters in Texas. “I get it, you don’t like that,” she said. “In 2024, Democrats lost. President Trump won big. You’re losing at the ballot box but you will not silence the majority in the state of Texas. You can throw your tantrum. You can leave, you can run, and you can ignore the will of the rest of the voters, but it’s honestly time to pick a new narrative. The racist rhetoric is old. News flash: Democrats do not own minorities in Texas.”

    Many Democratic lawmakers allege the redistricting effort involves “packing and cracking,” or widening the GOP advantage by unconstitutionally compressing people of color into some districts while spreading them throughout others to reduce their ability to elect their preferred candidates.

    It’s hard to predict what will happen in a legal battle because the U.S. Supreme Court has “sent some signals that the future of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is uncertain,” Froomkin said.

    “There are two cases before the Supreme Court that put the future of the Voting Rights Act in question,” he said. “In one of them, the court is planning to rule in a few months on the constitutionality of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, and a number of experts expect that this court will be hostile to section 2. That will of course dramatically shake up the redistricting process, particularly in southern states like Texas.”

    “In the absence of the Voting Rights Act, southern states would be able to completely gerrymander maps so as to deny minority communities any political representation, as they largely did before 1965,” he added.

    The actions of the federal government in micromanaging state legislatures is unprecedented, the law professor added. “That is another really surprising development,” he said. “The Republican Party used to, at least rhetorically, be a party that embraced federalism. Today, a Republican administration is trying to aggrandize federal power at the expense of states, including by coercing states to participate in the federal executive’s agenda.”

    What’s Next for Special Session No. 2

    Sixty-nine bills were read into the record on August 18 and referred to committees. More followed throughout the week, ranging from THC regulation to STAAR test elimination. Most were aimed at improving emergency preparedness and enhancing youth camp safety standards, a response to the deadly July 4 Hill Country floods. Several have already passed at least one chamber.
    Public hearings were held last week before the Select Committee on Flooding and Disaster Preparedness, at which several parents testified about the loss of their children at Camp Mystic during the Hill Country floods.

    Democratic lawmakers criticized Republicans for not putting flood victims ahead of redistricting. Republicans said they could have passed bills sooner if the Democrats hadn’t fled the state.

    Following the House passage of the redistricting bill, Abbott announced the addition of three more items to the special session agenda: Legislation imposing punishment for legislators who are willfully absent during a session; authorizing the purchase of Ivermectin over the counter; and proposing a groundwater study of East Texas aquifers by the Texas Water Development Board.

    Burrows has said he hopes to finish the second special session by addressing all 22 items on the governor’s agenda before Labor Day weekend.

    April Towery

    Source link

  • California’s lightning-fast push for partisan redistricting reflects Trump’s new America

    In an evening social media post about a supremely partisan battle that could reshape American political power for generations, President Trump sounded ebullient.

    “Big WIN for the Great State of Texas!!! Everything Passed, on our way to FIVE more Congressional seats and saving your Rights, your Freedoms, and your Country, itself,” Trump wrote, of the nation’s most populous red state pushing a mid-decade redistricting plan designed to win more Republican seats in Congress and protect Trump’s power through the 2026 midterms.

    “Texas never lets us down. Florida, Indiana, and others are looking to do the same thing,” Trump wrote — nodding to a potential proliferation of such efforts across the country.

    The next day, Gov. Gavin Newsom — projecting a fresh swagger as Trump’s chief antagonist on the issue — stood with fellow lawmakers from the nation’s most populous blue state to announce their own legislative success in putting to voters a redrawn congressional map for California that strongly favors Democrats.

    “We got here because the president of the United States is one of the most unpopular presidents in U.S. history,” Newsom said, couching the California effort as defensive rather than offensive. “We got here because he recognizes that he will lose the election, [and that] Congress will go back into the hands of the Democratic Party next November.”

    In the last week, with lightning speed, the nation’s foremost political leaders have jettisoned any pretense of political fairness — any notion of voters being equal or elected representatives reflecting their constituencies — in favor of an all-out partisan war for power that has some politicians and many political observers concerned for the future of American democracy.

    “America is headed towards true authoritarian rule if people do not stand up,” Texas state Rep. Gene Wu, a Democrat from the Houston area, said Friday on a call with reporters.

    The race to redistrict began with Trump, whose approval ratings have plummeted, pressuring Texas to manipulate maps to secure more House seats for Republicans so he wouldn’t face a hostile House majority in the second half of his second term. It escalated when Newsom and other California leaders said they wouldn’t stand idly by and started working to put a new map of their own on the November ballot — formally asking voters to jettison the state’s independent redistricting commission to counter Trump’s gambit in Texas.

    Those two states alone are home to some 70 million Americans, but the fight is hardly limited there. As Trump suggested, other states are also eyeing whether to redraw lines — raising the prospect of a country divided between blue and red power centers more than ever before, and the voice of millions of minority-party voters being all but erased in the halls of Congress.

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom answers questions on Thursday after signing legislation calling for a special election on a redrawn congressional map.

    (Godofredo A. Vásquez / Associated Press)

    Of course, gerrymandering is not new, and already exists in many states across the country. But the bold, unapologetic and bipartisan bent of the latest redistricting race is something new and different, experts said. It is a clear product of Trump’s new America, where political warfare is increasingly untethered to — and unbound by — long-standing political norms, and where leaders of both political parties seem increasingly willing to toss aside pretense and politeness in order to pursue power.

    Trump on the campaign trail promised a new “Golden Age,” and he has long said his goal is to return America to some purportedly greater, more aspirational and proud past. But he has also signaled, repeatedly and with hardly any ambiguity, an intention to manipulate the political system to further empower himself and his fellow Republicans — whether through redistricting, ending mail-in ballots, or other measures aimed at curtailing voter turnout.

    “In four years, you don’t have to vote again,” Trump told a crowd of evangelical Christians a little over a year ago, in the thick of his presidential campaign. “We’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not gonna have to vote.”

    ‘No democracy left’

    The redistricting war has dominated political news for weeks now, given its potential implications for reshaping Congress and further emboldening Trump in his second term.

    Sam Wang, president of the Electoral Innovation Lab at Princeton University, has studied gerrymandering for years, but said during the media call with Wu that he has never received more inquiries than in the last few weeks, when his inbox has filled with questions from media around the world.

    Wang said gerrymandering reached a high point more than a decade ago, but had been subsiding due to court battles and state legislatures establishing independent commissions to draw district lines.

    Texas Gov. Greg Abbott defends his state's redistricting move while calling California's "a joke."

    Texas Gov. Greg Abbott defends his state’s redistricting move while calling California’s “a joke.”

    (Eric Gay / Associated Press)

    Now, however, the efforts of Texas and California are threatening that progress and pushing things “to a new low point,” he said — leaving some voters feeling disenfranchised and Wang worried about further erosion of voter protections under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which he said the conservative Supreme Court may be preparing to weaken.

    Wu said allowing politicians to redraw congressional lines whenever they want in order to “make sure that they never lose” sets a dangerous precedent that will especially disenfranchise minority voters — because “politicians and leaders would no longer listen to the people.”

    “There would be no democracy left,” he said.

    That said, Wu drew a sharp distinction between Texas Republicans unilaterally redrawing maps to their and Trump’s advantage — in part by “hacking” apart minority populations — and California asking voters to counteract that power grab with a new map of their own.

    “California is defending the nation,” he said. “Texas is doing something illegal.”

    Texas Gov. Greg Abbott on Friday took the opposition position, saying Texas’ new map was constitutional while California’s was “a joke” and likely to be overturned. He also hinted at further efforts in other Republican-led states to add more House seats for the party.

    “Republicans are not finished in the United States,” Abbott said.

    Two legal experts on the call expressed grave concerns with such partisanship — especially in Texas.

    Sara Rohani, assistant counsel with the Legal Defense Fund, or LDF, said her organization has been fighting for decades to ensure that the promises of the Voting Rights Act for Black and other minority groups aren’t infringed upon by unscrupulous and racist political leaders in search of power.

    “Fair representation isn’t optional in this country. It’s the right of all Americans to [have] equal voting power,” she said.

    That said, “voters of color have been excluded” from that promise consistently, both before and after the passage of the Voting Rights Act, and “in 2025, it’s clear that our fight for fair maps continues,” Rohani said.

    Major victories have been won in the courts in recent years in states such as Alabama and Louisiana, and those battles are only going to continue, she said. Asked specifically if her group is preparing to sue over Texas’ maps, Rohani demurred — but didn’t back down, saying LDF will get involved “in any jurisdiction where Black voters are being targeted.”

    Thomas Saenz, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said there are definitely going to be challenges to Texas’ maps.

    By their own admission, Saenz said, Texas lawmakers redrew their maps in 2021 in order to maximize Republican advantage in congressional races — with the only limits being those imposed by the Voting Rights Act. That means in order to gain even more seats now, “they have to violate the Voting Rights Act,” he said.

    Texas Republicans have argued that they are acting in part in response to a warning from the Justice Department that their current maps, from 2021, are unlawful. But Saenz noted that the Justice Department dropped a lawsuit challenging those maps when Trump took office — meaning any threats to sue again are an empty ploy and “clearly orchestrated with one objective: Donald Trump’s objective.”

    The fate of any legal challenges to the redistricting efforts is unclear, in part because gerrymandering has become much harder to challenge in court.

    In 2019, the Supreme Court threw out claims that highly partisan state election maps are unconstitutional. Chief Justice John G. Roberts said such district-by-district line drawing “presents political questions” and there are no reliable “legal standards” for deciding what is fair and just.

    It was not a new view for Roberts.

    In 2006, shortly after he joined the court, the justices rejected a challenge to a mid-decade redistricting engineered by Texas Republicans, but ordered the state — over Roberts’ dissent — to redraw one of its majority-Latino districts to transfer some of its voters to another Latino-leaning district.

    Roberts expressed his frustration at the time, writing that it “is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race.”

    Some legal experts say the new Texas redistricting could face a legal challenge if Black or Latino lawmakers are in danger of losing their seats. But the Supreme Court conservatives are skeptical of such claims — and have given signs they may shrink the scope of the Voting Rights Act.

    In March, the justices considered a Louisiana case to decide if the state must create a second congressional district that would elect a Black candidate to comply with the Voting Rights Act, and if so, how it should be drawn.

    But the court failed to issue a decision. Instead, on Aug. 1, the court said it would hear further arguments this fall on “whether the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority Congressional district” violates the Constitution.

    Justice Clarence Thomas has long argued it is unconstitutional to draw election districts based on racial lines, regardless of the Voting Rights Act, and he may now have a majority that agrees with him.

    If so, such a ruling could squelch discrimination claims from Black and Latino lawmakers in Texas or elsewhere — further clearing the path for partisan gerrymandering.

    Looking ahead

    Given the intensity of the battle and the uncertainty of the related legal challenges, few of America’s top political leaders are thinking to the future. They’re fighting in the present — focused on swaying public perception.

    In a YouTube Live video with thousands of supporters on Thursday, Newsom said Trump “doesn’t believe in the rule of law — he believes in the rule of Don; period, full stop,” and that he hoped it was “dawning on more and more Americans what’s at stake.”

    Newsom said that when Trump “made the phone call to rig the elections to Greg Abbott in Texas,” he expected Democrats to just roll over and take it. In response, he said, Democrats have to stop thinking about “whether or not we should play hardball,” and start focusing on “how we play hardball.”

    On Friday, Newsom said he was “very proud of the Legislature for moving quickly” to counter Texas, and that he is confident voters will support the ballot measure to change the state’s maps despite polls showing a sluggish start to the campaign.

    A UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll, conducted for The Times, found 48% of voters said they would cast ballots in favor of temporary gerrymandering efforts, though 20% were undecided.

    Asked if he is encouraging Democratic leaders in other states to revisit their own maps, Newsom said he appreciated both Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signaling that they may be willing to do just that.

    “I do believe that the actions of [the California] Legislature will inspire other legislative leaders to … meet this moment, to save this democracy and to stop this authoritarian and his continued actions to literally vandalize and gut our Constitution and our democratic principles,” Newsom said.

    Kevin Rector, David G. Savage, Melody Gutierrez, Laura J. Nelson

    Source link

  • Most California voters disapprove of Trump’s immigration enforcement policies, poll shows

    Most California voters strongly disapprove of the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement policies and believe that raids in the state have unfairly targeted Latinos, according to a new poll.

    The findings, released Sunday, reflected striking emotional reactions to immigration enforcement. When voters were asked to describe their feelings about news reports or videos of immigration raids, 64% chose rage or sadness “because what is happening is unfair.”

    Among Democrats, 91% felt enraged or sad. Conversely, 65% of Republicans felt hopeful, “like justice is finally being served.”

    Such divisions were consistent across 11 questions about the administration’s overall immigration strategy and specific aspects of the way enforcement is playing out in the state, with divisions along partisan lines. The UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll was conducted for the Los Angeles Times.

    Democrats almost unanimously oppose President Trump’s tactics on immigration, the poll showed. Most Republicans support the president, though they are not as united as Democrats in their approval.

    “It was essential to show the strength of feelings because Democrats are strongly on the negative side of each of these policies,” said Mark DiCamillo, director of the Berkeley IGS Poll. “That struck me. I don’t usually see that kind of extreme fervor on a poll response.”

    • Share via

    The poll found that 69% of respondents disapprove of the way immigration enforcement is being carried out in the state.

    Among Democrats, 95% disapprove, as well as 72% of voters with no party preference or others not affiliated with the two major parties, whereas 79% of Republicans approve.

    The poll was completed online in English and Spanish from Aug. 11-17 by 4,950 registered voters in California.

    A question that showed the least unified support among Republican voters asked respondents whether they agree or disagree that federal agents should be required to show clear identification when carrying out their work. The question comes as immigration agents have carried out raids using face coverings, unmarked cars and while wearing casual clothing.

    Some 50% of Republicans agreed that agents should have to identify themselves, while 92% of Democrats agreed.

    G. Cristina Mora, IGS co-director and a sociology professor at UC Berkeley who studies race and immigration, helped develop the poll questions. She said the poll shows that Republican voters are much more nuanced than Democrats. They also split on questions about due process, birthright citizenship and immigration enforcement in sensitive locations.

    “Republicans are much more fractured in their thinking about immigration across the state,” Mora said.

    Mora said she developed the question about agent identification in response to the recent bill led by Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) that would require immigration officers to display their agency and name or badge number during public-facing enforcement actions, similar to police and other local law enforcement.

    Padilla also spearheaded a letter last month to Acting Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Todd Lyons seeking information about the agency’s policies regarding the identification of agents while on duty. ICE has justified the tactics by stating that agents are at risk of doxxing and have faced increased assault on the job.

    “The public has a right to know which officials are exercising police power, and anonymous enforcement undermines both constitutional norms and democratic oversight,” Padilla and 13 other Democrats wrote in the letter.

    Another poll question that garnered mixed support of Republicans asked respondents to agree or disagree with the statement, “ICE agents should expand immigration enforcement into schools, hospitals, parks and other public locations.”

    Among Republicans, 53% agreed with that statement, though fewer than 1 in 3 agree strongly. Meanwhile, 94% of Democrats disagreed.

    Shortly after Trump took office, his administration rescinded a 2011 memo that restricted immigration agents from making arrests in sensitive locations, such as churches, schools and hospitals. Since then, agents have been filmed entering locations that were previously considered off limits, putting immigrant communities on edge.

    Schools in Los Angeles reopened this month with “safe zones” in heavily Latino neighborhoods and changed bus routes with less exposure to immigration agents. An 18-year-old high school senior, Benjamin Marcelo Guerrero-Cruz, was walking his family’s dog in Van Nuys when he was taken into federal immigration custody.

    Mora said the varied responses illustrate how California Republicans view the Trump administration’s immigration tactics with “degrees of acceptability.” They might feel strongly that immigrants with violent criminal histories should be deported, she said, but the takeover of MacArthur Park, when a convoy of immigration agents in armored vehicles descended there in a show of force, or the enforcement actions outside of public schools “might have been a step too far.”

    Mike Madrid, a GOP political consultant who wrote a book about how Latinos have transformed democracy, said the split among Republicans is consistent with national polling. The trend is problematic for Trump, he said, because it means he is losing big swaths of his base.

    “This is becoming viewed as overreach more than it is immigration control,” he said. “The idea sets a frame for it, but the actual implementation is widely unpopular.”

    Republicans were largely united in response to other questions. Asked about the Trump administration’s proposal to do away with birthright citizenship — which confers citizenship to all children born in the U.S. regardless of their parent’s legal status — 67% of GOP respondents approved, and most of them strongly approved. By contrast, 92% of Democrats disapproved, and as did seven in 10 respondents overall.

    Mora said she was surprised by the fact that Latinos didn’t stand out as substantially more opposed to Trump’s actions than voters of other racial and ethnic groups. For example, 69% of Latino voters said ICE raids have unfairly targeted Latinos, just five percentage points higher than the 64% of white non-Latino voters who agreed.

    “You would imagine Latinos would be through the roof here, but they’re not,” Mora said. She said this reminded her of research around the tendency for Latinos to individualize their experiences instead of seeing them as racially unjust.

    Broadly, 72% of Latinos disagree with the way the Trump administration is enforcing immigration laws in California, while 25% approve and 3% have no strong opinion.

    Among Latino voter subgroups, older men and third-generation (or beyond) women are the more likely to support the way immigration enforcement is being handled in California, with 38% of Latino men over age 40 in agreement compared to 11% of Latinas ages 18-39, although among both groups majorities disapprove.

    Madrid said that’s consistent with national polling showing a decrease in support for Republicans among Latinos after record gains in the last presidential election. The question, he said, is whether Trump’s approval ratings among Latinos could regress substantially enough to flip control of Congress in the midterms.

    “We’re not there yet,” he said.

    Andrea Castillo

    Source link

  • GOP senators push Kamala Harris testimony as House Oversight eyes subpoena

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    As the 11th member of former President Joe Biden’s administration appeared before the House Oversight Committee this week, Fox News Digital asked senators on Capitol Hill if former Vice President Kamala Harris should testify next. 

    “I think they should take her behind closed doors and figure out what she knows and what she’s willing to talk about,” Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., said. 

    House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., is leading the investigation into the alleged cover-up of Biden’s cognitive decline and use of the autopen during his tenure as president. 

    Comer said on Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle” last month that the “odds” of Harris getting a subpoena to appear before the House Oversight Committee are “very high.” 

    INSIDE THE BIDEN COVER-UP PROBE: 8 AIDES QUESTIONED, MORE ON THE WAY

    The House Oversight Committee could issue a subpoena for former Vice President Kamala Harris to testify about the alleged cover-up of former President Joe Biden’s mental decline.  (Ting Shen/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

    While Marshall told Fox News Digital that Harris should testify, he admitted, “I don’t think you need her testimony to show Americans what I knew as a physician a long time ago, that Joe Biden had a neurodegenerative disease of some sort.”

    HOUSE REPUBLICANS FLOAT GRILLING JOE, JILL BIDEN AS FORMER AIDES STONEWALL COVER-UP PROBE

    Marshall has a medical degree from the University of Kansas and practiced medicine for more than 25 years before running for public office. 

    “All you had to do is look at his very fixed, flat face,” Marshall explained. “Look at his gait, the way he walked. He had a shuffled walk. He didn’t move his arms, hardly at all. When he talked, it was very monotone, a very soft voice. He had malingering thought processes. I don’t think it took much to figure that out.”

    Sen. Roger Marshall speaks to media

    Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan. speaks during a news conference at the U.S. Capitol in Washington on March 4, 2021. (Ting Shen/Bloomberg via Getty Images )

    After listing the former president’s symptoms, the Kansas senator lamented that Biden “turned weakness into war,” creating a national security threat. 

    During Biden’s presidency, the United States’ withdrawal from Afghanistan resulted in the death of 13 U.S. soldiers, Russia invaded Ukraine and Hamas attacked Israel, triggering the ongoing war in Gaza.

    But as Republicans demand transparency, Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., told Fox News Digital that he is far more worried about the “challenges we face right now,” particularly on the economy, inflation and the impact of Trump’s tariff policies. 

    joe biden ahead of debate in georgia

    Joe Biden reacts to a light display at his debate watch party at Hyatt Regency Atlanta on June 27, 2024, in Atlanta. (Derek White/Getty Images for DNC)

    Meanwhile, Sen. John Hoeven R-N.D., defended the accountability argument, telling Fox News Digital that Americans “always want more information and more transparency.”

    “If you’re involved in an administration, you [should] always be willing to come in and say what you did and why you did it, and you know what it’s all about. I mean, that’s how it works, and that’s what the American people want,” he said. 

    CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

    Fox News Digital reached out to Biden and Harris for comment but did not immediately receive a response. 

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

    Source link

  • Texas senate gives final approval to redrawn congressional map that heavily favours Republicans

    The Texas senate has given final approval to a redrawn congressional map that gives Republicans a chance to pick up as many as five congressional seats, fulfilling a brazen political request from Donald Trump to shore up the GOP’s standing before next year’s midterm elections.

    It will now be sent to governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, who is expected to quickly sign it into law, however Democrats have vowed to challenge it in court. The Texas house of representatives approved the map on Wednesday on an 88-52 party-line vote, before the senate approved it early on Saturday.

    Related: Obama calls California’s redistricting plan ‘a responsible approach’

    The effort by Trump and Texas’ Republican-majority Legislature prompted state Democrats to hold a two-week walkout and kicked off a wave of redistricting efforts across the country.

    Democrats had prepared for a final show of resistance, with plans to push the senate vote into the early morning hours in a last-ditch attempt to delay passage.

    Senator Carol Alvarado revealed her filibuster plans to delay its final passage, in a post on social media. “Republicans think they can walk all over us. Today I’m going to kick back,” Alvarado’s post read. “I’ve submitted my intention to filibuster the new congressional maps. Going to be a long night.”

    But the planned filibuster was thwarted by a procedural motion by Republicans. It now heads to the governor for final approval.

    Alvarado’s delay tactics were the latest chapter in a weeks-long showdown that has roiled the Texas Legislature, marked by a Democratic walkout and threats of arrest from Republicans.

    Democrats had already delayed the bill’s passage during hours of debate, pressing senator Phil King, the measure’s sponsor, on the proposal’s legality, with many alleging that the redrawn districts violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting voters’ influence based on race – an accusation King vehemently denied.

    “I had two goals in mind: that all maps would be legal and would be better for Republican congressional candidates in Texas,” said King, a Republican.

    “There is extreme risk the Republican majority will be lost” in the US House if the map does not pass, King said.

    The vote comes after California Democrats set a special election for November in which they will ask voters to approve a new congressional map in their state. That map would add up to five seats for Democrats, a move designed to offset the new map in Texas. California governor Gavin Newsom launched that effort after Texas began its push to redraw its maps.

    Republicans currently hold 25 of Texas’s 38 congressional districts. Under the redrawn map, they would be favored in 30 districts. Abbott called a special session last month to draw new maps after Trump requested that he do so.

    The new map eliminates Democratic-held districts in Austin, Houston and the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex and replaces them with Republican ones. It also tweaks the lines of two districts currently held by Democrats in south Texas to make them more friendly to Republicans. Swift lawsuits are expected challenging the new districts under the Voting Rights Act amid allegations the new lines make it harder for voters of color to elect their preferred candidates.

    Lawmakers passed the maps after Democrats in the Texas house of representatives left the state for two weeks, denying Republicans the necessary quorum to conduct legislative business. The Democrats returned to the state on Monday after California Democrats began moving ahead with a plan to redraw their state’s congressional map.

    Even after Democrats returned to Austin, protests continued at the state capitol this week as Republicans pushed the new map through. The efforts were galvanized by Nicole Collier, a Democratic state representative from Fort Worth who refused to sign a “permission slip” necessary to leave the house floor. Collier refused and remained confined to the house floor and her office until Wednesday.

    The Texas push set off an unusual mid-decade redistricting battle before next year’s midterm elections, in which Republicans are expected to lose seats in the US House. Republicans currently have a three-seat majority and the president’s party typically performs poorly in a midterm election. Republicans are also expected to redraw the maps in Florida, Ohio, Missouri and potentially Indiana.

    With the Associated Press

    Source link