ReportWire

Tag: VOTE

  • Here are the Democratic candidates for Texas General Land Office commissioner

    [ad_1]

    TOPSHOT - An aerial view shows a destroyed home in Surfside Beach, Texas, on July 8, 2024, after Hurricane Beryl made landfall. Hurricane Beryl made landfall July 8 in the southern US state of Texas, killing at least two people and causing millions to lose power amid dangerous winds and flooding, as some coastal areas remained under evacuation orders. (Photo by Mark Felix / AFP) (Photo by MARK FELIX/AFP via Getty Images)

    TOPSHOT – An aerial view shows a destroyed home in Surfside Beach, Texas, on July 8, 2024, after Hurricane Beryl made landfall. Hurricane Beryl made landfall July 8 in the southern US state of Texas, killing at least two people and causing millions to lose power amid dangerous winds and flooding, as some coastal areas remained under evacuation orders. (Photo by Mark Felix / AFP) (Photo by MARK FELIX/AFP via Getty Images)


    MARK FELIX

    AFP via Getty Images

    Two Democrats are on the primary ballot for commissioner of the Texas General Land Office. The winner will be on the November ballot against Republican Dawn Buckingham.

    Here are the Democrats’ responses to a Star-Telegram questionnaire, in the order you’ll see them on the ballot.

    Jose Loya

    Age (as of March 3): 43

    Campaign website: www.joseloya.com

    Best way for voters to reach you: trevizo@joseloya.com

    Occupation: United Steelworkers Staff Representative District 13

    Education: I graduated from a Texas public high school in the Panhandle and went on to serve in the United States Marine Corps, where I gained the leadership and discipline that continue to guide my work.

    Have you run for elected office before? I have not

    Please list the highlights of your civic involvement/activism in Texas:

    1) Union staff representative in Texas, advocating for safer workplaces, fair wages, and worker dignity

    2) Represented Texas workers at the bargaining table, holding powerful corporate interests accountable

    3) Advocated for refinery, energy, and industrial workers across the state

    4) Worked with SLAM Media, supporting youth leadership, storytelling, and civic engagement through media and education

    Have you ever been arrested, charged with a crime or otherwise been part of a criminal proceeding? No.

    Have you been involved in a civil lawsuit or bankruptcy proceeding? No.

    Who are your top three campaign contributors? Texas Majority PAC, Vote Vets and voter contributions

    Why are you seeking this office? I am running for Texas Land Commissioner because working Texans deserve real representation in an office that manages public land, public resources, and public trust. Too often, decisions reflect the priorities of political insiders, billionaires, and millionaires instead of the people who rely on these resources every day.

    I grew up in a working-class family and attended Texas public schools. Like many Texans, my family depended on wages, not wealth, and learned the value of hard work, fairness, and accountability. Those experiences shaped my belief that government should serve everyday people, not those with money or influence.

    For years, I have worked to give working people a voice—standing with them at the bargaining table, fighting for safer workplaces, fair wages, and dignity on the job, and holding powerful interests accountable.

    I am seeking this office to bring transparency and accountability so public resources serve Texans, not special interests.

    If elected, what would your top 3 policy priorities be?

    If elected, my top priorities as Texas Land Commissioner will be transparency, support for veterans, and effective disaster recovery. The General Land Office manages public land, public school funding, and disaster relief, yet most Texans have little insight into how decisions are made. I will bring transparency and accountability to an office that should operate in the open and serve the public, not political insiders or wealthy interests.

    Supporting Texas veterans will be a core priority. As chair of the Texas Veterans Land Board, the Land Commissioner oversees programs that help veterans access home, land, and renovation loans. I will focus on outreach so veterans know these benefits exist, reduce delays, and ensure working-class and rural veterans can access the resources they’ve earned.

    Disaster recovery must work for communities, not bureaucracy. I will prioritize clear communication, accountability, and timely delivery of relief so Texans can rebuild and move forward.

    How will you measure your success as General Land Office commissioner?

    I will measure my success by clear, measurable improvements in how the General Land Office serves Texans. For veterans, success means expanding outreach and increasing the number of veterans who are accessing the benefits they’ve earned. That includes higher participation in home, land, and renovation loan programs and reducing the time it takes for veterans to receive assistance.

    For disaster recovery, success means resources are available and deployed faster. I will measure whether communities receive clear information, whether funds are released more quickly, and whether local leaders are involved in the recovery process so rebuilding reflects community needs.

    For public education, success means increasing revenue for Texas public schools through the Permanent School Fund by ensuring fair market value for public resources without raising taxes.

    Ultimately, success means an office that works better, faster, and more transparently for everyday Texans.

    Why should voters choose you over your opponents?

    Voters should choose me because I bring lived experience and working-class values to an office that has too often been dominated by political insiders and wealthy interests. I know what it means to depend on public systems, to work for a paycheck, and to fight for fairness because that has been my life.

    I grew up in a working-class family, attended Texas public schools, and spent my career standing with working people so they had a voice in decisions that affect their lives. I have represented workers at the bargaining table, held powerful interests accountable, and fought for dignity, safety, and fair pay. That experience matters in an office that manages public land, school funding, disaster recovery, and veteran programs.

    I don’t see this office as a stepping stone or political prize. I see it as a public trust. I’m running to bring transparency, accountability, and real representation to the General Land Office, so it works for everyday Texans, not special interests.

    What are Texans looking for and wanting most in their General Land Office commissioner?

    Most Texans don’t know what the General Land Office does and that’s part of the problem. While the office isn’t always visible, its decisions have a real impact on people’s lives, from disaster recovery and veteran benefits to public school funding and the management of public land.

    What Texans want most is an office that works clearly, honestly, and in the open. They want transparency in how decisions are made, faster and more reliable disaster recovery, and veteran programs that are easy to understand and access. Texans also want to know that public land and resources are being managed in a way that benefits schools and communities—not political insiders or special interests.

    Above all, Texans are looking for a General Land Office commissioner who treats the job as a public trust, communicates clearly, and puts everyday Texans first.

    What’s the biggest challenge the next General Land Office commissioner will face in Texas, and how would you address it if elected?

    The biggest challenge facing the next General Land Office commissioner is trust. The GLO manages public land, school funding, disaster recovery, and veteran programs, yet most Texans don’t know how decisions are made or who they serve. That lack of transparency creates confusion and delays.

    If elected, I will open up the office by making transparency the standard. That means clear reporting, straightforward communication with communities, and accountability, especially in disaster recovery and veteran services. Success means veterans can access earned benefits, communities know where they stand after disasters, and Texans can see how public resources support public schools.

    The General Land Office oversees several programs for veterans. How would you help veterans as commissioner?

    As commissioner, I would help veterans by making sure they actually know about and can access the benefits they’ve earned through the General Land Office. Too many veterans are unaware of programs like home, land, and renovation loans, or face unnecessary delays when they try to use them.

    I would prioritize proactive outreach so veterans across Texas, especially working-class and rural veterans, understand what resources are available to them. I would also focus on reducing wait times, improving communication, and making the process easier to navigate from start to finish.

    Success means more veterans signing up for these programs, fewer barriers to access, and a system that treats veterans with the respect and urgency they deserve.

    Please explain your priorities for managing the Permanent School Fund, if elected as commissioner?

    My priority in managing the Permanent School Fund will be to protect it, grow it responsibly, and ensure it is managed transparently in the best interest of Texas public school students. The Fund exists to support public education, and every decision should be made with that responsibility in mind.

    I will focus on ensuring Texas receives fair market value for the use of public lands and natural resources so the Fund continues to grow without raising taxes. That means holding corporations accountable, avoiding sweetheart deals, and making sure revenues are maximized for schools and classrooms.

    I will also prioritize transparency so Texans can clearly see how the Fund is managed, how revenues are generated, and how decisions impact public education. Success means a stronger, more accountable Permanent School Fund that reliably supports Texas schools today and for future generations.

    How would you approach disaster response and recovery as commissioner?

    As commissioner, my approach to disaster response and recovery would focus on speed, clarity, and accountability. Texans who have been impacted by disasters deserve timely help and clear information, not confusion or long delays.

    I would prioritize clear communication so communities know what resources are available, where they are in the recovery process, and what to expect next. I would also focus on reducing delays in releasing funds and ensuring disaster resources are ready to use as quickly as possible.

    Just as important, I would work closely with local leaders and communities to make sure recovery efforts reflect real needs on the ground. Success means relief reaches Texans faster, the process is easier to navigate, and communities can rebuild with confidence.

    What role, if any, should the General Land Office play in securing the Texas-Mexico border?

    The General Land Office should not play a role in securing the Texas/Mexico border. Border security is not the mission of the GLO, and using this office for that purpose distracts from its core responsibilities, managing public land, supporting public education, assisting veterans, and overseeing disaster recovery.

    Texans are best served when the GLO office stays focused on the work it is designed to do and carries out those duties transparently, effectively, and in the public interest.

    Benjamin Flores

    Age (as of March 3): 50

    Campaign website: letsgowithben.com

    Best way for voters to reach you: My website or my facebook page www.facebook.com/benfloresforlandcom

    Occupation: Councilman, pig farmer, technologist

    Education: Bachelor in Cybersecurity and Information Assurance, multiple tech and industry related certifications

    Have you run for elected office before? Yes. I’m currently serving my third year as Bay City Councilman

    Please list the highlights of your civic involvement/activism in Texas:

    I serve on the Bay City Development Corporation board and represent our region on the Houston-Galveston Area Council. I completed CERT training and EMT academy before moving to Texas because I believe in being useful when things go wrong. That mindset hasn’t changed. During Hurricane Beryl in 2024, my family and I helped seniors in our neighborhood clear driveways and home entrances. I also run a small heritage pig farm with my family, which has given me firsthand experience with agricultural policy and the Texas Right to Farm Act.

    Have you ever been arrested, charged with a crime or otherwise been part of a criminal proceeding? No

    Have you been involved in a civil lawsuit or bankruptcy proceeding? Yes. My wife and I are defendants in a civil nuisance lawsuit regarding our heritage pig farm in Matagorda County (130th District Court). The case involves the Texas Right to Farm Act. The lawsuit was filed in April 2024 and is tentatively set for trial in May 2026. We dispute the plaintiffs’ claims and are vigorously defending our agricultural operation. Our story was featured in the April 2025 issue of Texas Monthly.

    Who are your top three campaign contributors? After my family, the next top contributors are Domingo Garcia and Liberal Austin Democrats.

    Why are you seeking this office?

    I’ve spent almost 30 years managing risk for a living. The GLO manages a $50+ billion fund for public schools, runs veterans programs, and handles disaster recovery. These responsibilities require professional stewardship, not political theater. The Permanent School Fund could generate more revenue if we diversified leasing beyond oil and gas. Wind and solar would bring steadier income. That’s money for Texas classrooms left on the table. We’ve seen what happens when the GLO isn’t ready for disasters. After Harvey, communities waited years for recovery funds while the feds flagged problems with how Texas managed the money. Living through Beryl in Matagorda reinforced what local communities actually need when storms hit. I immigrated from Mexico City in 1996, became a citizen, built a career, and now serve as a councilman. My mother taught me “nunca seas agachado” or never bow down, never accept less than you deserve. Texans deserve a Land Commissioner who shows up for the actual job.

    If elected, what would your top 3 policy priorities be?

    First, bringing more revenue into the Permanent School Fund through lease diversification. State lands currently generate income mostly from oil and gas, but wind and solar leases would provide steadier returns without commodity price swings. Every new dollar goes to Texas classrooms, some help with your property taxes. Second, overhauling how the Veterans Land Board serves our veterans. Too many vets face delays when trying to buy homes or access care they’ve earned. We need faster processing and systems that treat veterans like valued clients. Third, strengthening disaster preparedness. After Harvey, we saw communities wait years for recovery funds. The GLO needs plans and resources ready before storms hit, clear coordination with federal and local partners, and faster reimbursement for communities doing the hard work. Living through Beryl gave me firsthand lessons about what works and what doesn’t.

    How will you measure your success as General Land Office commissioner?

    Numbers. Numbers. And numbers. They don’t lie. I’ll track new revenue streams coming into the Permanent School Fund from diversified leasing. If we’re leaving money on the table, I want to know why. For veterans programs, I’ll measure processing times for loans and applications. Veterans shouldn’t wait months for answers. On disaster recovery, I’ll track how fast we get federal dollars to local communities after storms. Harvey showed us what happens when that process breaks down. I’ll measure satisfaction from the cities and counties we’re helping. I come from a world where audits and metrics matter. Texans deserve transparency about whether their Land Commissioner is doing the job.

    Why should voters choose you over your opponents?

    I live in Matagorda County. When Hurricane Beryl hit, I didn’t watch it on TV from Austin. I was there. My family was there. I saw firsthand how disaster response failures hurt real people in real time. That’s the fundamental difference in this race. I’m running to solve problems I’ve lived through. I’ve invested my own savings into this campaign because I believe Texans need independent leadership, not another rubber stamp for special interests. I have skin in the game. As a Bay City Councilman, I know where local systems break down. Whether it’s disaster recovery, funding our schools, or serving our veterans, I have almost 30 years of risk management experience to fix it. I earned my way onto this ballot. I’m not here because a political broker tapped me on the shoulder. I’ll be a Land Commissioner who answers to Texans, not to political sponsors or PAC money.

    What are Texans looking for and wanting most in their General Land Office commissioner?

    Most Texans don’t know who the Land Commissioner is or what the GLO does. They’ve never heard of the Permanent School Fund or the Veterans Land Board. And honestly, that’s fine. Government should work well enough that people don’t have to pay attention to every agency. But when disaster recovery is slow or veterans can’t get help, Texans notice something’s broken even if they don’t know which office to blame. What Texans want is quiet competence. Someone who manages their tax dollars responsibly and treats their fellow Texans with respect. They’re tired of officials who chase headlines instead of doing their homework. The GLO isn’t supposed to be exciting. It’s supposed to be reliable.

    What’s the biggest challenge the next General Land Office commissioner will face in Texas, and how would you address it if elected?

    Texas weather is getting more extreme, and our coast is getting hit harder. That’s what insurance companies tell us when they raise rates or leave the state entirely. The next commissioner must prepare for more frequent disasters while managing long term coastal erosion. Harvey showed us what happens when disaster recovery fails. Communities waited years for help while federal auditors flagged mismanagement. We can’t repeat those mistakes. I’ll work with coastal communities on realistic planning and coordinate with federal partners before disasters hit. Living through Beryl reinforced these lessons for me personally. I’ll also diversify Permanent School Fund revenue so classrooms benefit from wind and solar leases, not just oil and gas. Smarter management means more money for schools.

    The General Land Office oversees several programs for veterans. How would you help veterans as commissioner?

    I’ve already been meeting with veterans across Texas, listening to what they actually need. The message is clear: we need a VA hospital in the Valley and a new assisted living home in the Coastal Bend. The Land Commissioner doesn’t control VA hospital funding, but I’ll be a strong advocate. Veterans homes are squarely within the GLO’s responsibilities, and I’ll push for expansion where it’s needed. The Veterans Land Board also runs land loans and home improvement loans. On paper, great benefits. In practice, too many veterans face delays and confusion. I’d fix processing times and staffing so applications don’t sit in queues for months. And I’d improve outreach. Many veterans don’t know these programs exist. That’s on us to fix. These are Texans who served us. They deserve better than bureaucratic runaround.

    Please explain your priorities for managing the Permanent School Fund, if elected as commissioner?

    The Permanent School Fund is one of the largest education endowments in the country. My priority is bringing in more revenue through smarter land management. State lands currently generate income mostly from oil and gas leases. But wind and solar leases would provide additional, steadier revenue streams. This isn’t about replacing traditional energy. It’s about not leaving money on the table. Every new dollar supports Texas classrooms. I’ll also improve transparency. Texas families should see how their fund is managed through public dashboards and clear reporting. And I’ll seek independent analysis of our investment strategies, not just internal reports. The fund belongs to Texas schoolchildren. Every decision should start with that in mind.

    How would you approach disaster response and recovery as commissioner?

    The same way I approached it as a Councilman. Shortly after joining the council, I reviewed our incident response plan, found it woefully outdated, and stayed on it until we got it updated. After Beryl hit, I asked for a quick after-action report at our first meeting back and pushed for a formal Lessons Learned review for over a year. That’s how I operate. Preparation before the storm, honest assessment after. It comes from my almost 30 years in cybersecurity incident response and my CERT training. You plan, you drill, you respond, and then you figure out what went wrong so you’re better next time. I’ll build relationships with disaster-prone communities before anything happens. You don’t want the first conversation with a coastal mayor to be during a crisis. I’ll visit these communities, understand their specific vulnerabilities, and make sure they know who to call and what to expect from the GLO. Harvey showed what happens when this breaks down. I won’t let that happen again.

    What role, if any, should the General Land Office play in securing the Texas-Mexico border?

    Border security already involves multiple agencies at the federal, state, and local level. CBP, Border Patrol, DPS, the National Guard, local sheriffs. Adding the Land Commissioner to that mix doesn’t make Texas safer. It just diverts attention from what the GLO is actually supposed to do. The Permanent School Fund could generate more revenue for classrooms through lease diversification. Veterans are waiting too long for home loans. Coastal communities need better disaster preparation. Those are the GLO’s real responsibilities, and they’re not getting done while the commissioner chases border headlines or talks about building detention camps on state land. I immigrated from Mexico. Border issues aren’t simple. But Texans would benefit more from a Land Commissioner who focuses on delivering results where the agency actually has a job to do.

    [ad_2]

    Eleanor Dearman

    Source link

  • California leaders decry Trump call to ‘nationalize’ election, say they’re ready to resist

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — President Trump’s repeated calls to “nationalize” elections drew swift resistance from California officials this week, who said they are ready to fight should the federal government attempt to assert control over the state’s voting system.

    “We would win that on Day One,” California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta told The Times. “We would go into court and we would get a restraining order within hours, because the U.S. Constitution says that states predominantly determine the time, place and manner of elections, not the president.”

    “We’re prepared to do whatever we have to do in California,” said California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, whose office recently fought off a Justice Department lawsuit demanding California’s voter rolls and other sensitive voter information.

    Both Bonta and Weber said their offices are closely watching for any federal action that could affect voting in California, including efforts to seize election records, as the FBI recently did in Georgia, or target the counting of mailed ballots, which Trump has baselessly alleged are a major source of fraud.

    Weber said California plays an outsized role in the nation and is “the place that people want to beat,” including through illegitimate court challenges to undermine the state’s vote after elections, but California has fought off such challenges in the past and is ready to do it again.

    “There’s a cadre of attorneys that are already, that are always prepared during our elections to hit the courts to defend anything that we’re doing,” she said. “Our election teams, they do cross the T’s, dot the I’s. They are on it.”

    “We have attorneys ready to be deployed wherever there’s an issue,” Bonta said, noting that his office is in touch with local election officials to ensure a rapid response if necessary.

    The standoff reflects an extraordinary deterioration of trust and cooperation in elections that has existed between state and federal officials for generations — and follows a remarkable doubling down by Trump after his initial remarks about taking over the elections raised alarm.

    Trump has long alleged, without evidence and despite multiple independent reviews concluding the opposite, that the 2020 election was stolen from him. He has alleged, again without evidence, that millions of fraudulent votes were cast, including by non-citizen voters, and that blue states looked the other way to gain political advantage.

    Last week, the Justice Department acted on those claims by raiding the Fulton County, Ga., elections hub and seizing 2020 ballots. The department also has sued states, including California, for their voter rolls, and is defending a Trump executive order seeking to end mail voting and add new proof of citizenship requirements for registering to vote, which California and other states have sued to block.

    On Monday, Trump further escalated his pressure campaign by saying on former FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino’s podcast that Republicans should “take over the voting in at least 15 places,” alleging that voting irregularities in what he called “crooked states” are hurting his party. “The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting.”

    On Tuesday morning, Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, appeared to try to walk back Trump’s comments, saying he had been referring to the Save Act, a measure being pushed by Republicans in Congress to codify Trump’s proof-of-citizenship requirements. However, Trump doubled down later that day, telling reporters that if states “can’t count the votes legally and honestly, then somebody else should take over.”

    Bonta said Trump’s comments were a serious escalation, not just bluster: “We always knew they were going to come after us on something, so this is just an affirmation of that — and maybe they are getting a step closer.”

    Bonta said he will especially be monitoring races in the state’s swing congressional districts, which could play a role in determining control of Congress and therefore be a target of legal challenges.

    “The strategy of going after California isn’t rational unless you’re going after a couple of congressional seats that you think will make a difference in the balance of power in the House,” Bonta said.

    California Democrats in Congress have stressed that the state’s elections are safe and reliable, but also started to express unease about upcoming election interference by the administration.

    Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) said on “Meet the Press” last week that he believes the administration will try to use “every tool in their toolbox to try and interfere,” but that the American people will “overcome it by having a battalion of lawyers at the polls.”

    California Sen. Adam Schiff this week said recent actions by the Trump administration — including the Fulton County raid, where Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard put Trump on the phone with agents — were “wrong” and set off “alarm bells about their willingness to interfere in the next election.”

    Democrats have called on their Republican colleagues to help push back against such interference.

    “When he says that we should nationalize the elections and Republicans should take over, and you don’t make a peep? What is going on here?” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Tuesday. “This is the path that has ruined many a democracy, and our democracy is deep and strong, but it requires — and allows — resistance to these things. Verbal resistance, electoral resistance. Where are you?”

    Some Republicans have voiced their disagreement with Trump. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said Tuesday that he is “supportive of only citizens voting and showing ID at polling places,” but is “not in favor of federalizing elections,” which he called “a constitutional issue.”

    “I’m a big believer in decentralized and distributed power. And I think it’s harder to hack 50 election systems than it is to hack one,” he said.

    However, other Republican leaders have commiserated with Trump over his qualms with state-run elections. House Majority Leader Mike Johnson (R-La.), for example, took aim at California’s system for counting mail-in ballots in the days following elections, questioning why such counting led to Republican leads in House races being “magically whittled away until their leads were lost.”

    “It looks on its face to be fraudulent. Can I prove that? No, because it happened so far upstream,” Johnson said. “But we need more confidence in the American people in the election system.”

    Elections experts expressed dismay over Johnson’s comments, calling them baseless and illogical. The fact that candidates who are leading in votes can fall behind as more votes are counted is not magic but math, they said — with Democrats agreeing.

    “Speaker Johnson seems to be confused, so let me break it down. California’s elections are safe and secure. The point of an election is to make sure *every* eligible vote cast is counted, not to count fast,” Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) wrote on X. “We don’t just quit while we’re ahead. It’s called a democracy.”

    Democrats have also expressed concern that the administration could use the U.S. Postal Service to interfere with counting mail-in ballots. They have specifically raised questions about a rule issued by the postal service last December that deems mail postmarked on the day it is processed by USPS, rather than the day it is received — which would impact mail-in ballots in places such as California, where ballots must be postmarked by election day to be counted.

    “Election officials are already concerned and warning that this change could ultimately lead to higher mailed ballots being rejected,” Senate Democrats wrote to U.S. Postal Service Postmaster General David Steiner last month.

    Some experts and state officials said voters should make a plan to vote early, and consider dropping their ballots in state ballot drop boxes or delivering them directly to voting centers.

    [ad_2]

    Ana Ceballos, Kevin Rector

    Source link

  • Shutdown nears as lawmakers brace for next round of ICE negotiations

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — A budget impasse in Congress is poised to halt large swaths of federal operations early Saturday as lawmakers in Capitol Hill turn to the next flashpoint in negotiations to reopen the government: whether to impose new limits on federal immigration authorities carrying out President Trump’s deportation campaign.

    Over the next two weeks, Democrats and Republicans will weigh competing demands on how the Department of Homeland Security should carry out arrests, detention and deportations after the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens by federal immigration agents this month in Minnesota.

    Seeking to rein in the federal agency, Senate Democrats late on Thursday were able to strike a deal with the White House that would temporarily fund the Department of Homeland Security but fund the Pentagon, the State Department, as well as the health, education, labor and transportation agencies through Sept. 30.

    The agreement is intended to give lawmakers more time to address Democratic demands to curb ICE tactics while averting a partial government shutdown.

    The Senate finalized the deal Friday evening on a 71-29 vote, hours before a midnight deadline to avert a government shutdown. Passage of the deal was delayed by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who objected to parts of the package.

    The House expected to take up the legislation as early as Monday. The partial government shutdown will occur until the measure clears the House and Trump signs it into law.

    The president supports the deal, which came after Senate Democrats said they would not vote to fund Homeland Security unless reforms for the agency were approved. Among the demands: banning federal agents from wearing masks, requiring use of body cameras and requiring use of judicial warrants prior to searching homes and making arrests.

    Democrats have also demanded that local and state law enforcement officials be given the ability to conduct independent investigations in cases where federal agents are accused of wrongdoing.

    The deal, however, does not include any of those reforms; it includes only the promise of more time to negotiate with no guarantee that the new restrictions will be agreed to.

    Both of California’s Democratic senators, Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla, voted against the Senate deal. They both opposed giving more funding to Homeland Security without reforms in a vote Thursday.

    Schiff voted no because he said he promised to not “give another dime for ICE until we saw real reforms — and not just promised reforms but statutory requirements.”

    “I want to see those reforms before I am prepared to support any more funding for these agencies,” Schiff said in a video message posted on X, and added that he did not see the White House acting in “good faith. “I want it in writing and statute.”

    After voting against the measure, Padilla said in a statement: “I’ve been clear from the beginning: No more money for ICE and CBP without real oversight and accountability.”

    House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) told reporters Friday morning that Democrats will find out whether two weeks is enough time to reach a compromise.

    “We will evaluate whether that is sufficient time,” Jeffries said. “But there is urgency to dealing with this issue because ICE as we have seen is out of control.”

    Meanwhile, the absence of reforms in the Senate deal has already drawn concerns from some progressives, who argue the deal falls short of what is needed to rein in federal immigration enforcement.

    “First of all, I’m actually disappointed that Senate leadership is not right now demanding more,” Rep. Robert Garcia, a top-ranking House Democrat from Long Beach, told reporters Friday. “This idea that we’re somehow going to continue to fund this agency and somehow just extend the pain, I think is absolutely wrong.”

    Garcia said it was “outrageous” that the Senate deal would extend funding for Homeland Security for two weeks without any new requirements.

    “This idea that we’re somehow not demanding immediately the removal of masks and body cameras and all the other reforms while eliminating this agency that’s causing harm, I think, is outrageous,” Garcia said.

    Democratic Rep. Judy Chu of Pasadena said in a statement that she had not yet decided whether to support the Senate deal once it reaches the House floor.

    But, Chu added: “I cannot support legislation that increases funding to this agency while delivering no accountability measures.”

    Rep. Kevin Calvert (R-Corona) said in a statement that it is “critical” for lawmakers to pass the bipartisan spending package, in part because it included funding for the U.S. military.

    “As Chairman of the [House] Defense Appropriation Subcommittee, I’m especially concerned about the negative impacts of a shutdown at a time when we have a buildup of American military assets in the Middle East,” Calvert said.

    Calvert added that Homeland Security operations will continue even in the shutdown because lawmakers provided an influx of funding for the agency in last year’s “One Big Beautiful Bill.” But he said he worried that any lapse in funding would affect other operations by the agency, including disaster funding and security assistance for major events, such as the upcoming World Cup.

    “We need to get these priorities funded,” he said.

    Other Republican lawmakers have already signaled the possible hurdles Democrats will face as they try to rein in ICE.

    Graham held up consideration of the Senate deal, in part because he wanted the Senate to vote to criminalize local and state officials in sanctuary cities — a term that has no strict definition but that generally describes local jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

    “You can convince me that ICE can be better, but I don’t think I will ever convince you to abandon sanctuary cities because you’re wedded to it on the Democratic side,” Graham said.

    Graham also delayed passage of the deal because it included a repeal of a law that would have allowed senators — including himself — to sue the government if federal investigators gained access to their phones without notifying them. The law required senators to be notified if that were to happen and sue for up to $50,000 in damages per incident.

    “We’ll fix the $500,000 — count me in — but you took the notification out,” Graham said. “I am demanding a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.”

    Other Senate Republicans also expressed concern with Democrats’ demands, even as Trump seemed to try appease them.

    Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) said the demand for federal agents to remove their masks during operations was a “clear and obvious attempt to intimidate and put our federal agents in harm’s way.”

    “When enforcement becomes dangerous for enforcers, enforcement does not survive,” Schmitt said in a Senate floor speech. “What emerges is not reform, it is amnesty by default.”

    Despite the GOP opposition, most Senate Republicans were poised to join Democrats on Friday and vote for the deal. But there is no certainty that they will join the minority party when negotiations resume in the coming weeks.

    Recent history suggests that bipartisan support at the outset does not guarantee a lasting deal, particularly when unresolved policy disputes remain. The last government shutdown tied to a debate over healthcare exposed how quickly negotiations can collapse when no agreement is reached.

    In November, a small group of Democrats voted with Republicans to end the longest government shutdown in U.S. history with the promise of negotiating an extension to healthcare tax credits that were set to expire in the new year.

    Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Franciso), a former House speaker, reminded the public on Friday that Democrats were unable to get Republican support for extending the tax credits, resulting in increasing healthcare costs for millions of Americans.

    “House Democrats passed a bipartisan fix, yet Senate Republicans continue to block this critical relief for millions of Americans,” Pelosi wrote in a post on X.

    Times staff writer Seema Mehta contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Ana Ceballos

    Source link

  • Democrats poised to trigger government shutdown if White House won’t meet demands for ICE reform

    [ad_1]

    Senate Democrats are threatening to block legislation that would fund the Department of Homeland Security and several other agencies Thursday, potentially bringing the government a step closer to a partial shutdown if Republicans and the White House do not agree to new restrictions on President Donald Trump’s surge of immigration enforcement.As the country reels from the deaths of two protesters at the hands of federal agents in Minneapolis, irate Senate Democrats laid out a list of demands ahead of a Thursday morning test vote, including that officers take off their masks and identify themselves and obtain warrants for arrest. If those are not met, Democrats say they are prepared to block the wide-ranging spending bill, denying Republicans the votes they need to pass it and triggering a shutdown at midnight on Friday.Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said Wednesday that Democrats won’t provide needed votes until U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is “reined in and overhauled.”“The American people support law enforcement, they support border security, they do not support ICE terrorizing our streets and killing American citizens,” Schumer said.There were some signs of possible progress as the White House has appeared open to trying to strike a deal with Democrats to avert a shutdown. The two sides were talking as of Wednesday evening, according to a person familiar with the negotiations who requested anonymity to speak about the private talks. One possible option discussed would be to strip the funding for the Homeland Security Department from the larger bill, as Schumer has requested, and extend it for a short period to allow time for negotiations, the person said. The rest of the bill would fund government agencies until September.Still, with no agreement yet and an uncertain path ahead, the standoff threatened to plunge the country into another shutdown just two months after Democrats blocked a spending bill over expiring federal health care subsidies, a dispute that closed the government for 43 days as Republicans refused to negotiate.That shutdown ended when a small group of moderate Democrats broke away to strike a deal with Republicans, but Democrats are more unified this time after the fatal shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good by federal agents.Democrats lay out their demandsThere’s a lot of “unanimity and shared purpose” within the Democratic caucus, Minnesota Sen. Tina Smith said after a lunch meeting Wednesday.“Boil it all down, what we are talking about is that these lawless ICE agents should be following the same rules that your local police department does,” Smith said. “There has to be accountability.”Amid the administration’s immigration crackdown, Schumer said Democrats are asking the White House to “end roving patrols” in cities and coordinate with local law enforcement on immigration arrests, including requiring tighter rules for warrants.Democrats also want an enforceable code of conduct so agents are held accountable when they violate rules. Schumer said agents should be required to have “masks off, body cameras on” and carry proper identification, as is common practice in most law enforcement agencies.The Democratic caucus is united in those “common sense reforms” and the burden is on Republicans to accept them, Schumer said, as he has pushed for the Homeland spending to be separated out to avoid a broader shutdown.Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has indicated that he might be open to considering some of the Democrats’ demands, but he encouraged Democrats and the White House to talk and find agreement.Many obstacles to a dealAs the two sides negotiated, it was still unclear whether they could agree on anything that would satisfy Democrats who want Trump’s aggressive crackdown to end.The White House had invited some Democrats for a discussion to better understand their positions and avoid a partial government shutdown, a senior White House official said, but the meeting did not happen. The official requested anonymity to discuss the private invitation.The House passed the six remaining funding bills last week and sent them to the Senate as a package, making it more difficult to strip out the homeland security portion as Democrats have demanded. Republicans could break the package apart with the consent of all 100 senators or through a series of votes that would extend past the Friday deadline.Even if the Senate can resolve the issue, House Republicans have said they do not want any changes to the bill they have passed. In a letter to Trump on Tuesday, the conservative House Freedom Caucus wrote that its members stand with the president and ICE.“The package will not come back through the House without funding for the Department of Homeland Security,” according to the letter.Republican oppositionSeveral Republican senators have said they would be fine with Democrats’ request to separate the Homeland Security funds for further debate and pass the other bills in the package. But it might be more difficult to for Democrats to find broad GOP support for their demands on ICE.North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis said he’s OK with separating the bills, but is opposed to the Democrats’ proposal to require the immigration enforcement officers to unmask and show their faces, even as he blamed Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem for decisions that he said are “tarnishing” the agency’s reputation.“You know, there’s a lot of vicious people out there, and they’ll take a picture of your face, and the next thing you know, your children or your wife or your husband are being threatened at home,” Tillis said. “And that’s just the reality of the world that we’re in.”Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas said that “what happened over the weekend is a tragedy,” but Democrats shouldn’t punish Americans with a shutdown and a “political stunt.”Democrats say they won’t back down.“It is truly a moral moment,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn. “I think we need to take a stand.”___Associated Press writer Michelle Price in Washington contributed to this report.

    WASHINGTON —

    Senate Democrats are threatening to block legislation that would fund the Department of Homeland Security and several other agencies Thursday, potentially bringing the government a step closer to a partial shutdown if Republicans and the White House do not agree to new restrictions on President Donald Trump’s surge of immigration enforcement.

    As the country reels from the deaths of two protesters at the hands of federal agents in Minneapolis, irate Senate Democrats laid out a list of demands ahead of a Thursday morning test vote, including that officers take off their masks and identify themselves and obtain warrants for arrest. If those are not met, Democrats say they are prepared to block the wide-ranging spending bill, denying Republicans the votes they need to pass it and triggering a shutdown at midnight on Friday.

    Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said Wednesday that Democrats won’t provide needed votes until U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is “reined in and overhauled.”

    “The American people support law enforcement, they support border security, they do not support ICE terrorizing our streets and killing American citizens,” Schumer said.

    There were some signs of possible progress as the White House has appeared open to trying to strike a deal with Democrats to avert a shutdown. The two sides were talking as of Wednesday evening, according to a person familiar with the negotiations who requested anonymity to speak about the private talks. One possible option discussed would be to strip the funding for the Homeland Security Department from the larger bill, as Schumer has requested, and extend it for a short period to allow time for negotiations, the person said. The rest of the bill would fund government agencies until September.

    Still, with no agreement yet and an uncertain path ahead, the standoff threatened to plunge the country into another shutdown just two months after Democrats blocked a spending bill over expiring federal health care subsidies, a dispute that closed the government for 43 days as Republicans refused to negotiate.

    That shutdown ended when a small group of moderate Democrats broke away to strike a deal with Republicans, but Democrats are more unified this time after the fatal shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good by federal agents.

    Democrats lay out their demands

    There’s a lot of “unanimity and shared purpose” within the Democratic caucus, Minnesota Sen. Tina Smith said after a lunch meeting Wednesday.

    “Boil it all down, what we are talking about is that these lawless ICE agents should be following the same rules that your local police department does,” Smith said. “There has to be accountability.”

    Amid the administration’s immigration crackdown, Schumer said Democrats are asking the White House to “end roving patrols” in cities and coordinate with local law enforcement on immigration arrests, including requiring tighter rules for warrants.

    Democrats also want an enforceable code of conduct so agents are held accountable when they violate rules. Schumer said agents should be required to have “masks off, body cameras on” and carry proper identification, as is common practice in most law enforcement agencies.

    The Democratic caucus is united in those “common sense reforms” and the burden is on Republicans to accept them, Schumer said, as he has pushed for the Homeland spending to be separated out to avoid a broader shutdown.

    Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has indicated that he might be open to considering some of the Democrats’ demands, but he encouraged Democrats and the White House to talk and find agreement.

    Many obstacles to a deal

    As the two sides negotiated, it was still unclear whether they could agree on anything that would satisfy Democrats who want Trump’s aggressive crackdown to end.

    The White House had invited some Democrats for a discussion to better understand their positions and avoid a partial government shutdown, a senior White House official said, but the meeting did not happen. The official requested anonymity to discuss the private invitation.

    The House passed the six remaining funding bills last week and sent them to the Senate as a package, making it more difficult to strip out the homeland security portion as Democrats have demanded. Republicans could break the package apart with the consent of all 100 senators or through a series of votes that would extend past the Friday deadline.

    Even if the Senate can resolve the issue, House Republicans have said they do not want any changes to the bill they have passed. In a letter to Trump on Tuesday, the conservative House Freedom Caucus wrote that its members stand with the president and ICE.

    “The package will not come back through the House without funding for the Department of Homeland Security,” according to the letter.

    Republican opposition

    Several Republican senators have said they would be fine with Democrats’ request to separate the Homeland Security funds for further debate and pass the other bills in the package. But it might be more difficult to for Democrats to find broad GOP support for their demands on ICE.

    North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis said he’s OK with separating the bills, but is opposed to the Democrats’ proposal to require the immigration enforcement officers to unmask and show their faces, even as he blamed Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem for decisions that he said are “tarnishing” the agency’s reputation.

    “You know, there’s a lot of vicious people out there, and they’ll take a picture of your face, and the next thing you know, your children or your wife or your husband are being threatened at home,” Tillis said. “And that’s just the reality of the world that we’re in.”

    Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas said that “what happened over the weekend is a tragedy,” but Democrats shouldn’t punish Americans with a shutdown and a “political stunt.”

    Democrats say they won’t back down.

    “It is truly a moral moment,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn. “I think we need to take a stand.”

    ___

    Associated Press writer Michelle Price in Washington contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Contributor: A Senate war powers resolution on Venezuela actually could curb Trump

    [ad_1]

    President Trump seemed angry after the Senate voted last Thursday to pass a war powers resolution to the next stage, where lawmakers could approve the measure and seek to curb the president’s ability to wage war in Venezuela without congressional authorization.

    Trump said that day that five Republican senators who supported bringing the measure to a vote — Susan Collins (Maine), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Rand Paul (Ky.), Josh Hawley (Mo.) and Todd Young (Ind.) — “should never be elected to office again.”

    Why should he get so riled up about this, to the point where he could put his own party’s control of the Senate at risk in November? Even if this resolution were to pass both houses of Congress, he could veto it and ultimately be unrestrained. He did this in 2019, when a war powers resolution mandating that the U.S. military cease its participation in the war in Yemen was passed in both the Senate and the House. Many people think that such legislation therefore can’t make a difference.

    But the president’s ire is telling. These political moves on the Hill can get results even before the resolution has a final vote, or if it is vetoed by the president.

    The Trump administration made significant concessions before the 2019 resolution was approved by Congress, in an attempt to prevent it from passing. For instance, months before it was approved, the U.S. military stopped refueling Saudi warplanes in midair. These concessions de-escalated the war and saved tens of thousands of lives.

    A war powers resolution is an act of Congress that is based on a 1973 law of the same name. That law spells out and reinforces the power that our Constitution has allocated to Congress, to decide when the U.S. military can be involved in hostilities.

    The U.S. military raid in Caracas that seized Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, is illegal according to international law, the charters of the Organization of American States and the United Nations, as well as other treaties to which the United States is a signatory. According to our own Constitution, the government violates U.S. law when it violates treaties that our government has signed.

    None of that restrained the Trump administration, which has not demonstrated much respect for the rule of law. But the White House does care about the political power of Congress. If there is an expanded war in Venezuela or anywhere else that Trump has threatened to use the military, the fact that Congress took steps to oppose it will increase the political cost to the president.

    This is likely one of the main reasons that the Trump administration has at least promised to make concessions regarding military action in Latin America — and who knows, possibly he did make some compromises compared with what had been planned.

    On Nov. 5, the day before the Senate was to vote on a war powers resolution to halt and prevent hostilities within or against Venezuela by U.S. armed forces, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and White House counsel had a private briefing with senators.

    They assured lawmakers that they were not going to have a land war or airstrikes in Venezuela. According to news reports, the White House counsel stated that they did not have a legal justification for such a war. It is clear that blocking the resolution was very important to these top officials. The day after that meeting, the war powers resolution was blocked by two votes. Two Republicans had joined the Democrats and independents in support of the resolution: Murkowski and Paul. That added up to 49 votes — not quite the needed majority.

    But on Thursday, there were three additional Republicans who voted for the new resolution, so it will proceed to a final vote.

    The war powers resolution is not just a political fight, but a matter of life and death. The blockade involved in the seizure of oil tankers is, according to experts, an unlawful use of military force. This means that the blockade would be included as a participation in hostilities that would require authorization from Congress.

    Since 2015, the United States has imposed unilateral economic sanctions that destroyed Venezuela’s economy. From 2012 to 2020, Venezuela suffered the worst peacetime depression in world history. Real (inflation-adjusted) GDP, or income, fell by 74%. Think of the economic destruction of the U.S. Great Depression, multiplied by three times. Most of this was the result of the sanctions.

    This unprecedented devastation is generally attributed to Maduro in public discussion. But U.S. sanctions deliberately cut Venezuela off from international finance, as well as blocking most of its oil sales, which accounted for more than 90% of foreign exchange (mostly dollar) earnings. This devastated the economy.

    In the first year of Trump sanctions from 2017-18, Venezuela’s deaths increased by tens of thousands of people, at a time when oil prices were increasing. Sanctions were expanded even more the following year. About a quarter of the population, more than 7 million people, emigrated after 2015 — 750,000 of them to the United States.

    We know that the deadly impact of sanctions that target the civilian population is real. Research published in July by the Lancet Global Health, by my colleagues Francisco Rodriguez, Silvio Rendon and myself, estimated the global death toll from unilateral economic sanctions, as these are, at 564,000 per year over the past decade. This is comparable to the worldwide deaths from armed conflict. A majority of the victims over the 1970-2021 period were children.

    The Trump administration has, in the last few days, been moving in the direction of lifting some sanctions to allow for oil exports, according to the president’s stated plan to “run Venezuela.” This is ironic because Venezuela has for many years wanted more investment and trade, including in oil, with the United States, and it was U.S. sanctions that prohibited it.

    Such lifting of sanctions would be a big step forward, in terms of saving lives of people who are deprived of food, medicine and other necessities in Venezuela, as a result of these sanctions and the economic destruction that they cause.

    But to create the stability that Venezuela needs to recover, we will have to take the military and economic violence out of this campaign. There are members of Congress moving toward that goal, and they need all the help that they can get, before it’s too late.

    Mark Weisbrot is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research and author of “Failed: What the ‘Experts’ Got Wrong About the Global Economy.”

    [ad_2]

    Mark Weisbrot

    Source link

  • Washington National Opera is leaving the Kennedy Center in wake of Trump upset

    [ad_1]

    In what might be the most decisive critique yet of President Trump’s remake of the Kennedy Center, the Washington National Opera’s board approved a resolution on Friday to leave the venue it has occupied since 1971.

    “Today, the Washington National Opera announced its decision to seek an amicable early termination of its affiliation agreement with the Kennedy Center and resume operations as a fully independent nonprofit entity,” the company said in a statement to the Associated Press.

    Roma Daravi, Kennedy Center’s vice president of public relations, described the relationship with Washington National Opera as “financially challenging.”

    “After careful consideration, we have made the difficult decision to part ways with the WNO due to a financially challenging relationship,” Daravi said in a statement. “We believe this represents the best path forward for both organizations and enables us to make responsible choices that support the financial stability and long-term future of the Trump Kennedy Center.”

    Kennedy Center President Ambassador Richard Grenell tweeted that the call was made by the Kennedy Center, writing that its leadership had “approached the Opera leadership last year with this idea and they began to be open to it.”

    “Having an exclusive relationship has been extremely expensive and limiting in choice and variety,” Grenell wrote. “We have spent millions of dollars to support the Washington Opera’s exclusivity and yet they were still millions of dollars in the hole – and getting worse.”

    WNO’s decision to vacate the Kennedy Center’s 2,364-seat Opera House comes amid a wave of artist cancellations that came after the venue’s board voted to rename the center the Donald J. Trump and the John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts. New signage featuring Trump’s name went up on the building’s exterior just days after the vote while debate raged over whether an official name change could be made without congressional approval.

    That same day, Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio) — an ex officio member of the board — wrote on social media that the vote was not unanimous and that she and others who might have voiced their dissent were muted on the call.

    Grenell countered that ex officio members don’t get a vote.

    Cancellations soon began to mount — as did Kennedy Center‘s rebukes against the artists who chose not to appear. Jazz drummer Chuck Redd pulled out of his annual Christmas Eve concert; jazz supergroup the Cookers nixed New Year’s Eve shows; New York-based Doug Varone and Dancers dropped out of April performances; and Grammy Award-winning banjo player Béla Fleck wrote on social media that he would no longer play at the venue in February.

    WNO’s departure, however, represents a new level of artist defection. The company’s name is synonymous with the Kennedy Center and it has served as an artistic center of gravity for the complex since the building first opened.

    [ad_2]

    Jessica Gelt

    Source link

  • House votes on health insurance subsidies as Senate debates military powers

    [ad_1]

    It’s the first week of a new year for Congress, and each chamber is considering legislation with votes to watch on Thursday.Enhanced Health Care SubsidiesThe House of Representatives is voting on a bill to reinstate tax credits that expired last year and were central to the government shutdown.The bill aims to extend these subsidies for three years, helping those without insurance through their employers pay for coverage. Four Republicans: Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-1st), Rep. Ryan McKenzie (PA-7th), Rep. Rob Bresnahan (PA-8th), and Rep. Mike Lawler (NY-17th) joined Democrats to push the vote, which is expected to pass. Five more Republicans joined Democrats during a test vote on Wednesday.However, the Senate is not expected to consider this bill, as they are working on their own Affordable Care Act reform measure designed to pass both chambers.Venezuela War Powers ResolutionThe Senate is revisiting a war powers resolution that would prevent the president from using military force in Venezuela without congressional approval. This follows a recent military operation in Venezuela’s capital, which led to the arrest of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, who are now in New York facing narcoterrorism charges. President Donald Trump has stated that the U.S. is running Venezuela and may deploy the military again if the remaining Maduro regime does not comply with U.S. demands.The same resolution failed a previous vote, as well as a measure to stop the Trump administration from bombing alleged drug boats in the Caribbean and Pacific that the White House says were connected to Venezuela. Past administrations arrested and charged such suspects. The Trump administration’s campaign has killed more than 100 people.Reactions To Greenland RhetoricThe White House’s suggestion to use military force to take over Greenland has been met with criticism on Capitol Hill. Democrats have long opposed this idea, and several Republicans have recently spoken out against it.Rep. Mike Johnson, House Speaker, said, “All this stuff about military action and all that, I don’t even think that’s a possibility.” Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina criticized the notion, saying, “Making insane comments about how it is our right to have territory owned by the kingdom of Denmark, folks, amateur hour is over.” Rep. Ryan Zinke of Montana noted, “In the case of Greenland, you have two things: one, not a present threat, and so they have a duly elected president. So, he doesn’t have the authority without Congress.”Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska added, “It’s very… amateurish. I feel like we’ve got high school kids playing Risk.”Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also stated that the president wants to buy Greenland.Earlier this week, the White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told Hearst Television: “President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it’s vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The President and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the U.S. Military is always an option at the Commander in Chief’s disposal.”Keep watching for the latest from the Washington News Bureau:

    WASHINGTON —

    It’s the first week of a new year for Congress, and each chamber is considering legislation with votes to watch on Thursday.

    Enhanced Health Care Subsidies

    The House of Representatives is voting on a bill to reinstate tax credits that expired last year and were central to the government shutdown.

    The bill aims to extend these subsidies for three years, helping those without insurance through their employers pay for coverage. Four Republicans: Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-1st), Rep. Ryan McKenzie (PA-7th), Rep. Rob Bresnahan (PA-8th), and Rep. Mike Lawler (NY-17th) joined Democrats to push the vote, which is expected to pass. Five more Republicans joined Democrats during a test vote on Wednesday.

    However, the Senate is not expected to consider this bill, as they are working on their own Affordable Care Act reform measure designed to pass both chambers.

    Venezuela War Powers Resolution

    The Senate is revisiting a war powers resolution that would prevent the president from using military force in Venezuela without congressional approval. This follows a recent military operation in Venezuela’s capital, which led to the arrest of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, who are now in New York facing narcoterrorism charges.

    President Donald Trump has stated that the U.S. is running Venezuela and may deploy the military again if the remaining Maduro regime does not comply with U.S. demands.

    The same resolution failed a previous vote, as well as a measure to stop the Trump administration from bombing alleged drug boats in the Caribbean and Pacific that the White House says were connected to Venezuela. Past administrations arrested and charged such suspects. The Trump administration’s campaign has killed more than 100 people.

    Reactions To Greenland Rhetoric

    The White House’s suggestion to use military force to take over Greenland has been met with criticism on Capitol Hill. Democrats have long opposed this idea, and several Republicans have recently spoken out against it.

    Rep. Mike Johnson, House Speaker, said, “All this stuff about military action and all that, I don’t even think that’s a possibility.”

    Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina criticized the notion, saying, “Making insane comments about how it is our right to have territory owned by the kingdom of Denmark, folks, amateur hour is over.”

    Rep. Ryan Zinke of Montana noted, “In the case of Greenland, you have two things: one, not a present threat, and so they have a duly elected president. So, he doesn’t have the authority without Congress.”

    Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska added, “It’s very… amateurish. I feel like we’ve got high school kids playing Risk.”

    Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also stated that the president wants to buy Greenland.

    Earlier this week, the White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told Hearst Television: “President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it’s vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The President and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the U.S. Military is always an option at the Commander in Chief’s disposal.”

    Keep watching for the latest from the Washington News Bureau:


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Senate rejects extension of health care subsidies as costs are set to rise for millions of Americans

    [ad_1]

    The Senate on Thursday rejected legislation to extend Affordable Care Act tax credits, essentially guaranteeing that millions of Americans will see a steep rise in costs at the beginning of the year.Senators rejected a Democratic bill to extend the subsidies for three years and a Republican alternative that would have created new health savings accounts — an unceremonious end to a monthslong effort by Democrats to prevent the COVID-19-era subsidies from expiring on Jan. 1.Ahead of the votes, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York warned Republicans that if they did not vote to extend the tax credits, “there won’t be another chance to act,” before premiums rise for many people who buy insurance off the ACA marketplaces.”Let’s avert a disaster,” Schumer said. “The American people are watching.”Republicans have argued that Affordable Care Act plans are too expensive and need to be overhauled. The health savings accounts in the GOP bill would give money directly to consumers instead of to insurance companies, an idea that has been echoed by President Donald Trump. But Democrats immediately rejected the plan, saying that the accounts wouldn’t be enough to cover costs for most consumers.Some Republicans have pushed their colleagues to extend the credits, including Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who said they should vote for a short-term extension so they can find agreement on the issue next year. “It’s too complicated and too difficult to get done in the limited time that we have left,” Tillis said Wednesday.But despite the bipartisan desire to continue the credits, Republicans and Democrats have never engaged in meaningful or high-level negotiations on a solution, even after a small group of centrist Democrats struck a deal with Republicans last month to end the 43-day government shutdown in exchange for a vote on extending the ACA subsidies. Most Democratic lawmakers opposed the move as many Republicans made clear that they wanted the tax credits to expire.The deal raised hopes for bipartisan compromise on health care. But that quickly faded with a lack of any real bipartisan talks.The dueling Senate votes are the latest political messaging exercise in a Congress that has operated almost entirely on partisan terms, as Republicans pushed through a massive tax and spending cuts bill this summer using budget maneuvers that eliminated the need for Democratic votes. They also tweaked Senate rules to push past a Democratic blockade of all of Trump’s nominees. An intractable issueThe votes were also the latest failed salvo in the debate over the Affordable Care Act, President Barack Obama’s signature law that Democrats passed along party lines in 2010 to expand access to insurance coverage.Republicans have tried unsuccessfully since then to repeal or overhaul the law, arguing that health care is still too expensive. But they have struggled to find an alternative. In the meantime, Democrats have made the policy a central political issue in several elections, betting that the millions of people who buy health care on the government marketplaces want to keep their coverage.”When people’s monthly payments spike next year, they’ll know it was Republicans that made it happen,” Schumer said in November, while making clear that Democrats would not seek compromise.Even if they view it as a political win, the failed votes are a loss for Democrats who demanded an extension of the benefits as they forced a government shutdown for six weeks in October and November — and for the millions of people facing premium increases on Jan. 1.Maine Sen. Angus King, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, said the group tried to negotiate with Republicans after the shutdown ended. But, he said, the talks became unproductive when Republicans demanded language adding new limits for abortion coverage that were a “red line” for Democrats. He said Republicans were going to “own these increases.”A plethora of plans, but little agreementRepublicans have used the looming expiration of the subsidies to renew their longstanding criticisms of the ACA, also called Obamacare, and to try, once more, to agree on what should be done.Thune announced earlier this week that the GOP conference had decided to vote on the bill led by Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, the chairman of the Senate Health, Labor, Education and Pensions Committee, and Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, even as several Republican senators proposed alternate ideas.In the House, Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has promised a vote next week. Republicans weighed different options in a conference meeting on Wednesday, with no apparent consensus.Republican moderates in the House who could have competitive reelection bids next year are pushing Johnson to find a way to extend the subsidies. But more conservative members want to see the law overhauled.Rep. Kevin Kiley, R-Calif., has pushed for a temporary extension, which he said could be an opening to take further steps on health care.If they fail to act and health care costs go up, the approval rating for Congress “will get even lower,” Kiley said.___Associated Press writers Kevin Freking and Joey Cappelletti contributed to this report.

    WASHINGTON —

    The Senate on Thursday rejected legislation to extend Affordable Care Act tax credits, essentially guaranteeing that millions of Americans will see a steep rise in costs at the beginning of the year.

    Senators rejected a Democratic bill to extend the subsidies for three years and a Republican alternative that would have created new health savings accounts — an unceremonious end to a monthslong effort by Democrats to prevent the COVID-19-era subsidies from expiring on Jan. 1.

    Ahead of the votes, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York warned Republicans that if they did not vote to extend the tax credits, “there won’t be another chance to act,” before premiums rise for many people who buy insurance off the ACA marketplaces.

    “Let’s avert a disaster,” Schumer said. “The American people are watching.”

    Republicans have argued that Affordable Care Act plans are too expensive and need to be overhauled. The health savings accounts in the GOP bill would give money directly to consumers instead of to insurance companies, an idea that has been echoed by President Donald Trump. But Democrats immediately rejected the plan, saying that the accounts wouldn’t be enough to cover costs for most consumers.

    Some Republicans have pushed their colleagues to extend the credits, including Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who said they should vote for a short-term extension so they can find agreement on the issue next year. “It’s too complicated and too difficult to get done in the limited time that we have left,” Tillis said Wednesday.

    But despite the bipartisan desire to continue the credits, Republicans and Democrats have never engaged in meaningful or high-level negotiations on a solution, even after a small group of centrist Democrats struck a deal with Republicans last month to end the 43-day government shutdown in exchange for a vote on extending the ACA subsidies. Most Democratic lawmakers opposed the move as many Republicans made clear that they wanted the tax credits to expire.

    The deal raised hopes for bipartisan compromise on health care. But that quickly faded with a lack of any real bipartisan talks.

    The dueling Senate votes are the latest political messaging exercise in a Congress that has operated almost entirely on partisan terms, as Republicans pushed through a massive tax and spending cuts bill this summer using budget maneuvers that eliminated the need for Democratic votes. They also tweaked Senate rules to push past a Democratic blockade of all of Trump’s nominees.

    An intractable issue

    The votes were also the latest failed salvo in the debate over the Affordable Care Act, President Barack Obama’s signature law that Democrats passed along party lines in 2010 to expand access to insurance coverage.

    Republicans have tried unsuccessfully since then to repeal or overhaul the law, arguing that health care is still too expensive. But they have struggled to find an alternative. In the meantime, Democrats have made the policy a central political issue in several elections, betting that the millions of people who buy health care on the government marketplaces want to keep their coverage.

    “When people’s monthly payments spike next year, they’ll know it was Republicans that made it happen,” Schumer said in November, while making clear that Democrats would not seek compromise.

    Even if they view it as a political win, the failed votes are a loss for Democrats who demanded an extension of the benefits as they forced a government shutdown for six weeks in October and November — and for the millions of people facing premium increases on Jan. 1.

    Maine Sen. Angus King, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, said the group tried to negotiate with Republicans after the shutdown ended. But, he said, the talks became unproductive when Republicans demanded language adding new limits for abortion coverage that were a “red line” for Democrats. He said Republicans were going to “own these increases.”

    A plethora of plans, but little agreement

    Republicans have used the looming expiration of the subsidies to renew their longstanding criticisms of the ACA, also called Obamacare, and to try, once more, to agree on what should be done.

    Thune announced earlier this week that the GOP conference had decided to vote on the bill led by Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, the chairman of the Senate Health, Labor, Education and Pensions Committee, and Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, even as several Republican senators proposed alternate ideas.

    In the House, Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has promised a vote next week. Republicans weighed different options in a conference meeting on Wednesday, with no apparent consensus.

    Republican moderates in the House who could have competitive reelection bids next year are pushing Johnson to find a way to extend the subsidies. But more conservative members want to see the law overhauled.

    Rep. Kevin Kiley, R-Calif., has pushed for a temporary extension, which he said could be an opening to take further steps on health care.

    If they fail to act and health care costs go up, the approval rating for Congress “will get even lower,” Kiley said.

    ___

    Associated Press writers Kevin Freking and Joey Cappelletti contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Commentary: The U.S. Senate is a mess. He wants to fix it, from the inside

    [ad_1]

    To say the U.S. Senate has grown dysfunctional is like suggesting water is wet or the nighttime sky is dark.

    The institution that fancies itself “the world’s greatest deliberative body” is supposed to serve as a cooling saucer that tempers the more hotheaded House, applying weight and wisdom as it addresses the Great Issues of Our Time. Instead, it’s devolved into an unsightly mess of gridlock and partisan hackery.

    Part of that is owing to the filibuster, one of the Senate’s most distinctive features, which over roughly the last decade has been abused and misused to a point it’s become, in the words of congressional scholar Norman J. Ornstein, a singular “weapon of mass obstruction.”

    Democrat Jeff Merkley, the junior U.S. senator from Oregon, has spent years on a mostly one-man crusade aimed at reforming the filibuster and restoring a bit of sunlight and self-discipline to the chamber.

    In 2022, Merkley and his allies came within two votes of modifying the filibuster for voting rights legislation. He continues scouring for support for a broader overhaul.

    “This is essential for people to see what their representatives are debating and then have the opportunity to weigh in,” said Merkley, speaking from the Capitol after a vote on the Senate floor.

    “Without the public being able to see the obstruction,” he said, “they [can’t] really respond to it.”

    What follows is a discussion of congressional process, but before your eyes glaze over, you should understand that process is what determines the way many things are accomplished — or not — in Washington, D.C.

    The filibuster, which has changed over time, involves how long senators are allowed to speak on the Senate floor. Unlike the House, which has rules limiting debate, the Senate has no restrictions, unless a vote is taken to specifically end discussion and bring a matter to resolution. More on that in a moment.

    In the broadest sense, the filibuster is a way to protect the interests of a minority of senators, as well as their constituents, by allowing a small but determined number of lawmakers — or even a lone member — to prevent a vote by commanding the floor and talking nonstop.

    Perhaps the most famous, and certainly the most romanticized, version of a filibuster took place in the film “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.” The fictitious Sen. Jefferson Smith, played by James Stewart, talks to the point of exhausted collapse as a way of garnering national notice and exposing political corruption.

    The filibustering James Stewart received an Oscar nomination for lead actor for his portrayal of Sen. Jefferson Smith in the 1939 classic “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.”

    (From the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences)

    In the Frank Capra classic, the good guy wins. (It’s Hollywood, after all.) In real life, the filibuster has often been used for less noble purpose, most notably the decades-long thwarting of civil rights legislation.

    A filibuster used to be a rare thing, its power holstered for all but the most important issues. But in recent years that’s changed, drastically. The filibuster — or, rather, the threat of a filibuster — has become almost routine.

    In part, that’s because of how easy it’s become to gum up the Senate.

    Members no longer need to hold the floor and talk nonstop, testing not just the power of their argument but their physical mettle and bladder control. These days it’s enough for a lawmaker to simply state their intention to filibuster. Typically, legislation is then laid aside as the Senate moves on to other business.

    That pain-free approach has changed the very nature of the filibuster, Ornstein said, and transformed how the Senate operates, much to its detriment.

    The burden is “supposed to be on the minority to really put itself … on the line to generate a larger debate” — a la the fictive Jefferson Smith — “and hope during the course of it that they can turn opinions around,” said Ornstein, an emeritus scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. “What’s happened is the burden has shifted to the majority [to break a filibuster], which is a bastardization of what the filibuster is supposed to be about.”

    It takes 60 votes to end a filibuster, by invoking cloture, to use Senate terminology. That means the passage of legislation now effectively requires a supermajority of the 100-member Senate. (There are workarounds, which, for instance, allowed President Trump’s massive tax-and-spending bill to pass on a 51-50 vote, with Vice President JD Vance casting the tie-breaker.)

    The filibuster gives outsized power to the minority.

    To offer but two examples, there is strong public support for universal background checks for gun buyers and greater transparency in campaign finance. Both issues have majority backing in the Senate. No matter. Legislation to achieve each has repeatedly been filibustered to death.

    That’s where Merkley would step in.

    He would not eliminate the filibuster, a prerogative jealously guarded by members of both parties. (In a rare show of independence, Republican senators rejected President Trump’s call to scrap the filibuster to end the recent government shutdown.)

    Rather, Merkley would eliminate what’s come to be called “the silent filibuster” and force lawmakers to actually take the floor and publicly press their case until they prevail, give up or physically give out. “My reform is based on the premise that the minority should have a voice,” he said, “but not a veto.”

    Forcing senators to stand and deliver would make it more difficult to filibuster, ending its promiscuous overuse, Merkley suggested, and — ideally— engaging the public in a way privately messaging fellow senators — I dissent! — does not.

    “Because it’s so visible publicly,” Merkley said, “the American citizens get to weigh in, and there’s consequences. They may frame you as a hero for your obstruction, or a bum, and that has a reflection in the next election.”

    The power to repair itself rests entirely within the Senate, where lawmakers set their own rules and can change them as they see fit. (Nice work, if you can get it.)

    The filibuster has been tweaked before. In 1917, senators adopted the rule allowing cloture if a two-thirds majority voted to end debate. In 1975, the Senate reduced that number to three-fifths of the Senate, or 60 members.

    More recently, Democrats changed the rules to prevent filibustering most presidential nominations. Republicans extended that to include Supreme Court nominees.

    Reforming the filibuster is hardly a cure-all. The Senate has debased itself by ceding much of its authority and becoming little more than an arm of the Trump White House. Fixing that requires more than a procedural revamp.

    But forcing lawmakers to stand their ground, argue their case and seek to rally voters instead of lifting a pinkie and grinding the Senate to a halt? That’s something worth talking about.

    [ad_2]

    Mark Z. Barabak

    Source link

  • 2025 Lie of the Year: Readers’ Choice poll vote

    [ad_1]

    It’s time for PolitiFact’s readers to make their case for the annual Lie of the Year. And this year, we’re changing things up.

    PolitiFact awards the Lie of the Year to the most significant falsehood or exaggeration that worked to undermine an accurate narrative. (PolitiFact editors make the official choice.)

    We normally ask our readers to pick one falsehood they think should be Lie of the Year. But this year, we want you to rank our options from most to least significant falsehood.

    Last year’s winner of the reader poll was also PolitiFact’s official editors’ choice for Lie of the Year: President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance’s campaign claim that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, were eating pets.

    Scroll below to see links to each of the fact-checks listed on the ballot. Or click here to jump to the poll.

    You can also tell us which falsehood you thought was Lie of the Year worthy and why, either as a written answer in the form or by sending a video explaining your choice to [email protected]. We’ll feature clear and concise responses on PolitiFact’s social media accounts.

    • President Donald Trump: Regarding boat strikes off the coast of Venezuela, “Every boat that we knock out we save 25,000 American lives.” Pants on Fire.

    • President Donald Trump: “There’s no downside” to not taking Tylenol when you’re pregnant. Pants on Fire.

    • U.S. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah: The suspect in the Minnesota lawmakers’ shootings was driven by “Marxist” ideology. Pants on Fire.

    • Benjamin Netanyahu: “There is no starvation in Gaza.” False.

    • President Donald Trump: Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia “had ‘MS-13’ on his knuckles tattooed. … He had ‘MS’ as clear as you can be. Not ‘interpreted.’” Pants on Fire.

    • President Donald Trump: Asked about his campaign promise to deport the “worst of the worst,” Trump said, “That’s what we’re doing.” See our check.

    • Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker: The federal government “decided to shut down the SNAP machines, so that they can’t be used.” False.

    • White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt: “Tariffs are a tax cut for the American people.” False.

    • Vice President JD Vance: Democrats shut down the government to give health care to illegal immigrants. False.

    • House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries: “The Trump administration just declared that erecting a ballroom is the president’s main priority,” rather than issues such as the cost of living and health care. False.

    • Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth: “Nobody was texting war plans” in the Trump administration Signal group text about bombing Yemen. False.

    • Social media posts, left-wing influencers: The “Trump is dead” Labor Day weekend conspiracy theory. Special report.

    • President Donald Trump: The Jeffrey Epstein files “were made up by Comey. They were made up by Obama. They were made up by Biden.” Pants on Fire.

    • President Donald Trump: “Portland is burning to the ground.” Pants on Fire.

    • House Minority Leader Jeffries: “Republicans have effectively ended medical research in the United States of America.” Mostly False.

    Vote for the 2025 Readers’ Choice Lie of the Year

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House set to vote to release Epstein files following months of pressure

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The House is poised to vote overwhelmingly on Tuesday to demand the Justice Department release all documents tied to its investigation of the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

    President Trump, who initially worked to thwart the vote before reversing course on Sunday night, has said he will sign the measure if it reaches his desk. For that to happen, the bill will also need to pass the Senate, which could consider the measure as soon as Tuesday night.

    Republicans for months pushed back on the release of the Epstein files, joining Trump in claiming the Epstein issue was being brought up by Democrats as a way to distract from Republicans’ legislative successes.

    But that all seismically shifted Sunday when Trump had a drastic reversal and urged Republicans to vote to release the documents, saying there was “nothing to hide.”

    “It’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

    The reversal came days after 20,000 documents from Epstein’s private estate were released by lawmakers in the House Oversight Committee. The files referenced Trump more than 1,000 times.

    In private emails, Epstein wrote that Trump had “spent hours” at his house and “knew about the girls,” a revelation that reignited the push in Congress for further disclosures.

    Trump has continued to deny wrongdoing in the Epstein saga despite opposing the release of files from the federal probe into the conduct of his former friend, a convicted sex offender and alleged sex trafficker. He died by suicide while in federal custody in 2019.

    Many members of Trump’s MAGA base have demanded the files be released, convinced they contain revelations about powerful people involved in Epstein’s abuse of what is believed to be more than 200 women and girls. Tension among his base spiked when Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi said in July that an “Epstein client list” did not exist, after saying in February that the list was sitting on her desk awaiting review. She later said she was referring to the Epstein files more generally.

    Trump’s call to release the files now highlights how he is trying to prevent an embarrassing defeat as a growing number of Republicans in the House have joined Democrats to vote for the legislation in recent days.

    The Epstein files have been a hugely divisive congressional fight in recent months, with Democrats pushing the release, but Republican congressional leaders largely refusing to take the votes. The issue even led to a rift within the MAGA movement, and Trump to cut ties with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican from Georgia who had long been an ardent support of the president.

    “Watching this actually turn into a fight has ripped MAGA apart,” Greene said at a news conference Tuesday in reference to the resistance to release the files.

    Democrats have accused Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) of delaying the swearing-in of Rep. Adelita Grijalva, an Arizona Democrat, because she promised to cast the final vote needed to move a so-called discharge petition, which would force a vote on the floor. Johnson has denied those claims.

    If the House and Senate do vote to release the files, all eyes will turn to the Department of Justice, and what exactly it will choose to publicly release.

    “The fight, the real fight, will happen after that,” Greene said. “The real test will be: Will the Department of Justice release the files? Or will it all remain tied up in an investigation?”

    Several Epstein survivors joined lawmakers at the news conference to talk about how important the vote was for them.

    Haley Robson, one of the survivors, questioned Trump’s resistance to the vote even now as he supports it.

    “While I do understand that your position has changed on the Epstein files, and I’m grateful that you have pledged to sign this bill, I can’t help to be skeptical of what the agenda is,” Robson said.

    If signed into law by Trump, the bill would prohibit the attorney general, Bondi, from withholding, delaying or redacting “any record, document, communication, or investigative material on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”

    But caveats in the bill could provide Trump and Bondi with loopholes to keep records related to the president concealed.

    In the spring, FBI Director Kash Patel directed a Freedom of Information Act team to comb through the entire trove of files from the investigation, and ordered it to redact references to Trump, citing his status as a private citizen with privacy protections when the probe first launched in 2006, Bloomberg reported at the time.

    Rep. Thomas Massie, a Republican from Kentucky, said the Trump administration will be forced to release the files with an act of Congress.

    “They will be breaking the law if they do not release these files,” he said.

    [ad_2]

    Ana Ceballos

    Source link

  • House expected to vote on bill forcing release of Jeffrey Epstein case files

    [ad_1]

    The House is expected to vote Tuesday on legislation to force the Justice Department to publicly release its files on the late financier Jeffrey Epstein, the culmination of a monthslong effort that has overcome opposition from President Donald Trump and Republican leadership.When a small bipartisan group of House lawmakers introduced a petition in July to maneuver around House Speaker Mike Johnson’s control of which bills see the House floor, it appeared a long-shot effort, especially as Trump urged his supporters to dismiss the matter as a “hoax.” But both Trump and Johnson failed in their efforts to prevent the vote.Now the president has bowed to the growing momentum behind the bill and even said Republicans should vote for it. His blessing all but ensures that the House will pass the bill with an overwhelming margin, putting further pressure on the Senate to take it up.Trump on Monday said he would sign the bill if it passes both chambers of Congress, adding, “Let the Senate look at it.”Tuesday’s vote also provides a further boost to the demands that the Justice Department release its case files on Epstein, a well-connected financier who killed himself in a Manhattan jail while awaiting trial in 2019 on charges he sexually abused and trafficked underage girls.A separate investigation conducted by the House Oversight Committee has released thousands of pages of emails and other documents from Epstein’s estate, showing his connections to global leaders, Wall Street powerbrokers, influential political figures and Trump himself.Trump’s reversal on the Epstein filesTrump has said he cut ties with Epstein years ago, but tried for months to move past the demands for disclosure. On Monday, he told reporters that Epstein was connected to more Democrats and that he didn’t want the Epstein files to “detract from the great success of the Republican Party.”Still, many in the Republican base have continued to demand the release of the files. Adding to that pressure, several survivors of Epstein’s abuse will appear on Capitol Hill Tuesday morning to push for release of the files. They also met with Johnson and rallied outside the Capitol in September, but have had to wait two months for the vote.That’s because Johnson kept the House closed for legislative business for nearly two months and also refused to swear-in Democratic Rep. Adelita Grijalva of Arizona during the government shutdown. After winning a special election on Sept. 23, Grijalva had pledged to provide the crucial 218th vote to the petition for the Epstein files bill. But only after she was sworn into office last week could she sign her name to the discharge petition to give it majority support in the 435-member House.It quickly became apparent the bill would pass, and both Johnson and Trump began to fold. Trump on Sunday said Republicans should vote for the bill.Rep. Thomas Massie, the Kentucky Republican who sponsored the bill alongside Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna, said Trump “got tired of me winning. He wanted to join.”How Johnson is handling the billRather than waiting until next week for the discharge position to officially take effect, Johnson is moving to hold the vote this week. He indicated the legislation will be brought to the House floor under a procedure that requires a two-thirds majority.“I think it’s going to be an important vote to continue to show the transparency that we’ve delivered,” House Republican leader Steve Scalise, R-La., said Monday night.House Democrats celebrated the vote as a rare win for the minority.“It’s a complete and total surrender, because as Democrats we made clear from the very beginning, the survivors and the American people deserve full and complete transparency as it relates to the lives that were ruined by Jeffrey Epstein,” said House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries.What will the Senate do?Still, it’s not clear how the Senate will handle the bill.Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has previously been circumspect when asked about the legislation and instead said he trusted the Justice Department to release information on the Epstein investigation.But what the Justice Department has released so far under Trump was mostly already public. The bill would go further, forcing the release within 30 days of all files and communications related to Epstein, as well as any information about the investigation into his death in federal prison. Information about Epstein’s victims or continuing federal investigations would be allowed to be redacted, but not information due to “embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”Johnson also suggested that he would like to see the Senate amend the bill to protect the information of “victims and whistleblowers.”But Massie said the Senate should take into account the public clamor that forced both Trump and Johnson to back down.“If it’s anything but a genuine effort to make it better and stronger, it’ll backfire on the senators if they muck it up,” Massie said.___Associated Press writers Kevin Freking and Matt Brown contributed to this report.

    WASHINGTON —

    The House is expected to vote Tuesday on legislation to force the Justice Department to publicly release its files on the late financier Jeffrey Epstein, the culmination of a monthslong effort that has overcome opposition from President Donald Trump and Republican leadership.

    When a small bipartisan group of House lawmakers introduced a petition in July to maneuver around House Speaker Mike Johnson’s control of which bills see the House floor, it appeared a long-shot effort, especially as Trump urged his supporters to dismiss the matter as a “hoax.” But both Trump and Johnson failed in their efforts to prevent the vote.

    Now the president has bowed to the growing momentum behind the bill and even said Republicans should vote for it. His blessing all but ensures that the House will pass the bill with an overwhelming margin, putting further pressure on the Senate to take it up.

    Trump on Monday said he would sign the bill if it passes both chambers of Congress, adding, “Let the Senate look at it.”

    Tuesday’s vote also provides a further boost to the demands that the Justice Department release its case files on Epstein, a well-connected financier who killed himself in a Manhattan jail while awaiting trial in 2019 on charges he sexually abused and trafficked underage girls.

    A separate investigation conducted by the House Oversight Committee has released thousands of pages of emails and other documents from Epstein’s estate, showing his connections to global leaders, Wall Street powerbrokers, influential political figures and Trump himself.

    Trump’s reversal on the Epstein files

    Trump has said he cut ties with Epstein years ago, but tried for months to move past the demands for disclosure. On Monday, he told reporters that Epstein was connected to more Democrats and that he didn’t want the Epstein files to “detract from the great success of the Republican Party.”

    Still, many in the Republican base have continued to demand the release of the files. Adding to that pressure, several survivors of Epstein’s abuse will appear on Capitol Hill Tuesday morning to push for release of the files. They also met with Johnson and rallied outside the Capitol in September, but have had to wait two months for the vote.

    That’s because Johnson kept the House closed for legislative business for nearly two months and also refused to swear-in Democratic Rep. Adelita Grijalva of Arizona during the government shutdown. After winning a special election on Sept. 23, Grijalva had pledged to provide the crucial 218th vote to the petition for the Epstein files bill. But only after she was sworn into office last week could she sign her name to the discharge petition to give it majority support in the 435-member House.

    It quickly became apparent the bill would pass, and both Johnson and Trump began to fold. Trump on Sunday said Republicans should vote for the bill.

    Rep. Thomas Massie, the Kentucky Republican who sponsored the bill alongside Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna, said Trump “got tired of me winning. He wanted to join.”

    How Johnson is handling the bill

    Rather than waiting until next week for the discharge position to officially take effect, Johnson is moving to hold the vote this week. He indicated the legislation will be brought to the House floor under a procedure that requires a two-thirds majority.

    “I think it’s going to be an important vote to continue to show the transparency that we’ve delivered,” House Republican leader Steve Scalise, R-La., said Monday night.

    House Democrats celebrated the vote as a rare win for the minority.

    “It’s a complete and total surrender, because as Democrats we made clear from the very beginning, the survivors and the American people deserve full and complete transparency as it relates to the lives that were ruined by Jeffrey Epstein,” said House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries.

    What will the Senate do?

    Still, it’s not clear how the Senate will handle the bill.

    Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has previously been circumspect when asked about the legislation and instead said he trusted the Justice Department to release information on the Epstein investigation.

    But what the Justice Department has released so far under Trump was mostly already public. The bill would go further, forcing the release within 30 days of all files and communications related to Epstein, as well as any information about the investigation into his death in federal prison. Information about Epstein’s victims or continuing federal investigations would be allowed to be redacted, but not information due to “embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”

    Johnson also suggested that he would like to see the Senate amend the bill to protect the information of “victims and whistleblowers.”

    But Massie said the Senate should take into account the public clamor that forced both Trump and Johnson to back down.

    “If it’s anything but a genuine effort to make it better and stronger, it’ll backfire on the senators if they muck it up,” Massie said.

    ___

    Associated Press writers Kevin Freking and Matt Brown contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Your Employees’ Health Insurance is in Jeopardy. Here’s What to Do About It

    [ad_1]

    The longest government shutdown in U.S. history is finally over after President Donald Trump signed a stopgap spending bill narrowly approved by the House last week, but your employees’ healthcare is still in trouble.

    Tax credits that give entrepreneurs and their employees — and even solopreneurs — access to affordable healthcare through the ACA marketplace are set to expire at the end of this year. A study by the Kaiser Family Foundation estimates costs will soar by 26 percent — a combination of the projected loss of federal subsidies and the general increase of healthcare costs.

    Democrats, and even some Republicans, are working to extend the benefit before rates skyrocket in January, but the House won’t vote on it until mid-December. Open enrollment began on Nov. 1 and ends in mid- to late January, depending on the state. The timing is less than ideal, but states are reassuring consumers that the plans they choose now are not “final.” They’ll have the option to change plans once the House votes in December. Anyone who doesn’t want to pay higher rates or choose a plan with less coverage has the option to wait until January to sign up for a new plan, but that means their insurance won’t kick in until February, Politico reported.

    “We are hearing folks who simply cannot believe what they are looking at,” said Audrey Gasteier, executive director of the Massachusetts Health Connector, told the publication. “Folks who have surgery scheduled in the new year [say those plans are] in question now because they are not sure if they can stay covered.”

    If the subsidies are approved without changes, ACA plans will be updated with the new rates. However, things could get complicated if Republicans successfully impose income caps and “fraud guardrails” on people’s eligibility for the subsidy. President Donald Trump has also floated the idea of issuing the subsidies as a “direct payment” to consumers, bypassing the insurers — a move policy experts told Politico would “lead to the collapse of the exchanges.”

    Some state exchanges now require insurers to generate two rates — with and without the subsidies — to show consumers what they could be paying. These states say they’re working to get pricing information out to consumers as soon as possible.  

    “State marketplaces will all do whatever needs to be done to get those tax credits out to our consumers,” Michele Eberle, executive director of Maryland Health Benefit Exchange, told Politico. “We are ready to do it and poised to do it. We will make it happen.”

    [ad_2]

    Kayla Webster

    Source link

  • Trump says House Republicans should vote to release Epstein files

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump said House Republicans should vote to release the files in the Jeffrey Epstein case, a startling reversal after previously fighting the proposal as a growing number of those in his own party supported it.“We have nothing to hide, and it’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party,” Trump wrote on social media late Sunday after landing at Joint Base Andrews following a weekend in Florida.Video above: Congressman: ‘Let’s just release’ Epstein filesTrump’s statement followed a fierce fight within the GOP over the files, including an increasingly nasty split with Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who had long been one of his fiercest supporters.The president’s shift is an implicit acknowledgement that supporters of the measure have enough votes to pass it the House, although it has an unclear future in the Senate.It is a rare example of Trump backtracking because of opposition within the GOP. In his return to office and in his second term as president, Trump has largely consolidated power in the Republican Party.“I DON’T CARE!” Trump wrote in his social media post. “All I do care about is that Republicans get BACK ON POINT.”Lawmakers who support the bill have been predicting a big win in the House this week with a “deluge of Republicans” voting for it, bucking the GOP leadership and the president.In his opposition to the proposal, Trump even reached out to two of the Republican lawmakers who signed it. One, Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert, met last week with administration officials in the White House Situation Room to discuss it.The bill would force the Justice Department to release all files and communications related to Epstein, as well as any information about the investigation into his death in federal prison. Information about Epstein’s victims or ongoing federal investigations would be allowed to be redacted.“There could be 100 or more” votes from Republicans, said Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., among the lawmakers discussing the legislation on Sunday news show appearances. “I’m hoping to get a veto-proof majority on this legislation when it comes up for a vote.”Massie and Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., introduced a discharge petition in July to force a vote on their bill. That is a rarely successful tool that allows a majority of members to bypass House leadership and force a floor vote.Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., had panned the discharge petition effort and sent members home early for their August recess when the GOP’s legislative agenda was upended in the clamoring for an Epstein vote. Democrats also contend the seating of Rep. Adelita Grijalva, D-Ariz., was stalled to delay her becoming the 218th member to sign the petition and gain the threshold needed to force a vote. She became the 218th signature moments after taking the oath of office last week.Video below: Epstein emails falloutMassie said Johnson, Trump and others who have been critical of his efforts would be “taking a big loss this week.”“I’m not tired of winning yet, but we are winning,” Massie said. The view from GOP leadershipJohnson seems to expect the House will decisively back the Epstein bill.“We’ll just get this done and move it on. There’s nothing to hide,” adding that the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has been releasing “far more information than the discharge petition, their little gambit.”The vote comes at a time when new documents are raising fresh questions about Epstein and his associates, including a 2019 email that Epstein wrote to a journalist that said Trump “knew about the girls.” The White House has accused Democrats of selectively leaking the emails to smear the Republican president.Johnson said Trump “has nothing to hide from this.”“They’re doing this to go after President Trump on this theory that he has something to do with it. He does not,” Johnson said.Trump’s association with Epstein is well-established and the president’s name was included in records that his own Justice Department released in February as part of an effort to satisfy public interest in information from the sex-trafficking investigation.Trump has never been accused of wrongdoing in connection with Epstein and the mere inclusion of someone’s name in files from the investigation does not imply otherwise. Epstein, who killed himself in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial, also had many prominent acquaintances in political and celebrity circles besides Trump.Khanna voiced more modest expectations on the vote count than Massie. Still, Khanna said he was hoping for 40 or more Republicans to join the effort.“I don’t even know how involved Trump was,” Khanna said. “There are a lot of other people involved who have to be held accountable.”Khanna also asked Trump to meet with those who were abused. Some will be at the Capitol on Tuesday for a news conference, he said.Massie said Republican lawmakers who fear losing Trump’s endorsement because of how they vote will have a mark on their record, if they vote “no,” that could hurt their political prospects in the long term.“The record of this vote will last longer than Donald Trump’s presidency,” Massie said.A MAGA splitOn the Republican side, three Republicans joined with Massie in signing the discharge petition: Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, Nancy Mace of South Carolina and Boebert.Trump publicly called it quits with Greene last week and said he would endorse a challenger against her in 2026 “if the right person runs.”Greene attributed the fallout with Trump as “unfortunately, it has all come down to the Epstein files.” She said the country deserves transparency on the issue and that Trump’s criticism of her is confusing because the women she has talked to say he did nothing wrong.”I have no idea what’s in the files. I can’t even guess. But that is the questions everyone is asking, is, why fight this so hard?” Greene said.Trump’s feud with Greene escalated over the weekend, with Trump sending out one last social media post about her while still sitting in his helicopter on the White House lawn when he arrived home late Sunday, writing “The fact is, nobody cares about this Traitor to our Country!”Even if the bill passes the House, there is no guarantee that Senate Republicans will go along. Massie said he just hopes Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., “will do the right thing.”“The pressure is going to be there if we get a big vote in the House,” Massie said, who thinks “we could have a deluge of Republicans.”Massie appeared on ABC’s “This Week,” Johnson was on “Fox News Sunday,” Khanna spoke on NBC’s “Meet the Press” and Greene was interviewed on CNN’s “State of the Union.”Associated Press writer Michelle L. Price contributed to this report.

    WASHINGTON —

    President Donald Trump said House Republicans should vote to release the files in the Jeffrey Epstein case, a startling reversal after previously fighting the proposal as a growing number of those in his own party supported it.

    “We have nothing to hide, and it’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party,” Trump wrote on social media late Sunday after landing at Joint Base Andrews following a weekend in Florida.

    Video above: Congressman: ‘Let’s just release’ Epstein files

    Trump’s statement followed a fierce fight within the GOP over the files, including an increasingly nasty split with Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who had long been one of his fiercest supporters.

    The president’s shift is an implicit acknowledgement that supporters of the measure have enough votes to pass it the House, although it has an unclear future in the Senate.

    It is a rare example of Trump backtracking because of opposition within the GOP. In his return to office and in his second term as president, Trump has largely consolidated power in the Republican Party.

    “I DON’T CARE!” Trump wrote in his social media post. “All I do care about is that Republicans get BACK ON POINT.”

    Lawmakers who support the bill have been predicting a big win in the House this week with a “deluge of Republicans” voting for it, bucking the GOP leadership and the president.

    In his opposition to the proposal, Trump even reached out to two of the Republican lawmakers who signed it. One, Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert, met last week with administration officials in the White House Situation Room to discuss it.

    The bill would force the Justice Department to release all files and communications related to Epstein, as well as any information about the investigation into his death in federal prison. Information about Epstein’s victims or ongoing federal investigations would be allowed to be redacted.

    “There could be 100 or more” votes from Republicans, said Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., among the lawmakers discussing the legislation on Sunday news show appearances. “I’m hoping to get a veto-proof majority on this legislation when it comes up for a vote.”

    Massie and Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., introduced a discharge petition in July to force a vote on their bill. That is a rarely successful tool that allows a majority of members to bypass House leadership and force a floor vote.

    Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., had panned the discharge petition effort and sent members home early for their August recess when the GOP’s legislative agenda was upended in the clamoring for an Epstein vote. Democrats also contend the seating of Rep. Adelita Grijalva, D-Ariz., was stalled to delay her becoming the 218th member to sign the petition and gain the threshold needed to force a vote. She became the 218th signature moments after taking the oath of office last week.

    Video below: Epstein emails fallout

    Massie said Johnson, Trump and others who have been critical of his efforts would be “taking a big loss this week.”

    “I’m not tired of winning yet, but we are winning,” Massie said.

    The view from GOP leadership

    Johnson seems to expect the House will decisively back the Epstein bill.

    “We’ll just get this done and move it on. There’s nothing to hide,” adding that the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has been releasing “far more information than the discharge petition, their little gambit.”

    The vote comes at a time when new documents are raising fresh questions about Epstein and his associates, including a 2019 email that Epstein wrote to a journalist that said Trump “knew about the girls.” The White House has accused Democrats of selectively leaking the emails to smear the Republican president.

    Johnson said Trump “has nothing to hide from this.”

    “They’re doing this to go after President Trump on this theory that he has something to do with it. He does not,” Johnson said.

    Trump’s association with Epstein is well-established and the president’s name was included in records that his own Justice Department released in February as part of an effort to satisfy public interest in information from the sex-trafficking investigation.

    Pablo Martinez Monsivais

    Protest art representing President Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein is seen outside the entrance to Bustboys and Poets restaurant in the U Street neighborhood of Washington, Thursday, Nov., 13, 2025.

    Trump has never been accused of wrongdoing in connection with Epstein and the mere inclusion of someone’s name in files from the investigation does not imply otherwise. Epstein, who killed himself in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial, also had many prominent acquaintances in political and celebrity circles besides Trump.

    Khanna voiced more modest expectations on the vote count than Massie. Still, Khanna said he was hoping for 40 or more Republicans to join the effort.

    “I don’t even know how involved Trump was,” Khanna said. “There are a lot of other people involved who have to be held accountable.”

    Khanna also asked Trump to meet with those who were abused. Some will be at the Capitol on Tuesday for a news conference, he said.

    Massie said Republican lawmakers who fear losing Trump’s endorsement because of how they vote will have a mark on their record, if they vote “no,” that could hurt their political prospects in the long term.

    “The record of this vote will last longer than Donald Trump’s presidency,” Massie said.

    A MAGA split

    On the Republican side, three Republicans joined with Massie in signing the discharge petition: Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, Nancy Mace of South Carolina and Boebert.

    Trump publicly called it quits with Greene last week and said he would endorse a challenger against her in 2026 “if the right person runs.”

    Greene attributed the fallout with Trump as “unfortunately, it has all come down to the Epstein files.” She said the country deserves transparency on the issue and that Trump’s criticism of her is confusing because the women she has talked to say he did nothing wrong.

    “I have no idea what’s in the files. I can’t even guess. But that is the questions everyone is asking, is, why fight this so hard?” Greene said.

    Trump’s feud with Greene escalated over the weekend, with Trump sending out one last social media post about her while still sitting in his helicopter on the White House lawn when he arrived home late Sunday, writing “The fact is, nobody cares about this Traitor to our Country!”

    Even if the bill passes the House, there is no guarantee that Senate Republicans will go along. Massie said he just hopes Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., “will do the right thing.”

    “The pressure is going to be there if we get a big vote in the House,” Massie said, who thinks “we could have a deluge of Republicans.”

    Massie appeared on ABC’s “This Week,” Johnson was on “Fox News Sunday,” Khanna spoke on NBC’s “Meet the Press” and Greene was interviewed on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

    Associated Press writer Michelle L. Price contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • President Trump signs government funding bill, ending shutdown after a record 43-day disruption

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump signed a government funding bill Wednesday night, ending a record 43-day shutdown that caused financial stress for federal workers who went without paychecks, stranded scores of travelers at airports and generated long lines at some food banks.The shutdown magnified partisan divisions in Washington as Trump took unprecedented unilateral actions — including canceling projects and trying to fire federal workers — to pressure Democrats into relenting on their demands.The Republican president blamed the situation on Democrats and suggested voters shouldn’t reward the party during next year’s midterm elections.“So I just want to tell the American people, you should not forget this,” Trump said. “When we come up to midterms and other things, don’t forget what they’ve done to our country.”The signing ceremony came just hours after the House passed the measure on a mostly party-line vote of 222-209. The Senate had already passed the measure Monday.Democrats wanted to extend an enhanced tax credit expiring at the end of the year that lowers the cost of health coverage obtained through Affordable Care Act marketplaces. They refused to go along with a short-term spending bill that did not include that priority. But Republicans said that was a separate policy fight to be held at another time.“We told you 43 days ago from bitter experience that government shutdowns don’t work,” said Rep. Tom Cole, the Republican chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. “They never achieve the objective that you announce. And guess what? You haven’t achieved that objective yet, and you’re not going to.”The frustration and pressures generated by the shutdown were reflected when lawmakers debated the spending measure on the House floor.Republicans said Democrats sought to use the pain generated by the shutdown to prevail in a policy dispute.”They knew it would cause pain and they did it anyway,” House Speaker Mike Johnson said.Democrats said Republicans raced to pass tax breaks earlier this year that they say mostly will benefit the wealthy. But the bill before the House Wednesday “leaves families twisting in the wind with zero guarantee there will ever, ever be a vote to extend tax credits to help everyday people pay for their health care,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass.Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said Democrats would not give up on the subsidy extension even if the vote did not go their way.”This fight is not over,” Jeffries said. “We’re just getting started.”The House had not been in legislative session since Sept. 19, when it passed a short-term measure to keep the government open when the new budget year began in October. Johnson sent lawmakers home after that vote and put the onus on the Senate to act, saying House Republicans had done their job.What’s in the bill to end the shutdownThe legislation is the result of a deal reached by eight senators who broke ranks with the Democrats after reaching the conclusion that Republicans would not bend on using a government funding to bill to extend the health care tax credits.The compromise funds three annual spending bills and extends the rest of government funding through Jan. 30. Republicans promised to hold a vote by mid-December to extend the health care subsidies, but there is no guarantee of success.The bill includes a reversal of the firing of federal workers by the Trump administration since the shutdown began. It also protects federal workers against further layoffs through January and guarantees they are paid once the shutdown is over. The bill for the Agriculture Department means people who rely on key food assistance programs will see those benefits funded without threat of interruption through the rest of the budget year.The package includes $203.5 million to boost security for lawmakers and an additional $28 million for the security of Supreme Court justices.Democrats also decried language in the bill that would give senators the opportunity to sue when a federal agency or employee searches their electronic records without notifying them, allowing for up to $500,000 in potential damages for each violation.The language seems aimed at helping Republican senators pursue damages if their phone records were analyzed by the FBI as part of an investigation into Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss. The provisions drew criticism from Republicans as well. Johnson said he was “very angry about it.””That was dropped in at the last minute, and I did not appreciate that, nor did most of the House members,” Johnson said, promising a vote on the matter as early as next week.The biggest point of contention, though, was the fate of the expiring enhanced tax credit that makes health insurance more affordable through Affordable Care Act marketplaces.”It’s a subsidy on top of a subsidy. Our friends added it during COVID,” Cole said. “COVID is over. They set a date certain that the subsidies would run out. They chose the date.”Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the enhanced tax credit was designed to give more people access to health care and no Republican voted for it.”All they have done is try to eliminate access to health care in our country. The country is catching on to them,” Pelosi said.Without the enhanced tax credit, premiums on average will more than double for millions of Americans. More than 2 million people would lose health insurance coverage altogether next year, the Congressional Budget Office projected.Health care debate aheadIt’s unclear whether the parties will find any common ground on health care before the December vote in the Senate. Johnson has said he will not commit to bringing it up in his chamber.Some Republicans have said they are open to extending the COVID-19 pandemic-era tax credits as premiums will soar for millions of people, but they also want new limits on who can receive the subsidies. Some argue that the tax dollars for the plans should be routed through individuals rather than go directly to insurance companies.Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said Monday that she was supportive of extending the tax credits with changes, such as new income caps. Some Democrats have signaled they could be open to that idea.House Democrats expressed great skepticism that the Senate effort would lead to a breakthrough.Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said Republicans have wanted to repeal the health overhaul for the past 15 years. “That’s where they’re trying to go,” she said.When could things return to normal?While the shutdown will end tonight, the return to pre-shutdown status will not be immediate. Air travel is expected to experience lingering impacts, as the transportation secretary noted that the speed of recovery will depend on how quickly air traffic controllers return to work, with many having retired during the shutdown. The FAA administrator stated that air traffic controllers will receive their full back pay within a week, but it remains unclear how quickly other federal workers will be compensated. In previous shutdowns, it took up to eight weeks for some workers to receive back pay.Regarding SNAP benefits, the American Public Human Services Association anticipates that most states will issue full benefits within three days after the shutdown ends, though some states may take about a week due to complications from issuing partial benefits during the shutdown. The Small Business Administration has indicated that once the government reopens, it will immediately begin processing and approving loans for small businesses. ___Associated Press writer Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

    WASHINGTON —

    President Donald Trump signed a government funding bill Wednesday night, ending a record 43-day shutdown that caused financial stress for federal workers who went without paychecks, stranded scores of travelers at airports and generated long lines at some food banks.

    The shutdown magnified partisan divisions in Washington as Trump took unprecedented unilateral actions — including canceling projects and trying to fire federal workers — to pressure Democrats into relenting on their demands.

    The Republican president blamed the situation on Democrats and suggested voters shouldn’t reward the party during next year’s midterm elections.

    “So I just want to tell the American people, you should not forget this,” Trump said. “When we come up to midterms and other things, don’t forget what they’ve done to our country.”

    The signing ceremony came just hours after the House passed the measure on a mostly party-line vote of 222-209. The Senate had already passed the measure Monday.

    Democrats wanted to extend an enhanced tax credit expiring at the end of the year that lowers the cost of health coverage obtained through Affordable Care Act marketplaces. They refused to go along with a short-term spending bill that did not include that priority. But Republicans said that was a separate policy fight to be held at another time.

    “We told you 43 days ago from bitter experience that government shutdowns don’t work,” said Rep. Tom Cole, the Republican chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. “They never achieve the objective that you announce. And guess what? You haven’t achieved that objective yet, and you’re not going to.”

    The frustration and pressures generated by the shutdown were reflected when lawmakers debated the spending measure on the House floor.

    Republicans said Democrats sought to use the pain generated by the shutdown to prevail in a policy dispute.

    “They knew it would cause pain and they did it anyway,” House Speaker Mike Johnson said.

    Democrats said Republicans raced to pass tax breaks earlier this year that they say mostly will benefit the wealthy. But the bill before the House Wednesday “leaves families twisting in the wind with zero guarantee there will ever, ever be a vote to extend tax credits to help everyday people pay for their health care,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass.

    Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said Democrats would not give up on the subsidy extension even if the vote did not go their way.

    “This fight is not over,” Jeffries said. “We’re just getting started.”

    The House had not been in legislative session since Sept. 19, when it passed a short-term measure to keep the government open when the new budget year began in October. Johnson sent lawmakers home after that vote and put the onus on the Senate to act, saying House Republicans had done their job.

    What’s in the bill to end the shutdown

    The legislation is the result of a deal reached by eight senators who broke ranks with the Democrats after reaching the conclusion that Republicans would not bend on using a government funding to bill to extend the health care tax credits.

    The compromise funds three annual spending bills and extends the rest of government funding through Jan. 30. Republicans promised to hold a vote by mid-December to extend the health care subsidies, but there is no guarantee of success.

    The bill includes a reversal of the firing of federal workers by the Trump administration since the shutdown began. It also protects federal workers against further layoffs through January and guarantees they are paid once the shutdown is over. The bill for the Agriculture Department means people who rely on key food assistance programs will see those benefits funded without threat of interruption through the rest of the budget year.

    The package includes $203.5 million to boost security for lawmakers and an additional $28 million for the security of Supreme Court justices.

    Democrats also decried language in the bill that would give senators the opportunity to sue when a federal agency or employee searches their electronic records without notifying them, allowing for up to $500,000 in potential damages for each violation.

    The language seems aimed at helping Republican senators pursue damages if their phone records were analyzed by the FBI as part of an investigation into Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss. The provisions drew criticism from Republicans as well. Johnson said he was “very angry about it.”

    “That was dropped in at the last minute, and I did not appreciate that, nor did most of the House members,” Johnson said, promising a vote on the matter as early as next week.

    The biggest point of contention, though, was the fate of the expiring enhanced tax credit that makes health insurance more affordable through Affordable Care Act marketplaces.

    “It’s a subsidy on top of a subsidy. Our friends added it during COVID,” Cole said. “COVID is over. They set a date certain that the subsidies would run out. They chose the date.”

    Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the enhanced tax credit was designed to give more people access to health care and no Republican voted for it.

    “All they have done is try to eliminate access to health care in our country. The country is catching on to them,” Pelosi said.

    Without the enhanced tax credit, premiums on average will more than double for millions of Americans. More than 2 million people would lose health insurance coverage altogether next year, the Congressional Budget Office projected.

    Health care debate ahead

    It’s unclear whether the parties will find any common ground on health care before the December vote in the Senate. Johnson has said he will not commit to bringing it up in his chamber.

    Some Republicans have said they are open to extending the COVID-19 pandemic-era tax credits as premiums will soar for millions of people, but they also want new limits on who can receive the subsidies. Some argue that the tax dollars for the plans should be routed through individuals rather than go directly to insurance companies.

    Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said Monday that she was supportive of extending the tax credits with changes, such as new income caps. Some Democrats have signaled they could be open to that idea.

    House Democrats expressed great skepticism that the Senate effort would lead to a breakthrough.

    Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said Republicans have wanted to repeal the health overhaul for the past 15 years. “That’s where they’re trying to go,” she said.

    When could things return to normal?

    While the shutdown will end tonight, the return to pre-shutdown status will not be immediate. Air travel is expected to experience lingering impacts, as the transportation secretary noted that the speed of recovery will depend on how quickly air traffic controllers return to work, with many having retired during the shutdown.

    The FAA administrator stated that air traffic controllers will receive their full back pay within a week, but it remains unclear how quickly other federal workers will be compensated. In previous shutdowns, it took up to eight weeks for some workers to receive back pay.

    Regarding SNAP benefits, the American Public Human Services Association anticipates that most states will issue full benefits within three days after the shutdown ends, though some states may take about a week due to complications from issuing partial benefits during the shutdown.

    The Small Business Administration has indicated that once the government reopens, it will immediately begin processing and approving loans for small businesses.

    ___

    Associated Press writer Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House returns, set to end record-breaking government shutdown

    [ad_1]

    Right now the process is underway to reach that final vote in the House to end this longest government shutdown ever. We also wanted to lay out how it’s currently set to work. Over the last 2 days, House lawmakers have been flying in from across the country as they’ve been on recess during the entire shutdown. Some potentially face shutdown-related flight delays, but they are on their way back to the Capitol. The House agenda today was very specific, swearing in *** new congresswoman from Arizona when the House resumed this. Afternoon then debate and an initial procedural vote scheduled for around 5 p.m. Eastern today. If that passes, the House would debate again and is currently scheduled to hold *** final vote around 7 p.m. Eastern. That vote does not include healthcare subsidies, which started the whole shutdown in the first place. Of course we want to reopen the government. But that we need to decisively address the Republican healthcare crisis, and that begins with extending the Affordable Care Act tax credits. We believe the long national nightmare will be over tonight. It was completely and utterly foolish and pointless in the end, as we said all along. Democrats are largely expected to vote no on this. Republicans who hold *** majority in the House can only afford to lose 2 votes in order to pass this bill. And if that happens, the bill then heads over to President Donald Trump for his signature before the very likely long process of getting the government back up and running again. Reporting on Capitol Hill, I’m Amy Lou.

    House returns, set to end record-breaking government shutdown

    House lawmakers reconvened in Washington on Wednesday to vote on a bill that would end the longest government shutdown in U.S. history.

    Updated: 2:05 PM PST Nov 12, 2025

    Editorial Standards ⓘ

    House lawmakers raced back to Washington on Wednesday to vote on a bill that could end the 43-day government shutdown, making it the longest in U.S. history. Over the last two days, lawmakers have been flying in from across the country, some facing their own potential shutdown-related delays, to get to Wednesday’s expected final vote. The House’s agenda included swearing in a new congresswoman from Arizona, followed by debate and an initial procedural vote scheduled for early evening. If that passes, the House debates again before holding a final vote on the bill, expected around 7 p.m. ET. The bill currently does not include Affordable Care Act subsidies, which started the shutdown in the first place.Democrats, who are largely expected to vote “no” on the bill, expressed disappointment.”Of course, we want to reopen the government, but we need to decisively address the Republican health care crisis,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said. “That begins with extending the Affordable Care Act tax credits.”House Republicans, who hold a majority in the chamber, were largely expected to pass the measure despite Democrats’ objections, but can only afford to lose two votes for the bill to pass. “We believe the long national nightmare will be over tonight,” House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said. “It was completely and utterly foolish and pointless in the end, as we said all along.”If the bill clears the House, it will require President Donald Trump’s signature before beginning the likely lengthy process of getting the government back up and running again.However, full Republican support is not clear-cut ahead of the final vote. The bill includes a controversial provision that would ban most hemp products in the U.S. Supporters say it would close a dangerous loophole on unregulated products, but others argue it would destroy the hemp industry for many farmers. In the Senate, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., for example, voted against the bill. Similar action in the House on Wednesday could hold up its passage.Watch the latest coverage on the government shutdown:

    WASHINGTON —

    House lawmakers raced back to Washington on Wednesday to vote on a bill that could end the 43-day government shutdown, making it the longest in U.S. history.

    Over the last two days, lawmakers have been flying in from across the country, some facing their own potential shutdown-related delays, to get to Wednesday’s expected final vote.

    The House’s agenda included swearing in a new congresswoman from Arizona, followed by debate and an initial procedural vote scheduled for early evening. If that passes, the House debates again before holding a final vote on the bill, expected around 7 p.m. ET. The bill currently does not include Affordable Care Act subsidies, which started the shutdown in the first place.

    Democrats, who are largely expected to vote “no” on the bill, expressed disappointment.

    “Of course, we want to reopen the government, but we need to decisively address the Republican health care crisis,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said. “That begins with extending the Affordable Care Act tax credits.”

    House Republicans, who hold a majority in the chamber, were largely expected to pass the measure despite Democrats’ objections, but can only afford to lose two votes for the bill to pass.

    “We believe the long national nightmare will be over tonight,” House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said. “It was completely and utterly foolish and pointless in the end, as we said all along.”

    If the bill clears the House, it will require President Donald Trump’s signature before beginning the likely lengthy process of getting the government back up and running again.

    However, full Republican support is not clear-cut ahead of the final vote. The bill includes a controversial provision that would ban most hemp products in the U.S.

    Supporters say it would close a dangerous loophole on unregulated products, but others argue it would destroy the hemp industry for many farmers.

    In the Senate, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., for example, voted against the bill. Similar action in the House on Wednesday could hold up its passage.

    Watch the latest coverage on the government shutdown:

    [ad_2]

    Source link

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

    [ad_1]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Epstein files loomed large over vote

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

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

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

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

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

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

    “Justice cannot wait another day,” Grijalva said.

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

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

    [ad_2]

    Ana Ceballos

    Source link

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

    [ad_1]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    [ad_2]

    Michael Wilner, Ana Ceballos

    Source link

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

    [ad_1]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    (Mariam Zuhaib / Associated Press)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Two men.

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

    (J. Scott Applewhite / Associated Press)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    “The deal is very good,” he said.

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

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

    [ad_2]

    Ana Ceballos, Michael Wilner

    Source link

  • Republicans fret as shutdown threatens Thanksgiving travel chaos

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — Republican lawmakers and the Trump administration are increasingly anxious that an ongoing standoff with Democrats over reopening the government may drag into Thanksgiving week, one of the country’s busiest travel periods.

    Already, hundreds of flights have been canceled since the Federal Aviation Administration issued an unprecedented directive limiting flight operations at the nation’s biggest airports, including in Los Angeles, New York, Miami and Washington, D.C.

    Sean Duffy, the secretary of transportation, told Fox News on Thursday that the administration is prepared to mitigate safety concerns if the shutdown continues into the holiday week, leaving air traffic controllers without compensation over multiple payroll cycles. But “will you fly on time? Will your flight actually go? That is yet to be seen,” the secretary said.

    While under 3% of flights have been grounded, that number could rise to 20% by the holiday week, he added.

    “It’s really hard — really hard — to navigate a full month of no pay, missing two pay periods. So I think you’re going to have more significant disruptions in the airspace,” Duffy said. “And as we come into Thanksgiving, if we’re still in a shutdown posture, it’s gonna be rough out there. Really rough.”

    Senate Republicans said they are willing to work through the weekend, up through Veterans Day, to come up with an agreement with Democrats that could end the government shutdown, which is already the longest in history.

    But congressional Democrats believe their leverage has only grown to extract more concessions from the Trump administration as the shutdown goes on.

    A strong showing in races across the country in Tuesday’s elections buoyed optimism among Democrats that the party finally has some momentum, as it focuses its messaging on affordability and a growing cost-of-living crisis for the middle class.

    Democrats have withheld the votes needed to reopen the government over Republican refusals to extend Affordable Care Act tax credits. As a result, Americans who get their healthcare through the ACA marketplace have begun seeing dramatic premium hikes since open enrollment began on Nov. 1 — further fueling Democratic confidence that Republicans will face a political backlash for their shutdown stance.

    Now, Democratic demands have expanded, insisting Republicans guarantee that federal workers get paid back for their time furloughed or working without pay — and that those who were fired get their jobs back.

    A bill introduced by Republican Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, called the Shutdown Fairness Act, would ensure that federal workers receive back pay during a government funding lapse. But Democrats have objected to a vote on the measure that’s not tied to their other demands, on ACA tax breaks and the status of fired workers.

    Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has proposed passing a clean continuing resolution already passed by the House followed by separate votes on three bills that would fund the government through the year. But his Democratic counterpart said Friday he wants to attach a vote on extending the ACA tax credits to an extension of government funding.

    Democrats, joined by some Republicans, are also demanding protections built in to any government spending bills that would safeguard federal programs against the Trump administration withholding funds appropriated by Congress, a process known as impoundment.

    President Trump, for his part, blamed the ongoing shutdown for Tuesday’s election results earlier this week, telling Republican lawmakers that polling shows the continuing crisis is hurting their party. But he also continues to advocate for Thune to do away with the filibuster, a core Senate rule requiring 60 votes for bills that fall outside the budget reconciliation process, and simply reopen the government with a vote down party lines.

    “If the filibuster is terminated, we will have the most productive three years in the history of our country,” Trump told reporters on Friday at a White House event. “If the filibuster is not terminated, then we will be in a slog, with the Democrats.”

    So far, Thune has rejected that request. But the majority leader said Thursday that “the pain this shutdown has caused is only getting worse,” warning that 40 million Americans risk food insecurity as funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program lapses.

    The Trump administration lost a court case this week arguing that it could withhold SNAP benefits, a program that was significantly defunded in the president’s “Big Beautiful Bill” act earlier this year.

    “Will the far left not be satisfied until federal workers and military families are getting their Thanksgiving dinner from a food bank? Because that’s where we’re headed,” Thune added.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Wilner

    Source link