ReportWire

Tag: Republicans

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

    [ad_1]

    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.

    [ad_2]

    April Towery

    Source link

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

    [ad_1]

    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.

    [ad_2]

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

    Source link

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

    [ad_1]

    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.

    [ad_2]

    Andrea Castillo

    Source link

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

    [ad_1]

    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. 

    Deirdre Heavey is a politics writer for Fox News Digital. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

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

    [ad_1]

    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

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Letters: Let’s invest in the Bay Area’s greatest asset: nature

    [ad_1]

    Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.

    Invest in Bay Area’s
    greatest asset: Nature

    Re: “Bay Area needs unity to solve its problems” (Page A9, Aug. 17).

    I second Russell Hancock’s recent call for bold regional leadership in this period of “federal ruckus.” As climate impacts intensify, California must act now to build climate resilience for tomorrow — and for future generations.

    [ad_2]

    Letters To The Editor

    Source link

  • Congress is set to receive the first batch of Epstein files. It’s not likely to quell the drama.

    [ad_1]

    The Justice Department is expected on Friday to start handing the first batch of Jeffrey Epstein files over to Congress. But it may be a while before lawmakers get the information they want — if ever.

    The DOJ is taking a piecemeal approach to transmitting documents to Capitol Hill, pursuant to a subpoena issued this month by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee after Democrats on the panel forced the matter.

    The committee, led by Kentucky Republican Rep. James Comer, anticipates receiving an initial tranche of files related to the convicted sex offender by the end of the day Aug. 22. Making these materials public, however, will be a slow, deliberative process.

    That’s because House Oversight intends to coordinate with the Justice Department on taking steps to shield the names of the women who were victims of Epstein, who died by suicide in 2019, and information around ongoing criminal cases.

    “The Committee intends to make the records public after thorough review to ensure all victims’ identification and child sexual abuse material are redacted,” said an Oversight Committee spokesperson, granted anonymity to share details about the panel’s internal activities. “The Committee will also consult with the DOJ to ensure any documents released do not negatively impact ongoing criminal cases and investigations.”

    If the Justice Department follows precedent, both Democrats and Republicans on House Oversight would get access to the materials. While under a typical arrangement, the majority — in this case Republicans — would control its disclosure, either party could release the materials unilaterally.

    Democrats, however, intend to review the files before releasing them publicly, according to a person familiar with Oversight Democrats’ planning, speaking on condition of anonymity to share internal party strategy.

    The files they receive could include FBI reports of witness interviews; materials seized from the searches of Epstein’s vast properties in New York, the Virgin Islands, Palm Beach and New Mexico; and the affidavits used to gain permission from judges to execute those searches.

    There are a variety of complicating factors to consider, among them the ongoing legal challenge that Ghislaine Maxwell, a longtime Epstein associate, is pursuing against her 20-year conviction for sex trafficking crimes. House Oversight previously subpoenaed Maxwell for testimony and is negotiating the conditions of the interview with her legal team. Maxwell, who was sentenced in 2021, is demanding that she be granted immunity from further criminal proceedings in exchange for her cooperation.

    The plodding process is unlikely to satisfy demands for transparency from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, though. And House GOP leaders shouldn’t expect to return from the August recess free from the drama that consumed them in July.

    “After months of stonewalling, calling Epstein files a hoax, and telling people nothing but porn exists in their possession, the administration now admits the files exist, and agrees to release some of them,” Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said in a social media post this week. “Americans want transparency though, not smoke and mirrors.”

    Massie, with Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), has been leading the charge to force a floor vote on a resolution that would compel the release of the Epstein files, and the two men say they’ll follow through on plans when Congress returns to use procedural maneuvers to call the measure up without leadership’s consent.

    The Massie-Khanna resolution would call for the materials to be made public with redactions only for the purposes of protecting names of victims, hiding sexually explicit content and in instances where ongoing legal cases could be compromised. In other words, the lawmakers want to guarantee the identities of Epstein’s associates, if applicable, are revealed.

    Last month, Speaker Mike Johnson said Republicans should give the DOJ time to reveal the documents in a responsible manner that would respect the privacy of Epstein’s victims. However, President Donald Trump — who had ties to Epstein, a well-known financier — was also pushing to move past the issue after his allies had stoked conspiracy theories for years about what authorities were hiding.

    Yet Massie, Khanna and allies would not budge from their stance that members must be allowed to vote to bring the files to light, disrupting the Rules Committee that tees up floor consideration for most legislation. Leaders opted to send their members home a few days ahead of schedule for the summer recess rather than stay in Washington to take politically uncomfortable votes.

    Democrats are also signaling they won’t be satisfied by the DOJ’s game plan and will continue to make the issue a political headache for Republicans.

    “Releasing the Epstein files in batches just continues this White House cover-up. The American people will not accept anything short of the full, unredacted Epstein files,” Rep. Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee, said in a statement. “We will keep pressing until the American people get the truth — every document, every fact, in full. The administration must comply with our subpoena, by law.”

    Efforts to draw a wedge in the GOP over the Epstein files were taking place as far away as Texas this week, where Gene Wu, chair of the state’s House Democratic Caucus, offered an amendment to delay Republicans’ mid-decade redistricting efforts until after the release of Epstein materials.

    Meanwhile, back in Washington, lawmakers will regroup on Capitol Hill on Sept. 2 with just four weeks left to avert a government shutdown, and there’s already concern in GOP leadership over the time the House could waste continuing to fight over perceived distractions.

    “I’d really like to see this resolved, if possible, before we get back,” Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-Va.), chair of the House Rules Committee, told reporters this week. “We’re going to have a lot of work to do when we get back in September. I’ve already looked at my September calendar, and it looks pretty busy.”

    Foxx, whose committee work was derailed by members’ efforts to force Epstein-related votes, called the saga “a tempest in a teapot.”

    In February, the Department of Justice released what it called the “first phase” of documents related to the Epstein investigation, which has been a fixation of some of the president’s supporters. It has long been public that Trump — along with other prominent figures, like Bill Clinton — are referenced in documents previously released in court cases surrounding Epstein. But Trump is not accused of any wrongdoing linked to Epstein.

    The real firestorm, however, began in earnest in early July, when the department quietly released a memo saying the federal government did not find evidence of a so-called Epstein “client list.” Conspiracists had long postulated that Epstein kept such a list of people with whom he trafficked young women, and that it was being hidden to protect the rich and powerful.

    No additional disclosures would be forthcoming, the unsigned memo said, which quickly — and predictably — set off a complicated political quagmire for the president and the GOP amid accusations that the administration was reneging on its promise for transparency.

    Trump, in an effort to quash the outrage, asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek the release of grand jury materials in the most recent investigations of Epstein and Maxwell in New York, as well as an earlier federal probe of Epstein in Florida. In recent weeks, all three judges assigned to resolve the unsealing requests rebuffed the administration, with the most recent rejection coming Wednesday.

    The judges said the department hadn’t justified taking the unusual step of unsealing the secret files and that, in any event, most of material in the files had already been made public through Maxwell’s trial or other means.

    Still, even if the grand jury transcripts and exhibits were made public, they represent a tiny fraction of the material the Justice Department possesses in the Epstein and Maxwell investigative files that are the subject of the congressional subpoena.

    When the House Oversight Committee interviewed Trump’s former attorney general, Bill Barr, as part of its probe into the Epstein matter earlier this month, Barr told congressional investigators that he did not know why the documents were being withheld, according to a person familiar with his testimony and granted anonymity to describe the private conversation.

    The lack of transparency around the process, however, might have to do with the fact that some grand jury materials may need court approval, Barr suggested, and that current policy prohibits the release of unsubstantiated information.

    Ultimately, the House Oversight subpoena currently represents the best chance for bringing some information to light — and for the Trump administration to get limited details released to satisfy those clamoring for action.

    Longstanding DOJ policies as well as a federal law — the Privacy Act of 1974 — limit disclosures about living individuals investigated for potential crimes. However, that law and those DOJ rules do not apply to Congress, which is generally free to ignore individuals’ pleas for discretion. DOJ has sometimes used that distinction to effectively make sensitive information public by transmitting it to Congress — with GOP and Democratic lawmakers then able to cherry pick what of the sensitive information they choose to share.

    A DOJ spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.

    Erica Orden, Josh Gerstein and Jordain Carney contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • CA redistricting special election approved; Proposed congressional maps no longer hinge on Texas

    [ad_1]

    It’s official. California voters this fall will be asked to approve Democratic-drawn congressional maps, after the Legislature approved a bill Thursday calling for a special election in the fall. Earlier Thursday, California’s Democratic leaders moved forward with an effort to change the congressional district maps so that they heavily favor Democrats, regardless of what Texas or other Republican states do. (Video below: Gov. Newsom, Democratic lawmakers answer questions about the redistricting special election.)The effort that was promoted by California Democrats as a way to counteract efforts in Texas to send more Republicans to Congress will no longer rely on the action in the Lone Star state or others that allegedly spurred redistricting efforts, according to legislative documents KCRA 3 obtained Thursday. Democratic state lawmakers in the California Assembly made changes to the legislation known as ACA 8 on Thursday morning, minutes before they began debating and voting on the proposed ballot measure that would present the new maps to voters in a special statewide election this fall.(Video below: Gov. Newsom speaks with legislative leaders at a bill signing.)The changes clarifying that the maps do not rely on Texas or other states were put in a separate bill that lawmakers are prepared to approve on Monday. Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democratic leaders have repeatedly insisted that California would have no need to enact new Congressional maps if Texas and other GOP states cease redistricting efforts. It has been part of a bitter fight between states over which party controls the U.S. House of Representatives halfway through President Donald Trump’s term.But now the legislation, known as the Election Rigging Response Act in California, has all references to any red state’s redistricting efforts stricken out of the language. That special election would ask voters to allow the new, politically drawn maps heavily favoring Democrats to take effect 2026, 2028 and 2030 elections. It could be a legal gamble in the state, where voters in 2008 and 2010 took the power away from politicians to draw Congressional districts and gave it to an independent, citizens-led redistricting commission. (VIDEO BELOW: How did we get here?)The change comes a day after the Texas House approved new Congressional maps that attempt to remove five Democrats from its representation and replace them with Republicans. The maps are now halfway through that state’s process. The Republican-controlled state Senate was scheduled to vote on a map Thursday night. “Yesterday, Texas moved forward with their Trump power grab so this notion of “conditioning” is no longer applicable — it is self-evident that California will need to move forward in response to what Texas has done,” Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office said in a statement.The governor’s office noted California’s change is also meant to simplify the question that is presented to voters this fall. Republican states will no longer be mentioned in the ballot measure, which will ask voters to simultaneously approve the new politically drawn congressional maps and support independent redistricting nationwide. The act of redrawing district lines to specifically favor a political party is known as gerrymandering, a once taboo practice to openly admit to that is now being boasted by both Democrats and Republicans.California Democrats began publicly advocating for redistricting after President Donald Trump called on Texas to send five additional Republicans to the U.S. House of Representatives. Trump made the request because midterm elections could typically lead to shifts in power.California lawmakers approved legislation Thursday that will establish the Nov. 4 special election. The Assembly approved ACA 8 with 57 ayes and 20 nos, with Democrat Alex Lee abstaining from the vote. Democrat Dawn Addis was absent on Thursday.The state Senate then voted to approve ACA 8 on a 30-8 vote. The ballot measure is expected to be known as Proposition 50. The cost of a special election is not yet public, but it is expected to cost at least $200 million, which is around what it cost for the 2021 election that attempted to recall Newsom from office. Newsom signed two pieces of legislation later Thursday that outline the logistics for the special election and provide resources and money for it. See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. —

    It’s official.

    California voters this fall will be asked to approve Democratic-drawn congressional maps, after the Legislature approved a bill Thursday calling for a special election in the fall.

    Earlier Thursday, California’s Democratic leaders moved forward with an effort to change the congressional district maps so that they heavily favor Democrats, regardless of what Texas or other Republican states do.

    (Video below: Gov. Newsom, Democratic lawmakers answer questions about the redistricting special election.)

    This content is imported from YouTube.
    You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.



    This content is imported from Twitter.
    You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

    The effort that was promoted by California Democrats as a way to counteract efforts in Texas to send more Republicans to Congress will no longer rely on the action in the Lone Star state or others that allegedly spurred redistricting efforts, according to legislative documents KCRA 3 obtained Thursday.

    Democratic state lawmakers in the California Assembly made changes to the legislation known as ACA 8 on Thursday morning, minutes before they began debating and voting on the proposed ballot measure that would present the new maps to voters in a special statewide election this fall.

    (Video below: Gov. Newsom speaks with legislative leaders at a bill signing.)

    This content is imported from YouTube.
    You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

    The changes clarifying that the maps do not rely on Texas or other states were put in a separate bill that lawmakers are prepared to approve on Monday.

    This content is imported from Twitter.
    You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democratic leaders have repeatedly insisted that California would have no need to enact new Congressional maps if Texas and other GOP states cease redistricting efforts. It has been part of a bitter fight between states over which party controls the U.S. House of Representatives halfway through President Donald Trump’s term.

    But now the legislation, known as the Election Rigging Response Act in California, has all references to any red state’s redistricting efforts stricken out of the language.

    That special election would ask voters to allow the new, politically drawn maps heavily favoring Democrats to take effect 2026, 2028 and 2030 elections. It could be a legal gamble in the state, where voters in 2008 and 2010 took the power away from politicians to draw Congressional districts and gave it to an independent, citizens-led redistricting commission.

    (VIDEO BELOW: How did we get here?)

    The change comes a day after the Texas House approved new Congressional maps that attempt to remove five Democrats from its representation and replace them with Republicans. The maps are now halfway through that state’s process. The Republican-controlled state Senate was scheduled to vote on a map Thursday night.

    “Yesterday, Texas moved forward with their Trump power grab so this notion of “conditioning” is no longer applicable — it is self-evident that California will need to move forward in response to what Texas has done,” Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office said in a statement.

    The governor’s office noted California’s change is also meant to simplify the question that is presented to voters this fall. Republican states will no longer be mentioned in the ballot measure, which will ask voters to simultaneously approve the new politically drawn congressional maps and support independent redistricting nationwide.

    The act of redrawing district lines to specifically favor a political party is known as gerrymandering, a once taboo practice to openly admit to that is now being boasted by both Democrats and Republicans.

    California Democrats began publicly advocating for redistricting after President Donald Trump called on Texas to send five additional Republicans to the U.S. House of Representatives. Trump made the request because midterm elections could typically lead to shifts in power.

    California lawmakers approved legislation Thursday that will establish the Nov. 4 special election.

    The Assembly approved ACA 8 with 57 ayes and 20 nos, with Democrat Alex Lee abstaining from the vote. Democrat Dawn Addis was absent on Thursday.

    The state Senate then voted to approve ACA 8 on a 30-8 vote.

    This content is imported from Twitter.
    You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

    The ballot measure is expected to be known as Proposition 50.

    The cost of a special election is not yet public, but it is expected to cost at least $200 million, which is around what it cost for the 2021 election that attempted to recall Newsom from office.

    Newsom signed two pieces of legislation later Thursday that outline the logistics for the special election and provide resources and money for it.

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

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Most Michigan voters support U.S. aid for Gaza, poll finds

    [ad_1]

    Steve Neavling

    Signs at a pro-Palestinian encampment at Wayne State University in May 2024.

    A majority of Michiganders want the U.S. to help secure food, water, and medical supplies for people in Gaza, where Israeli attacks since October 2023 have killed more than 62,000 and led to mass starvation, a new poll shows.

    The survey, released Thursday by the progressive advocacy group Progress Michigan, found that 69% of Michigan voters support U.S. aid to Gaza, including 45% who strongly support it. Just 22% oppose the aid, while 8% were unsure.

    Support was highest among Democrats, with 67% strongly backing aid and another 20% somewhat in favor. Independents also favored action, with 43% strongly supporting aid and 21% somewhat supporting. Republicans were more divided, with 18% strongly supporting aid and 33% somewhat supporting, while 38% opposed.

    Women were more likely than men to support aid, with 50% strongly in favor compared with 41% of men. By race, 68% of white respondents expressed support, with 45% strongly and 23% somewhat, and Black residents also supported U.S. involvement, including 39% strongly and 36% somewhat.

    In each demographic, more people favored aid to Gaza than opposed it.

    A poll from Progress Michigan found bipartisan support among Michigan residents calling for aid for Gaza. - Progress Michigan

    Progress Michigan

    A poll from Progress Michigan found bipartisan support among Michigan residents calling for aid for Gaza.

    “Some things are bigger than partisan politics, and the ongoing genocide in Gaza is one of them,” Sam Inglot, executive director of Progress Michigan, said. “Michiganders recognize that allowing an entire population to starve and suffer without medical care is a moral failure we cannot accept. People are fed up with the foot dragging and the excuses and are demanding an end to the suffering of the Palestinian people.”

    Inglot said the poll shows voters want urgent action, not excuses from elected officials.

    “We have a moral imperative to do everything we can to get food, water and medical supplies to those who still remain in Gaza, and end the bombings and killing of Palestinians,” Inglot said. “It’s time for our lawmakers to stop making excuses for the reprehensible actions of the Israeli government and step up to do the right thing.”

    The results come from Progress Michigan’s monthly Lake Effect polls, which survey voters across the state.

    [ad_2]

    Steve Neavling

    Source link

  • Texas House Passes Congressional Redistricting Bill After Absconding Dems Return

    [ad_1]



    After House Democrats absconded for more than two weeks in opposition to a Congressional redistricting bill, the Texas House on Wednesday passed the bill by a vote of 88-52.

    It was passed after roughly eight hours of debate during which the majority of Democrats called Republicans racist.

    State Rep. Todd Hunter, R-Corpus Christi, filed HB 4, the redistricting bill, which was added to the call for the first and second legislative special sessions. He also authored the redistricting bill the legislature passed in 2021 that remains in litigation.

    “I’ve heard a lot of comments, and I will tell you I don’t take them personally,” Hunter said. “These are tough issues. I feel like sometimes that I’m a pinata with no candy, just being hit. But I respect all of you.” Speaking to Democrats who fled the state, he said, “you left for 17 to 19 days and most of the comments I’ve heard could have been handled, discussed or mutually resolved in this House within that time. You chose to leave … that’s your choice. We chose to stay. That was our choice.”

    State Rep. Nicole Collier, D-Fort Worth, like her colleagues, said the redistricting plan was racist. Collier on Monday refused to comply with House rules she voted for, not leaving the chamber, The Center Square reported. On Wednesday, she asked Hunter if he was aware that during the time of slavery, Blacks fled, or that during Nazi rule, Jews fled. “They fled their oppressor,” she said, accusing House Republicans of being oppressors, saying they “don’t reflect the diversity of Texas.”

    She also complained that House Democrats weren’t involved in the redistricting process, to which Hunter replied they were gone for 17 days and chose not to be a part of the process.

    “When you are oppressed, you flee the oppressors,” she said.

    In response, state Rep. Katrina Pierson, R-Rockwall, said, “Chairman Hunter may not have taken the personal attacks and disrespect personally, but I did. The opposition gets to stand here and grandstand and say pretty much anything that they want, and we’re expected to stand here and just take it.

    “You call my voters racist. You call my party racist, but yet we’re expected to follow the rules. Well, that double standard ends today.”

    “More minority voters are voting their values, not their skin color,” she continued. “Many of them are moving to Texas to escape blue states because their values have been successfully gerrymandered into suppression. I’ve heard the accusations that this mid-decade redistricting is going to silence voters, and that it misrepresents the population of Texas. The facts don’t match the rhetoric.”

    She said that under current congressional maps, Texas has zero Black CVAP (citizen voting age population) districts. Under the new map, there are two. She also replied to Collier’s claim, saying that Blacks fled during slavery to Republican states.

    “I have heard repeatedly that these maps are gerrymandered, but that doesn’t fit the narrative either. That’s just spin because in many parts of the state, the map eliminates gerrymandering; they emphasize compactness in whole counties and whole cities. Political performance isn’t just legal, it is fair. It reflects the voters of the state of Texas,” she said.

    She also pointed out that President Donald Trump won Hispanic voters in Texas in the last election. “President Trump flipped 11 out of 18 counties on the Texas-Mexico border. He doubled his support from 2020. Political performance is the driver” behind the redistricting. “You lost,” she told Democrats. “Get over it.”

    After the vote, House Speaker Dustin Burrows, R-Lubbock, thanked members who carried the bill, also saying the new map is constitutional and legal.

    “These past few weeks have not been easy, but the House members who showed up for work every day have shown a dedication to their constituents that will not be forgotten,” he said. 

    Syndicated with permission from The Center Square.

    [ad_2]

    Bethany Blankley – The Center Square

    Source link

  • Gavin Newsom, Kathy Hochul issue warnings after Texas redistricting vote

    [ad_1]

    Democratic Governors Gavin Newsom and Kathy Hochul of California and New York, respectively, issued brief warnings to Texas after the Republican-led state legislature voted Wednesday evening to advance a controversial congressional redistricting plan.

    Newsweek reached out to GOP Texas Governor Greg Abbott‘s office via email for comment.

    Why It Matters

    The vote occurred after weeks of partisan standoffs in Austin, including a Democratic walkout, as it heightened concerns that states could spark a mid‑decade redistricting “arms race” ahead of the 2026 midterms.

    Texas Republicans said the map could produce as many as five additional GOP‑leaning seats; Democrats said they would mount legal challenges and urged broader pushback from governors and allies.

    The Lone Star State’s GOP also felt partisan pressure and backing from President Donald Trump to press the plan further along and approve it.

    What To Know

    Posting to X after the vote passed, Newsom said, “It’s on, Texas.”

    Hochul also said in a post to X, “Game on.”

    The Texas House approved the proposed congressional map by an 88-52 party‑line vote, advancing the legislation to the state Senate, where passage is expected.

    What People Are Saying

    Trump on Truth Social Tuesday: “CONGRATULATIONS TEXAS! The July Border Statistics are in and, once again, they are the LOWEST RECORDED NUMBERS IN UNITED STATES HISTORY. The U.S. Border Patrol reported ZERO releases of Illegal Aliens into the Country. Texas’ Border is Safe and Secure, and the entire World knows it. All we need to do is keep it this way, which is exactly why Texas Republicans need to help us WIN the 2026 Midterm Elections, and pass their new Bill, AS IS, for the ONE BIG, BEAUTIFUL CONGRESSIONAL MAP!

    “With the Texas House now in Quorum, thanks to GREAT Speaker Dustin Burrows, I call on all of my Republican friends in the Legislature to work as fast as they can to get THIS MAP to Governor Greg Abbott’s desk, ASAP. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

    This is a developing story that will be updated with additional information.

    Republican Governor Greg Abbott speaks at a news conference on July 8 in Hunt, Texas. (Photo by Brandon Bell/Getty Images)

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Texas House approves controversial GOP congressional redistricting map

    [ad_1]



    Texas House approves controversial GOP congressional redistricting map – CBS News










































    Watch CBS News



    The Texas House on Wednesday night passed a controversial, Republican-backed proposal to redraw the state’s congressional maps. The bill now moves onto the Texas Senate. CBS News reporter Erica Brown has more.

    [ad_2]
    Source link

  • ‘CD 32 is a 175-Mile Fajita Strip’: North Texans React to Redistricting House Approval

    [ad_1]

    In the end, the hubbub and national attention that Texas House Democrats drew earlier this month by fleeing Texas and busting the chamber’s quorum did little to stop the inevitable. Whoever could’ve seen that one coming?…

    [ad_2]

    Emma Ruby

    Source link

  • Obama endorses redrawing California congressional districts to counter Trump

    [ad_1]

    Former President Obama endorsed California Democrats’ plans to redraw congressional districts if Texas or another Republican-led state does so to increase the GOP’s chances of maintaining control of Congress after next year’s midterm election.

    Obama said that while he opposes partisan gerrymandering, Republicans in Texas acting at President Trump’s behest have forced Democrats’ hand.

    If Democrats “don’t respond effectively, then this White House and Republican-controlled state governments all across the country, they will not stop, because they do not appear to believe in this idea of an inclusive, expansive democracy,” he said at a fundraiser Tuesday in Martha’s Vineyard that was first reported by the Associated Press on Wednesday.

    “I wanted just a fair fight between Republicans and Democrats based on who’s got better ideas, and take it to the voters and see what happens,” Obama said, “… but we cannot unilaterally allow one of the two major parties to rig the game. And California is one of the states that has the capacity to offset a large state like Texas.”

    Redistricting typically only occurs once a decade, after the census, to account for population shifts. In 2010, Californians voted to create an independent redistricting commission to end partisan gerrymandering. California’s 52 congressional districts were last redrawn in 2021.

    Earlier this summer, Trump urged Texas leaders to redraw its congressional boundaries to increase the number of Republicans in Congress. Led by Gov. Gavin Newsom, California Democrats responded and proposed redrawing the state’s district lines and putting the matter before voters in a special election in November.

    The issue came to a head this week, with Texas lawmakers expected to vote on their new districts on Wednesday, and California legislators expected to vote on Thursday to call the special election.

    Obama called Newsom’s approach “responsible,” because the matter will ultimately be decided by voters, and if approved, would only go into effect if Texas or another state embarks on a mid-decade redistricting, and line-drawing would revert to the independent commission after the 2030 census.

    “I think that approach is a smart, measured approach, designed to address a very particular problem in a very particular moment in time,” Obama said.

    [ad_2]

    Seema Mehta

    Source link

  • Latest news on the Texas, California redistricting fights

    [ad_1]



    Latest news on the Texas, California redistricting fights – CBS News










































    Watch CBS News



    Texas Democratic lawmakers are still seeking ways to prevent the implementation of new congressional maps in the red state. This comes as California lawmakers prepare for a potential vote on redistricting. CBS News’ Hunter Woodall reports.

    [ad_2]
    Source link

  • Texas Republicans closer to voting on new maps following Democrat protests

    [ad_1]

    Texas Republicans appear to have a clear path forward to pass their new congressional maps as soon as Wednesday, as lawmakers are set to reconvene on the House floor. CBS News’ Hunter Woodall joins CBS Morning News with what to expect.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Commentary: Newsom’s redistricting move isn’t pretty. California GOP leaders are uglier

    [ad_1]

    King Gavin is at it again!

    That’s the cry coming from Republicans across California as Newsom pushes the state Legislature to approve a November special election like none this state has ever seen. Voters would have the chance to approve a congressional map drawn by Democrats hoping to wipe out GOP-held seats and counter Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s Trump-driven redistricting.

    The president “doesn’t play by a different set of rules — he doesn’t believe in the rules,” the governor told a roaring crowd packed with Democratic heavyweights last week at the Japanese American National Museum in Little Tokyo. “And as a consequence, we need to disabuse ourselves of the way things have been done. It’s not good enough to just hold hands, have a candlelight vigil and talk about the way the world should be. … We have got to meet fire with fire.”

    California Republicans are responding to this the way a kid reacts if you take away their Pikachu.

    “An absolutely ridiculous gerrymander!” whined Rep. Doug LaMalfa, who represents the state’s rural northeast corner, on social media. Under the Democratic plan, his district would swing all the way down to ultra-liberal Marin County.

    The California Republican Party deemed the new maps a “MASTERCLASS IN CORRUPTION” (Trumpian caps in the original). National Republican Congressional Committee spokesperson Christian Martinez said “Newscum” was giving “a giant middle finger to every Californian.”

    Intelligent minds can disagree on whether countering an extreme political move with an extreme political move is the right thing. The new maps would supersede the ones devised just four years ago by an independent redistricting commission established to keep politics out of the process, which typically occurs once a decade after the latest census.

    Good government types, from the League of Women Voters to Charles Munger Jr. — the billionaire who bankrolled the 2010 proposition that created independent redistricting for California congressional races — have criticized Newsom’s so-called Election Rigging Response Act. So has former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a fierce Trump critic who posted a photo of himself on social media working out in a T-shirt that read, “F*** the Politicians / Terminate Gerrymandering.”

    I’m not fully convinced that Newsom’s plan is the MAGA killer he thinks it is. If the economy somehow rebounds next year, Republicans would most likely keep Congress anyway, and Newsom would have upended California politics for nothing.

    I also don’t discount the moderate streak in California voters that pops up from time to time to quash what seem like liberal gimmes, like the failed attempt via ballot measure to repeal affirmative action in 2020 and the passage last year of Proposition 36, which increased penalties for theft and drug crimes. Nearly two-thirds of California voters want to keep redistricting away from the Legislature, according to a POLITICO-Citrin Center-Possibility Lab poll released last week.

    If Californians reject Newsom’s plan, that would torpedo his presidential ambitions and leave egg on the face of state Democratic leaders for years, if not a generation.

    For now, though, I’m going to enjoy all the tears that California Republicans are shedding. As they face the prospect of even fewer congressional seats than the paltry nine they now hold, they suddenly care about rescuing American democracy?

    In this image from video, Republican Rep. Doug LaMalfa speaks at the U.S. Capitol in 2020.

    (House Television via Associated Press)

    Where were they during Trump’s fusillade of lawsuits and threats against California? When he sent the National Guard and Marines to occupy parts of Los Angeles this summer after protests against his deportation deluge? When his underlings spew hate about the Golden State on Fox News and social media?

    Now they care about political decency? What about when LaMalfa and fellow California GOP House members Ken Calvert and Darrell Issa — whose seats the Newsom maps would also eliminate — voted against certifying Joe Biden’s 2020 victory? When the state Republican Party backed a ridiculous recall against Newsom that cost taxpayers $200 million? Or when the Republican congressional delegation unanimously voted to pass Trump’s Big Bloated Bill, even though it’s expected to gut healthcare and food programs for millions of Californians in red counties? Or even when Trump first pushed Abbott to pursue the very gerrymandering Newsom is now emulating?

    We’re supposed to believe them when they proclaim Newsom is a pompadoured potentate who threatens all Californians, just because he wants to redo congressional maps?

    Pot, meet black hole.

    If these GOPers had even an iota of decency or genuine care for the Golden State, they would back a bill by one of their own that I actually support. Rep. Kevin Kiley, whose seat is also targeted for elimination by the Newsom maps, wants to ban all mid-decade congressional redistricting. He stated via a press release that this would “stop a damaging redistricting war from breaking out across the country.”

    That’s an effort that any believer in liberty can and should back. But Kiley’s bill has no co-sponsors so far. And Kevin: Why can’t you say that your man Trump created this fiasco in the first place?

    We live in scary times for our democracy. If you don’t believe it, consider that a bunch of masked Border Patrol agents just happened to show up outside the Japanese American National Museum — situated on a historic site where citizens of Japanese ancestry boarded buses to incarceration camps during World War II — at the same time Newsom was delivering his redistricting remarks. Sector Chief Gregory Bovino was there, migra cameramen documenting his every smirk, including when he told a reporter that his agents were there to make “Los Angeles a safer place, since we won’t have politicians that’ll do that, we do that ourselves.”

    The show of force was so obviously an authoritarian flex that Newsom filed a Freedom of Information Act request demanding to know who authorized what and why. Meanwhile, referring to Trump, he described the action on X as “an attempt to advance a playbook from the despots he admires in Russia and North Korea.”

    Newsom is not everyone’s cup of horchata, myself included. Whether you support it or not, watching him rip up the California Constitution’s redistricting section and assuring us it’s OK, because he’s the one doing it, is discomfiting.

    But you know what’s worse? Trump anything. And even worse? The California GOP leaders who have loudly cheered him on, damn the consequences to the state they supposedly love.

    History will castigate their cultish devotion to Trump far worse than any of Newsom’s attempts to counter that scourge.

    [ad_2]

    Gustavo Arellano

    Source link

  • Social Security benefits could be cut in as soon as 7 years. Congress must act. | Our view

    [ad_1]

    The 90th anniversary of Social Security came and went Thursday, August 14, as did programs acknowledging and celebrating it.

    At a Columbus town hall on the program, U.S. Rep. Joyce Beatty reminded supporters and other seniors that President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans promised not to cut Social Security the same way they promised not to cut Medicaid, but did just that..

    “People are concerned, people are frustrated, people are scared and we’re talking about taking away, to quote what many of the participants said today, hard-earned money that they have worked for,” Beatty said.

    She’s right. People are concerned, frustrated and scared—and rightly so. That said, the problems with Social Security go beyond the fear of what Trump and GOP lawmakers may or may not do.

    The reality is Democrats and Republicans have failed Social Security, and benefits Americans receive could be dramatically slashed in as little as 7 years if lawmakers don’t act.

    Elected officials from both parties have an obligation to fix Social Security. Yet despite having had both the opportunity and the power, neither side has done so.

    The biggest countdown

    In May, AARP started counting down to the monumental day when Social Security, a benefit for retirees and those who can not work due to disabilities, was launched.

    A man holds back the hands of time on a large clock that stands in front of a large Social Security card. The image conveys the issues of the solvency of the social security system or a person’s invetibile march toward their eligiblity for social security.

    There is another countdown that should deeply concern Americans— our politicians in Congress, who can right the ship in particular.

    Since 2010, Social Security has distributed more money than it receives in taxes.

    If Republicans and Democrats in the Capitol continue to fail all Americans by punting the can down the road, the Social Security trust fund is projected to run dramatically short by 2034, a year earlier than the Social Security Administration reported in 2024.

    “At that time, the fund’s reserves will become depleted and continuing program income will be sufficient to pay 77% of total scheduled benefits,” the agency’s June report reads.

    In other words, Social Security benefits that seniors depend on will be cut by 23% within eight years.

    That projection is slightly better than the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget’s estimation that benefits will drop 24% within seven years.

    The think tank included the impact of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed July 4.

    Under the committee’s conclusions, a dual-earning couple retiring at the start of 2033 would see their annual benefits cut $18,100.

    People are frustrated, people are scared

    Younger Americans have long been skeptical about the future of Social Security. Now, those concerns are growing among older Americans.

    According to a  July 22 AARP survey, 96% of Americans consider Social Security important, but only 36% are confident in the future of the retirement trust fund.

    Of that, 25% of those ages 18 to 49 voiced confidence in the program’s future. That compares with 48% of those 50 and older.

    Sixty-six percent of retirees said they relied substantially on Social Security. Another 21% indicated they rely on it somewhat.

    A separate July survey from Alliance for Lifetime Income, found that 58% of Americans aged 45 to 75 fear Social Security will be cut due to the Trump administration’s recent actions.

    Fifty-two percent in that age range expressed less confidence in Social Security than they had five years ago.

    The coming crisis can be averted

    It will not be easy to shore up Social Security, but doing so is a necessity and should be a congressional priority to avoid the impact on 68 million recipients, the vast majority whom are retired workers or their dependents.

    The Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, has offered a list of suggestions for policymakers that includes slowing the growth of benefits over time, and raising the payroll tax rate or increasing the amount of earnings subject to the tax.

    Other experts have suggested that the retirement age should be gradually increased.

    A solution to that heads off the crisis will not be easy to reach, but the undertaking is worth it.

    Social Security has been there for Americans for nine decades — with Americans’ first receiving benefit checks from their taxes in 1937.

    If our elected representatives make the decisive acts required of them, it will be there for years to come.

    This editorial was written by Dispatch Opinion and Community Engagement Editor Amelia Robinson on behalf of the editorial board of The Columbus Dispatch. Editorials are fact-based assessments of issues of importance to the communities we serve. These are not the opinions of our reporting staff members, who strive for neutrality in their reporting.

    This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: Social Security may run out of money. Congress must save it | Our view

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Texas Democrat says she’s locked inside state Capitol after refusing mandatory DPS escort

    [ad_1]

    Democratic state Rep. Nicole Collier from Fort Worth returned to the Texas Capitol on Monday but says she remains locked inside the Capitol because she wouldn’t sign a permission slip to be under escort by the Texas Department of Public Safety. 

    The escorts for all House Democrats who left the state of Texas last month — preventing a vote on a GOP-led redistricting effort — are meant as a guarantee that they will return to the House by 10 a.m. Wednesday for the next special session.

    CBS News Texas spoke with Collier via Zoom on Monday, and she said the situation is wrong — just like the new Congressional maps she and other Democrats have tried to block from being passed. 

    “I have a right to resist, I have a right to oppose, just like my voters do, just like Texans have a right to challenge government, and that’s what I’m doing. I’m challenging these decisions that are being made. I don’t agree with them,” said Collier. 

    She continued, adding, “All the Democrats will be working together to get that legal record set so that we can take this fight to the court.”

    Collier also said that, according to DPS, she must stay in the House chambers or inside her office at the Capitol.

    CBS News Texas has reached out to DPS for comment.

    In a statement, the Texas House Democratic Caucus said the police escorts were the “latest Republican tactic to monitor and control Democratic lawmakers following their successful quorum break.”  

    Collier and dozens of other House Democrats who returned to the Capitol on Monday received a Texas-sized welcome from their supporters as they walked from the rotunda into the House chamber minutes before the House session began around noon.

    The Democrats had fled to blue states earlier this month after President Trump suggested the state should redraw its U.S. House district maps to secure more Republican seats. The Democrats had remained out of the state to deny Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott a quorum, temporarily derailing a special legislative session that the governor called to reshape the state’s congressional maps.

    The GOP-led redistricting effort would create five more Republican-leaning House seats ahead of the 2026 midterms. Republicans currently have a narrow majority in the House.

    Because the Democrats broke quorum for two weeks, there weren’t enough House members to hold the special session. On Monday, there were 120 members present on the floor, but 30 were still absent. 

    Rep. Gene Wu, the House Democratic Caucus chair, said their efforts to block the potential five Republican-leaning seats have now moved into their second phase, the legal phase.

    On Monday evening, the House Select Committee on Congressional Redistricting approved the new maps along party lines by a 12-8 margin. The legislation goes to the full House which could vote on the maps as early as Wednesday.

    The Texas Senate redistricting committee approved the maps on Sunday, and the full Senate will take them up sometime this week.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump says he’ll sign executive order aimed at eliminating mail-in ballots

    [ad_1]

    President Trump says he will sign an executive order aimed at eliminating voting through mail-in ballots ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, joins “The Takeout” to discuss.

    [ad_2]

    Source link