Politics Desk

WASHINGTON — An acutely contentious and historically expensive midterm campaign barrels to a finish Monday, on the eve of elections that will set the nation’s course for the remaining half of President Trump’s second term.

Republicans are bracing for a backlash from voters as Democrats prepare for gains — but the magnitude of any “blue wave,” and whether it could sweep not only the U.S. House but also the Senate into Democratic control, will be the key question as Americans finish casting ballots Tuesday.

Early voting had already seen strong turnout, including among influence blocs such as Latino and Black voters. Candidates spent the weekend crisscrossing their states and pulling in surrogates to make a final push for voters still on the fence.

Capping a turbulent first half of Trump’s second term, the campaign has been defined by affordability and economic issues that have created headwinds for Republicans and spurred a possible turn toward Democrats by voters. And as Trump has pushed the limits of executive power, the midterms could act as a consequential check on his presidential reach.

In recent polls, voters have consistently put Democrats several points ahead on the generic ballot and given a historically low approval rating to Trump.

Eyes are now on Senate control, as an unexpected competitiveness by Democrats in a handful of red states has put the majority into play. It would require a “massive” wave for Democrats, but the fact that it is a possibility at all reflects an “extraordinary situation,” said Thaddeus Kousser, a UC San Diego political science professor.

With seven toss-up seats, tough math for Democrats and tough polling for Republicans, the outcome is far from certain. There may not be a large difference between the Democrats eking out enough seats for the majority or Republicans succeeding at holding it, said Charles Franklin, director of the Marquette Law School Poll.

“Just a little bit better night for the Democrats, and they pick up quite a number of these very close seats,” Franklin said. “Just a little bit better night for the Republicans, and Democrats fall slightly short in several of these competitive seats.”

The outcome in competitive races will not only set the dynamic between Trump and Congress for the next two years, but also hold signs for the 2028 presidential campaign. Both parties are closely watching how well Democrats can do in red states, how Republicans perform in Michigan and how far to the left Trump-voting districts swing.

The party out of power typically wins House control in midterm elections. This year, fatigue with Trump — fueled by the war in Iran, immigration policy, tariffs and other issues — merged with concern about prices, housing and AI issues to drive that movement toward the minority party, analysts said.

“This is an opportunity for the American people to try to put some brakes on the government,” said Todd Belt, a professor of political management at George Washington University.

The midterms are designed to function as a potential check on every presidency, said Christopher Warshaw, a Georgetown University public policy professor.

“The reason we have a democracy is in part because the out party does well in midterm elections,” Warshaw said. “That function of midterms is really important regardless of who’s in power.”

In many races, the quality of individual candidates also is poised to be a deciding factor, including in Texas, where Republican Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton has struggled to gain traction, and in Maine, where Democrat Troy Jackson has labored to confront Republican Sen. Susan Collins’ staying power.

The campaign has held significant twists, among them the unexpected death of Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina; the dropping out of Democrat Graham Platner from Maine’s Senate race; and the questions about the alleged involvement of operatives aligned with Democrat Mary Peltola’s campaign in the presence of a spoiler candidate on the Alaska ballot.

And Trump gambled on a largely dismissive approach toward voters’ affordability concerns; in recent days, he has also drawn attention with off-script comments at his rallies about Republican candidates’ rear ends and for lashing out at a reporter who questioned why he had canceled his final two rallies, which Trump later rescheduled.

Voter turnout could also have a significant effect on results; both parties have worked to reach independent voters while turning out their bases.

Across the country, nonpartisan groups are holding last-minute voting events, encouraging people to fill out their ballots. A hotline run by a nonprofit coalition organized by the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law is receiving hundreds of calls a day about how to vote.

Brandon Waithe, 42, an Air Force veteran who has organized get-out-the-vote events through Project HALO, a voting initiative, said he hoped to help raise turnout.

He hosted a line dancing event in a Cleveland public plaza last month aimed at reminding people to vote — and to “tie some positive emotion to the act of voting,” he said.

“It’s like, ‘Ah, cool, all right, voting’s not so bad,’” Waithe said. “There’s no pressure. … We’re not telling you which party to vote for or which candidate. We’re just like, ‘Thank you for participating in voting.’”

The speed with which results are known Tuesday will partly depend on how large a blue wave might occur. The House majority could become clear Tuesday night, but the margin could take a little more time with swing races in slower-counting states such as California and Pennsylvania.

If the Senate majority comes down to Maine or Alaska and if those races are very close, the outcome will probably take some days to verify, Kousser said.

“What I’ve been telling people is you’re going to have to buckle up and wait,” he said.

And, of course, one of the few certainties of an election is that no one knows exactly what will happen. The electorate is volatile, said Sonoma State University political science professor David McCuan, and there are always wild cards.

“There will be a surprise on election night,” McCuan said.

The last day to register to vote online for the Nov. 3 general election was Oct. 19. You still can register to vote, however, through the “same day” voter registration process.

Here’s what you need to know.

Who can register to vote in California?

You must be a United States citizen and a California resident, 18 years or older on election day, not serving a state or federal prison term for a felony and not deemed mentally incompetent by a court.

How to register via the ‘same day’ voter registration process

If you missed the registration deadline, you can register as a conditional voter through the same-day voter registration process.

Eligible citizens who need to register or re-register to vote within 14 days of an election can complete this process at county elections offices, polling places or vote centers.

You’ll need to re-register to vote if you’ve changed your:

• name
• residence address or mailing address
• political party

If you’ve become a U.S. citizen fewer than 15 days before the election, you may register to vote by visiting your county elections office anytime before the polls close on election day. You must bring proof that you are a U.S. citizen and sign a form saying you are eligible to vote in California.

For more information, contact your county elections office; a complete list of contact information for each county office can be found here.

What documentation will I need to complete the registration process?

The application requires a state driver’s license or California identification card number, or you can use the last four numbers on your Social Security card.

If you don’t have any of those, you still can register. You’ll be assigned a unique identifier to validate your registration.

Here’s how that information is verified:

• California ID numbers are matched with Department of Motor Vehicles records.
• Social Security numbers are matched with Social Security Administration records.
• Unique identifiers are verified by election officials.

What if I need a guide or voting instructions in another language?

Voters can choose to get election information in English, Spanish, Chinese, Hindi, Japanese, Khmer, Korean, Tagalog, Thai or Vietnamese by calling the phone numbers listed here or by using these online options to get help.

Where can I complete the ‘same day’ voter registration process?

You can visit an early voting location. Now through Nov. 2, in-person voting centers are open from 10 a.m. to 7 p.m., according to the Los Angeles County registrar-recorder/county clerk’s office.

You also can complete the same-day voter registration process on election day. All polling locations are open on election day from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.

What’s a provisional ballot and when will my vote be counted?

With same-day registration, you are “conditionally” registered to vote and your ballot is provisional.

The provisional ballot is a regular ballot that is placed in a special envelope prior to being put in the ballot box.

This just means that elections officials must confirm that you are registered to vote in that county and that you did not already vote in that election. After that information is confirmed, your ballot will be processed and counted.

More election news

Spearheading the campaign in opposition of Proposition 38 is Robert Kaplan, senior scholar at the Clinical Excellence Research Center at Stanford School of Medicine, and David Panush, who served as a senior health policy and budget advisor to five state Senate presidents.

Kaplan stated, “As written, Proposition 38 is deceptive,” because the proposed criteria for awarding the grant funding would appear to create an extremely minuscule pool of qualified recipients.

To qualify, a recipient institution must be established since Jan. 1, 2025, and have at least 200,000 square feet of research space it controls. From that start date, the recipients also must have an affiliation agreement with a UC campus and be affiliated with a UC Health system that records more than 35,000 inpatient admissions and 3.5 million outpatient visits annually. The qualification requirements also include having identified at least $250 million in philanthropic support and securing two $50-million commitments for designated research programs.

Kaplan argues medical research grants should be awarded through a competitive process that gives all applicants equal opportunity. Instead, his campaign states, only the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy, co-founded by billionaire Gary K. Michelson, would qualify under the proposed criteria. In a Cal Matters report, a UCLA spokesperson confirmed that among all nonprofit entities affiliated with the school, “only the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy could satisfy the stipulations of Prop. 38.”

Robin Swanson, spokesperson for the Yes on 38 campaign, said that “lots of institutions would qualify for funds under this measure.”

“But it is very likely that [the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy], which is a research institute affiliated with UCLA, will qualify for half of the funds under the current criteria,” she added during a virtual news conference in mid-September.

Swanson said it was likely that other research institutions from Stanford, Scripps Research, USC and Cedars Sinai would qualify for the other 50% of funds, “and that really is what we wanted to ensure that we had research institutes that were ready to hit the ground running.”

Ultimately, she said, the decision lies with the California Department of Public Health.

Michelson’s institute first became a nonprofit in 2022, and the co-founder has donated at least $120 million to the research organization. The billionaire is the board chair of the institute, which is housed at a research center owned by UCLA, according to the opposition campaign.

The Vote No on Prop. 38 campaign also argues against the financial model of the measure, saying a bond would saddle taxpayers with decades of debt and that any potential future revenue from the research is uncertain.

DETROIT — Michigan Democrat Abdul El-Sayed’s former opponent in the U.S. Senate primary, Rep. Haley Stevens, stunned party officials Sunday by endorsing his Republican rival, Mike Rogers, after Democratic tensions boiled over days before the election that could determine the balance of power on Capitol Hill.

Stevens endorsed Rogers after attending a Detroit church service with him. The remarkable show of support for the President Trump-backed candidate in the tightly contested race comes after she was uninvited to a joint event the same day with El-Sayed, who defeated the congresswoman by a slim margin in the August primary.

“Our Democratic nominee for Senate said I was no longer welcome in his campaign and that I should stay away,” Stevens said in a video announcing the endorsement. “And he’s right. And that’s why I am endorsing Mike Rogers for the United States Senate today.”

El-Sayed dismissed the endorsement when asked about it by reporters later Sunday, saying he’s focused on issues voters care about, such as the high cost of living.

“At the end of the day I actually don’t think about Haley Stevens,” he said, adding later: “None of this matters.”

Michigan Democratic leaders were left shocked. With just less than 48 hours to go before election day, a party that had spent months trying to unite behind its Senate nominee was suddenly grappling with an extraordinary defection in one of this year’s most important races.

Tensions between the two Democrats have festered since the primary. Stevens is a staunch supporter of Israel, while El-Sayed is a fierce critic of the U.S. ally. He has also been criticized by some in the community for past remarks regarding a Michigan synagogue attack and for appearances with controversial streamer Hasan Piker.

El-Sayed, a former Michigan public health official, is facing Rogers, an ex-congressman, for the seat held by the retiring Democrat, Gary Peters. Keeping Michigan in Democratic hands is vital to the party’s effort to win a majority for the final two years of Trump’s second term.

Stevens and El-Sayed were originally scheduled to attend church together, along with other Michigan and national Democrats, including South Carolina Rep. James E. Clyburn. Democrats hoped it would be a show of unity as they worked to boost turnout in the Detroit area, where concerns have lingered about enthusiasm among Black and Jewish voters in key Democratic strongholds.

Instead, Stevens swayed to gospel music alongside Rogers in the pews at Perfecting Church, while El-Sayed was a few miles away at a different house of worship campaigning alongside prominent Democrats, including Clyburn.

Stevens’ top aide resigns

After the church service north of Detroit, where Stevens and fiance Jason Turkish worshiped with Rogers and his wife, Kristi, the congresswoman told reporters, “I’m not turning my back on Democrats. It is this one vote.”

Rogers, standing beside her, said he was “honored” by her support.

Their appearance came days after Stevens publicly reaffirmed she would vote for El-Sayed. It also led her longtime chief of staff to resign, with a number of staff members expected to follow soon, according to a person familiar with the developments who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters.

“We are shocked and heartbroken,” the aide said in a statement.

The state party chair, Curtis Hertel, said Stevens’ endorsement “shows that she has abandoned everything she claims to care about.”

“We reject the attempts by Stevens and bad-faith actors to divide our party and undermine our momentum,” Hertel wrote, adding that they won’t let such eleventh-hour “distractions” deter the campaign. Hertel later wrote that Stevens “is not a current member of the Michigan Democratic Party, nor will she be in the future.”

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, who supported Stevens in the primary, denounced her endorsement of Rogers.

“This is a despicable betrayal from Rep. Stevens,” Schumer, of New York, wrote in a social media post.

Dingell disinvited Stevens after it became ‘distracting’

Among the Democrats who joined El-Sayed at church Sunday morning were Rep. Debbie Dingell of Michigan, Sen. Angela Alsobrooks of Maryland and state Sen. Mallory McMorrow, who dropped out of the Senate primary before voting began.

Dingell, a senior Democratic figure in the state who helped organize the planned joint appearance, said she asked Stevens not to attend and that Stevens told her she would abide by that.

“I’m the one who pulled it because it had become way too distracting,” Dingell said a telephone interview Sunday before Stevens’ appearance with Rogers. “This is not how I was going to spend my weekend before the election, to be perfectly frank.”

In the August primary, Stevens defeated El-Sayed in Wayne County, which includes Detroit, and neighboring Oakland County, drawing support from Black and Jewish voters who are important parts of the Democratic coalition.

Early voting for Tuesday’s election has been underway since Oct. 24. As of Friday, more than 1.8 million people had already voted in Michigan.

How did we get here?

The Democratic primary was among the most bitter this year. Each candidate accused the other of making personal attacks. Tens of millions of dollars in outside spending poured into the race, including from the super PAC affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, known as AIPAC, which backed Stevens. El-Sayed took particular offense to an outside group’s ad accusing him of disrespecting women.

Although Stevens pledged after the primary to help El-Sayed however she could, the two have not appeared together publicly since a unity breakfast two days after his primary win.

Last week Stevens’ fiance told the Detroit News that he would vote for Rogers. Stevens later appeared on CNN to reaffirm her support for El-Sayed but urged his campaign to “shut out the hate and call it out.”

But on Friday, after the Associated Press reported on the planned joint appearance, Stevens released a lengthy statement calling on El-Sayed to condemn an ad by an independent left-wing group that linked U.S. support for Israel to high grocery prices.

“Abdul promises to get money out of politics,” Stevens wrote. “He can begin by getting Israel out of his explanation for everything Michigan cannot afford.”

El-Sayed then responded: “So while Congresswoman Stevens seems intent on relitigating a primary that ended three months ago, let’s all focus on the task at hand.”

He made clear the ad was not made by his campaign and said “I do not agree with the contents of that ad.”

The Michigan-born Democratic nominee, meanwhile, has been the frequent target of Islamophobic attacks, including from Trump. At a rally last weekend, Trump called El-Sayed a “jihadist,” adding: “He would be the only senator that will have to go through a metal detector before he’s allowed to go into the Senate.”

Trump and Republicans revel in the discord

Trump praised Stevens in a social media post, saying she was “a Highly Respected Democrat” and that her support from Black and Jewish voters in Michigan is “virtually unprecedented.”

“Haley said what few people are willing to say. She showed great and almost unprecedented loyalty to the Great People of Michigan with what she did,” Trump wrote. “It’s a thing called bravery, and few people have it like just displayed by Congresswoman Haley Stevens!”

Appearing with Trump in Iowa for a campaign rally, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said that he spoke to Stevens after she endorsed Rogers. Johnson said he “encouraged her to stay safe and keep speaking the truth.”

Stevens is not seeking reelection to her House seat Tuesday.

A spokesman for the Republican National Committee, Hunter Lovell, said Democrats who feel abandoned by El-Sayed “have a home” with Rogers.

Cappelletti, Williams and Householder write for the Associated Press. Cappelletti reported from Washington.

WASHINGTON — People heading into the Affordable Care Act open enrollment period with plans to sign up for insurance should expect a variety of changes in 2027, including higher premiums and fewer coverage options.

The sign-up window for the marketplace, also known as Obamacare, started Sunday in most states and runs through Jan. 15.

Big changes to the exchange include expiring financial assistance, rising rates, potential delays in working with a broker, new restrictions on immigrants, and stricter enrollment checks.

Financial help, including premium tax credits and cost-sharing reductions, is now restricted for many groups of people who were previously eligible.

Across the board, healthcare experts predict less coverage and higher prices, with the average price of health insurance purchased through the marketplaces expected to rise by 13% in 2027, according to analysis of new CMS data by the healthcare research nonprofit KFF.

Increases are driven by multiple factors

Cynthia Cox, a vice president and director of the ACA program at KFF, said the increase is primarily driven by rising healthcare costs, hospital market concentration, and potential factors such as the No Surprises Act, which took effect in 2022 and bans surprise billing, or the rising availability of GLP-1 drugs.

The people who will be most affected by the new increases are those who do not qualify for a subsidy.

“They may or may not be able to afford to continue to keep their coverage into next year,” Cox said, adding that “a lot of them have already moved into bronze plans, which are the cheapest plans.”

A CMS fact sheet about open enrollment that was distributed Friday says, “Americans using HealthCare.gov will have robust access to low-cost plans.”

The price of ACA insurance has skyrocketed for many people during President Trump’s second term after Republicans opposed extending COVID-era subsidies that had helped offset the costs of health insurance for most enrollees during the Biden administration.

That resulted in 1.2 million fewer people signing up for coverage in the exchanges.

Falling number of enrollees

As of February, roughly 19.2 million people in the United States were actively enrolled in ACA marketplace health plans, according to the Department of Health and Human Services website. The number of enrollees grew during the COVID-19 pandemic when enhanced subsidies became available through the American Rescue Plan Act and Inflation Reduction Act, both signed into law by President Biden.

New regulations starting in 2027 will also limit tax credits for certain lawfully present immigrants, which could result in an additional 1 million uninsured individuals over time.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration has been removing ACA enrollees from the program as part of the ongoing campaign against what it characterizes as waste, fraud and abuse.

In September, Vice President JD Vance and other officials in the Republican administration announced plans to remove 760,000 ACA enrollees from public healthcare exchanges, alleging the individuals were fraudulently enrolled in the program or simply did not exist.

Vance said the discovery and canceled subsidy payments for hundreds of thousands of people from the exchanges, part of an administration-wide crackdown on alleged fraud, would result in $2.2 billion in cost savings.

It’s unclear how many more people will drop off of ACA coverage in 2027, Cox said. But with higher premiums, immigration eligibility changes and the anti-fraud efforts, “I think there’s going to be fewer people enrolled in this market, but it’s going to be harder to understand why.”

Hussein writes for the Associated Press.

MONTGOMERY, Ala. — When the U.S. Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act this year, U.S. Rep. Shomari Figures knew he was going to be targeted.

Alabama’s Republican-controlled Legislature soon after redrew the 2nd Congressional District, one of only two in the state represented by a Democrat, to make it easier for the GOP to win.

Figures, one of several Black members of Congress who saw their districts redrawn, has complicated that plan. He is fighting to hold on to his seat by not only rallying Black voters in cities such as Montgomery and Tuskegee, both steeped in the nation’s struggle for civil rights, but also talking to voters deep in conservative territory, tugging at their concerns over rising prices of food, fuel and fertilizer.

“We know that the deck has been stacked. We know that the rules have been changed in the middle of the game, but we know what we’ve got to do,” Figures told a cheering crowd recently in Montgomery. “All we’ve got to do is show up. All we’ve got to do is show out. All we’ve got to do is fight.”

National groups have taken notice.

Spending on television advertising in the district has gone from almost nothing to nearly $10 million in the last seven weeks, according to AdImpact, with Democratic groups outspending Republicans.

Figures’ race against Rhett Marques, a state lawmaker endorsed by President Trump, is drawing attention as another sign of potential trouble for Republicans as they try to hold their majorities in Congress. The contest also has become a rallying point for Black voters angry over how Southern states swiftly gerrymandered congressional districts after the Supreme Court decision.

U.S. Sen. Cory Booker said the Alabama election is an opportunity to send a message on voting rights.

“The people of Alabama have a chance again to say this is a moral moment — ‘Not on my watch,’” Booker (D-N.J.) said during a campaign stop with Figures. “I will not stay seated while you try to take away our power.”

Racial gerrymandering

Figures was elected in 2024 after a federal court ordered new districts, ruling that the Legislature had unlawfully diluted the voting power of Black residents. Alabama is 27% Black and has seven U.S. House seats. With Figures’ victory, the state added a second Black member of Congress for the first time in its history, aligning its representation with its demographics.

But the Supreme Court decision last term paved the way for drawing new lines. The map Alabama is using on election day reduces the Black voting-age population in Figures’ district from 48% to 40%, making the district more likely to go Republican. Trump carried the area within the new district by 14 percentage points two years ago.

Despite the district’s conservative lean, Democrats are hoping a redistricting backlash and frustration over the economy will galvanize voters on Tuesday and send Figures back to Congress.

Some Black voters say they see echoes of the state’s Jim Crow past in the redrawing of the district.

“I’m 75, and history is repeating itself,” said Francis Fanning, a retired substitute teacher in Montgomery.

Sheyann Webb-Christburg was 8 in 1965 when she and other voting rights marchers were attacked by law enforcement in Selma.

“Much blood, sweat and tears was shed in an effort for African Americans to gain their right to vote,” said Webb-Christburg, who lives in Montgomery, and remembers a feeling of excitement when Figures was elected two years ago.

“It’s very sad that we are in this place,” she said. “But we still got to continue just as we did back in the ’60s. Lift our voices, because we always keep hope alive.”

Republican says he’s aligned with ‘Alabama values’

For the GOP, the new lines are about reclaiming a district that was reliably Republican before it was altered by the federal court.

“We have an opportunity to not only flip a seat from Democrat back to Republican here in Alabama, but to also hold the majority in the House with a win,” Marques said.

He emphasizes his legislative record, which includes support for school choice, law enforcement and restrictions on transgender athletes’ participation in girls’ sports and gender-affirming care for minors. Marques said he is more aligned with “the Alabama values in this district.”

He acknowledged voter concerns about affordability, but put the blame on President Biden’s administration.

Marques has deep ties to the heavily Republican areas of the district, where he served on the Enterprise City Council and ran an automotive store for decades.

“I know his values and I trust him,” said Coffee County Sheriff Scott Byrd, who appeared with Marques at an event with local law enforcement officials.

Republicans are optimistic about reclaiming the seat, but have expressed concerns about the potential for lackluster turnout as Figures mounts an aggressive campaign. Marques said he expects to prevail “if the Republicans and the people who believe in freedom” go vote.

U.S. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise said the district is one of three dozen swing seats that will determine control of Congress.

“This seat absolutely will have a larger say on the direction of the country. Do we want conservative policies that are rooted in common sense, or do you want far-left socialists?” Scalise (R-La.) said at a campaign event for Marques in the city of Dothan.

From Black churches to Boll Weevil festival

Figures has been campaigning in both heavily Republican and Democratic areas as he seeks to maximize Democratic turnout while trying to persuade more conservative and independent voters.

He said affordability is the overriding issue facing all voters, from grocery and gas prices to farmers’ high fertilizer costs.

“The cost of living in this country is getting out of control. And we don’t come from a district or a state where people have the means to just continue to pump out money for $4 a gallon for gas or $8 for ground beef,” Figures said.

Figures often notes that the median individual income in Alabama is $34,000 and people struggle with access to hospitals and healthcare. He framed the race as a choice between “someone with a record of serving the people” or someone there to serve a president.

On an October weekend, his heavy schedule of stops included greeting people at the annual Boll Weevil Fall Festival in Enterprise, a predominantly white city of about 31,000. The festival is named for the cotton-destroying insect that forced the community’s pivot to more prosperous peanut farming a century ago.

The next day, he made a string of appearances through largely Black churches in nearby Dothan, urging people to vote.

Figures often notes that the district was never drawn as majority Black, but initially was split evenly between Black and white voters.

Speaking at Greater Beulah Baptist Church, a predominantly Black church in strongly Republican Houston County, Figures said the district was reconfigured in a way that makes it more difficult for “somebody who looks like me” to be able to win. That doesn’t mean it’s not possible, he said.

“Even though they are changing district lines, we still have the right to show up and make our voices heard,” he said.

Chandler writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Thomas Beaumont in Des Moines contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Barbara Weigand could not have prepared more for retirement. She stayed healthy and saved diligently for years.

This year, though, a shoulder surgery and a bladder cancer diagnosis have really tested her finances. She recently withdrew $4,000 from her retirement account to cover medical expenses associated with her cancer treatment.

“On my monthly income, I would not be able to afford my new medical expenses,” says Weigand, 83, who lives in North Canton, Ohio. She is currently on a Medicare Advantage plan and was searching for new coverage as Medicare’s open enrollment period began in October.

For older adults in the United States, the rising cost of healthcare is hitting where it hurts most — their pocketbooks. With Medicare costs, prescription drug prices and long-term care expenses weighing on household budgets, their concerns could carry significant political weight heading into Tuesday’s elections.

Weigand is part of a reliable voting bloc; 83% of voters over age 50 say they’re extremely motivated to vote in the midterms, according to an AARP poll conducted in early October. Their concerns over managing healthcare costs put the issue of affordability squarely in the spotlight.

Here are some of their biggest healthcare concerns — and how Weigand sees them.

Changes to Medicare plans

Open enrollment for Medicare plans began in mid-October, and enrollees are facing a slew of changes that will go into effect in 2027.

During the enrollment period, people are considering higher Part D out-of-pocket caps, the end of temporary federal Part D premium subsidies, and new drug price negotiations. Additionally, in some states, insurers put caps on the number of people who can enroll in Advantage plans, pulling out of markets or eliminating plans that people have come to rely on.

Juliette Cubanski, director of KFF’s program on Medicare policy, told the Associated Press that the open enrollment period offers enrollees “an opportunity to evaluate the coverage they have and see if there might be better options for them in terms of accessing the care that they need, at possibly a lower cost.”

Although Weigand is grateful to have the mental acuity to do the research and the spiritual community that she relies on, she worries about other older people who are struggling to plan for the year ahead. “There are so many changes, and a lot of people my age who don’t know where to start,” she says. “What do they do?”

The affordability of prescription drugs

The Trump administration says it has made a priority of lowering drug prices in its effort to show that it is addressing soaring costs. President Trump has struck multiple most-favored-nation drug deals with pharmaceutical companies and has launched the discount drug website TrumpRx, among other steps.

In September, his administration said all 50 states would join in on a program set to provide most-favored-nation pricing to some drugs within the Medicaid program, bringing the net price of selected drugs down to prices paid in certain other countries.

Still, the cost of prescription drugs prevents some people from filling prescriptions. A KFF survey from March found that about 4 in 10 U.S. adults say they have not taken their medication as prescribed in the last year due to costs.

Weigand is considering rationing her drugs to save money. “I’ve been thinking — if I could just do this every other day rather than every day to make the medicine last longer,” she says. “Isn’t that sad?“

The KFF report says about 1 in 5 people surveyed had cut pills in half or skipped doses of medicine in the prior year because of the cost.

The costs of long-term support

The costs of receiving long-term care — whether from spouses, home-care aides or friends — have risen steeply for retirees.

An AARP report released Wednesday that examines out-of-pocket caregiving expenses finds that family caregivers are spending nearly 60% more supporting a family member or friend than five years ago. They spend an average of $11,508 a year supporting a family member or friend, compared with $7,242 in 2021, according to the report.

Nancy LeaMond, AARP’s executive vice president and chief advocacy officer, said “we’re already hearing from our members about healthcare affordability — its prescription drug costs, caregiver costs, copays, premiums,” she said. “Not only are we trying to help family caregivers with their finances, but also to get them the kind of information they need to help their loved ones.”

These worries are top of mind for older people. About one-third of Americans over 50 provide regular care to an adult relative or friend with a health issue or disability, according to a national poll on healthy aging conducted in September 2025 by the University of Michigan.

The solvency of Social Security

The Social Security Administration announced last month that the annual cost-of-living adjustment for older adults and people with disabilities will rise by 3.6% beginning in 2027. That translates to $75 extra per month for the nearly 72 million people who receive monthly Social Security benefits and about 7.3 million beneficiaries who get Supplemental Security Income.

The agency faces an approaching bankruptcy date if a funding shortfall is not addressed by Congress.

The Social Security and Medicare trustees’ report from June states that Social Security’s combined trust funds, which cover old age and disability recipients, will be unable to pay full benefits beginning in 2034. After that, incoming revenue would cover about 83% of scheduled benefits.

With 2034 not far away, the upcoming Congress will be faced with determining how to shore up the program.

Matt Hogan, a partner at the polling firm Impact Research, has this advice to candidates in the closing days of the midterm campaign: “Regardless of party, to make inroads with these voters, Social Security and Medicare should definitely be part of their messaging.”

Hussein writes for the Associated Press.

Donning a creepy mask of Democratic rival Xavier Becerra, Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton dashed around a children’s Halloween event dishing out candy and warnings about potential liberal tax policies.

“Vote for Becerra, and your parents will have to pay every mile they drive. Isn’t that great?” Hilton sarcastically said at a Trunk or Treat gathering Saturday in Highland Park. “These children are very pricey because if their parents vote for Becerra, they will be taxed every mile they drive. Yay! Yay! Mileage tax! Mileage tax! Mileage tax!”

Becerra was not spooked when he heard of Hilton’s get-up and put-down.

“I suspect, if he takes off that mask, you’ll see Donald Trump right underneath,” Becerra, a former congressman, state attorney general and member of President Biden’s Cabinet, said at a campaign event in Sacramento on Saturday. “That’s who he really is. Either that or he’s a clown.”

With Tuesday’s election barreling toward them, Becerra and Hilton traded barbs and did their the best to gin up support as they crisscrossed California in what has been a relatively sedate race to succeed Democrat Gavin Newsom, who is wrapping up his final term as governor. Recent polls show Becerra leading Hilton by at least 20 percentage points, which is not a surprise in a state where Democratic voters vastly outnumber Republicans and GOP candidates last won a statewide election two decades ago.

Xavier Becerra, Democratic nominee for governor, speaks during a reception Friday in San Francisco.

(Lea Suzuki / San Francisco Chronicle / Getty Images)

Becerra has spent the waning days of the campaign stumping for Democrats in competitive House races in the Central Valley and Southern California.

Party leaders are trying to capitalize on broad anti-Trump sentiment to juice the state’s liberal electorate and win House seats that were redrawn to favor Democrats, including a Sacramento-area seat currently held by Republican-turned-independent Rep. Kevin Kiley.

“We’re not just gonna take back these seats in California. We’re gonna take back the House and the Senate,” Becerra told costumed and cheering volunteers during a quick Saturday stop in support of Richard Pan, the Democrat challenging Kiley. Trump, Becerra said, wants to “destroy democracy. That’s why we’re getting out to vote.”

The Republican president is a big motivator for Democrats this year. California’s high cost of living was among the top concerns of California voters this election, but that was recently eclipsed by fears about Trump’s policies and their desire for a governor to fight back against his administration.

“Everything the Trump administration has done so far is something I disagree with,” 19-year-old Arthur Galvan said after Becerra spoke at Pan’s campaign headquarters. But the UC Davis sophomore said his top priorities are education and one day being able to afford a home, even in Lincoln, the semi-rural and fast-growing town he grew up in.

“Compared to the rest of the state, housing over there is slightly cheaper. But even still, that’s not attainable,” Galvan said. “I don’t think that there’s many easy ways to go about this but it’s something that we have to look into.”

Asked about his support for a proposed mileage tax — which would require drivers to pay a fee based on the total number of miles driven in a period of time — Becerra said he is considering all options to maintain road funding as more Californians adopt electric vehicles and stop paying the gas tax.

“We need to pay for our roads and our bridges and our highways. We need to pay for mass transit. You can’t do it if you don’t have the money,” he said. “I’m not gonna say exactly how it will be, because that’s work we have to do with the Legislature, and with every community having a chance to speak up.”

Hilton, a former Fox News commentator and political advisor to British Prime Minister David Cameron, has embraced his underdog status. The quick-witted Republican has pinballed from California’s deeply-red northern territories to Democratic strongholds in San Francisco and L.A., generating enough heat to remain in the spotlight but not enough to catch fire. He tailgated with Chargers and Rams fans at SoFi Stadium on Sunday, and had planned to rally voters at a Bakersfield demolition derby the night before, but pulled out when rain was forecast.

He has promised to lower gas prices to $3 per gallon, and on Thursday held a $3-a-gallon fill-up event in the San Joaquin Valley. Hilton also vowed eliminate state taxes on workers’ first $150,000 of income, scuttle the behind-schedule, over-budget high-speed rail project and abolish the DMV.

Though endorsed by Trump, Hilton has framed his campaign around the many ills facing California — including the lack of affordable housing, a persistent and worsening homelessness crisis, entrenched budget deficits and high gas prices — all of which he blames on years of Democratic rule.

At the Halloween event on Saturday, Hilton asked Italia Sandoval’s 3-year-old daughter Milania if she would prefer candy or a potential mileage tax. The toddler, understandably confused, opted for candy. Her mother, 31, jumped in, saying that such a levy would mean less story time, field trips and park and library visits for her family’s home-schooled children and further hamper their dreams of one day buying a home.

“Taxes are killing Californians. I want to buy my own home. Can’t afford it,” said the Huntington Park resident, a registered Republican who become politically engaged after studying theater at Cal State LA.

The daughter of a Mexican immigrant said her husband proposed moving to Idaho because of the cost of living in California, but she balked because their families live here. So they found other methods of cutting their budget.

“I shop at Goodwills, yard sales, Facebook Marketplace, you name it,” Sandoval said. “I even sadly say I pick up clothes off the side of the street sometimes. … It’s taught me to be resourceful in this state. But it’s like, come on.”

Aided by his Halloween mask and cardboard cutouts portraying Becerra as a hand puppet controlled by Newsom, Hilton has turned his opponent into a symbol of California’s high cost of living and “killjoy” rules. During a Friday night rally in Sacramento, the Republican candidate lamented local bans on gas appliances and a statewide prohibition on flavored tobacco products.

“It’s ridiculous. They don’t mind the fentanyl, they give out free drugs to hopeless addicts, but you try getting flavored Zyn in California — no way. That is insane,” he said, drawing cheers mostly from younger audience members. Lawmakers approved the ban in 2020 and voters upheld it two years later.

GOP gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton campaigns at a Trunk or Treat block party Saturday in Highland Park.

(David Butow / For The Times)

Though Becerra is considered unbeatable in blue California in the race, many Hilton fans are clinging to hope that the Republican candidate will overcome the odds.

“We need help. I bought a hybrid and still am like, the gas, it’s killing me,” said Marina Gabel, adding that the paycheck from her school district job is “crumbs.” The Roseville Republican wore a shirt to Hilton’s Sacramento rally that described Newsom as a “California Horror Story” in a nod to the long-running FX anthology series.

In the final days of his campaign Becerra seized on voter anxiety about Trump’s policies, heightened by the administration’s recent efforts to wrest control over state voting processes.

Becerra forcefully argued that Tuesday’s election is a referendum on the president, and accused Hilton of being beholden to a White House that has attacked immigrants, launched an unnecessary war against Iran and created economic havoc by imposing tariffs and other unhinged policies.

“We see that wolf in that sheep’s clothing. We see right through you, Donald Trump,” Becerra said Friday at a social club in San Francisco’s Castro district, one of the nation’s most iconic LGBTQ+ communities. “In California, we say no mas. …. that’s why this election is so important, because we gotta prove that California does not take a knee to Donald Trump.”

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and her challenger Nithya Raman darted across the city over the weekend, foraging for votes as the clock ticks down before Tuesday’s election.

The former allies, and now competitors, took veiled shots at each other as they each hit multiple campaign stops Sunday morning, with both attending church services and other events.

Bass’ first stop Sunday morning was at South L.A. Cafe, where she spoke with alumnae of the Divine Nine, a group of historically Black fraternities and sororities. She then did a hit on the KBLA radio station.

“You know who I am. I am the same person as I have been,” Bass said, citing her roots in South L.A., where she was a community organizer as a young adult. “No matter what position I have held, this community — my community — has always been front and center of the work that I have done.”

Woodrow Bailey, a 63-year-old University of Southern California grad who was a member of Phi Beta Sigma, said he knew Bass when she was working at her nonprofit Community Coalition in the 1990s, just down the street from where South L.A. Cafe now stands. His long relationship with Bass made him confident in her leadership

“I understand what she’s trying to accomplish here,” Bailey said.

After the event Bass left to attend Mass at four churches and one Sikh temple. She also planned to cast her ballot Sunday.

Raman started the day in Boyle Heights at Dolores Mission Catholic Church. The council member has spent significant time in Boyle Heights following the Lineage fire, which burned down a massive cold food storage facility, sending noxious smoke into the heavily Latino neighborhood.

Raman attended Mass at 9 a.m. then chatted with parishioners in English and Spanish and grabbed food from a taco stand set up in the church’s courtyard. Children splashed in the fountain and played with a soccer ball as the mayoral hopeful introduced herself to voters.

“My calendar is so packed. I’m actually scared to look at it,” Raman told reporters outside the church, before noting she was going to a canvass in Northridge and at a Día de los Muertos (Day of the Dead) event in Canoga Park. The council member added that she was taking a brief pause in the middle of the day to go to an 11th birthday bowling party for her twins.

“L.A. is frustrated and I will bring change,” Raman said. “I brought that urgency to services in my district. I’ve reduced homelessness. I’ve addressed the residents’ issues that they’ve brought to me, and I want to bring that same responsiveness and urgency to every block of Los Angeles.”

The campaigns last week reported their final fundraising numbers before Election Day. Bass has now raised a total of just over $5.4 million, compared to $2.7 million for Raman.

In the final period, between Oct. 18 and 28, Bass reporting raising $139,737.28 while Raman took in $122,498.83.

Bass and Raman are locked in a dead heat, with the final poll from the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, cosponsored by The Times, finding that 40% of likely L.A. voters said they supported Raman, while 40% supported Bass. But 19% were still undecided.

Times data and graphics journalist Sandhya Kambhampati contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Sen. Chris Murphy is in the hospital after having a stroke, according to the Connecticut Democrat’s office.

In a statement Sunday, Murphy’s chief of staff, Allison Herwitt, said the senator “started experiencing numbness in his arm while at his son’s hockey game” on Saturday.

“He was taken to a local hospital, where it was discovered he had experienced a stroke,” she said. “He was transferred to Johns Hopkins for further monitoring and is responding well to treatment. The doctors are encouraged by his progress, he is awake and alert, and we are optimistic he will make a full recovery.”

The 53-year-old Murphy was elected to the House in 2006 and the Senate in 2012. He is not on the ballot Tuesday.

In the Senate, he serves on the Appropriations Committee and is a leading voice on immigration and restrictions on guns. He’s considered a contender for more senior leadership positions in the Senate and is also a potential 2028 presidential candidate.

Three other Senate Democrats have had strokes in recent years.

Sens. Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico and Chris Van Hollen of Maryland had strokes in 2022 and have since recovered. Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman had a stroke while campaigning for his seat that year and now uses adaptive technology in the Senate, including live captioning on a phone or tablet that transcribes words as people speak to him and helps him process the conversation.

Fetterman said on social media Sunday that his family “is rooting for Chris and his family for a full and speedy recovery.”

Several Republican senators, including Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Pete Ricketts of Nebraska, also offered prayers for Murphy.

Sloan writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

Nov. 1, 2026 11:10 AM PT

JUNEAU, Alaska — A federal judge on Sunday dismissed a Justice Department lawsuit seeking to block certification of Alaska’s U.S. Senate race if Republican incumbent Dan Sullivan loses.

Sullivan, an ally of President Trump, faces Democratic former U.S. Rep. Mary Peltola in one of the country’s most closely watched races, with Senate control at stake. Tuesday’s ranked-choice election also includes two candidates who have done little campaigning, one of whom shares the incumbent’s name.

The lawsuit, filed less than two weeks before the election and with early voting underway, called for an investigation into whether votes for retired teacher Dan J. Sullivan were intended for the senator. The state said the case lacked merit and argued there would be no way to determine that without violating voter privacy.

U.S. District Judge Sharon Gleason wrote in the order that the relief the United States seeks is “infeasible” because many voters have already cast their ballots. She said the cast ballots have been mixed together to the point where they cannot be matched to specific voters.

“More fundamentally, the United States provides no workable plan as to how it proposes to segregate ballots cast for Daniel J. Sullivan on Election Day and then conduct a court-ordered unspecified ‘investigation’ of those ballots in a manner that would preserve voter secrecy,” she wrote.

Attorneys for the Republican-led state government, Peltola’s campaign and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee argued that the case lacked any legal basis and amounted to interference. The senator and his allies, including Trump, for months have portrayed Dan J. Sullivan as a sham candidate intent on confusing voters and helping Peltola.

In the week before election day, the New York Times reported that Peltola’s campaign was involved in efforts to recruit the challenger Sullivan. Dan J. Sullivan in June, shortly after entering the race, said he’d had no contact with the campaign about running. He did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the report.

Peltola’s campaign responded by saying the campaign “has no involvement with either Sullivan campaign” — a statement similar to one it released after Dan J. Sullivan launched his bid.

“I am not interested in tricking voters,” she said during a recent campaign event.

State courts, including the Alaska Supreme Court, rejected Republican-backed efforts to block the retired teacher from the August open primary ballot on which he appeared as Daniel J. Sullivan Jr., with no party affiliation. The senator was listed as Dan S. Sullivan, Republican and incumbent.

Both Sullivans appear the same way on the general election ballot. Peltola placed first in the primary, followed by the senator. Dan J. Sullivan received about 2.5% of the primary vote, but that was enough to finish within the top four and qualify for the Nov. 3 ranked-choice election.

Attorneys for the Alaska Department of Law, led by Republican acting Atty. Gen. Cori Mills, represented state elections officials in the case and asked Gleason, who was appointed by President Obama, to toss the lawsuit. They filed a scathing response to the federal government’s complaint, calling it “meritless.”

Alaska also said the state had taken “significant steps” to distinguish the two Sullivans on the ballot. Voters who still might be confused could ask for help or look up candidate biographies and other information in state-distributed election pamphlets.

Gleason wrote that the administration’s attempt to block certification ran counter to the Constitution, which gives states the authority to run elections. She also cited the Supreme Court’s Purcell principle, which holds that federal courts should generally not change election rules too close to an election.

Alaska’s ranked voting system also offers a solution to possible confusion, the state wrote, allowing voters to rank the Sullivans as first and second choices, if they choose.

“That way, if the voter’s first-ranked Sullivan is eliminated, his vote would transfer to the other Sullivan,” attorneys Rachel Witty, Margaret Paton Walsh and Laura Fox wrote. “The voter’s vote would not ‘be transferred to Peltola’ as the complaint asserts, unless the voter chose to rank Peltola as his next choice instead of the other Sullivan.”

Trump for years has railed against Alaska’s use of ranked-choice voting in general elections. Republican state leaders have said that while they don’t like ranked voting, they want voters to “rank every Republican” candidate on this year’s ballot, especially with a high-stakes governor’s race featuring one Democrat and three Republicans.

On Thursday, the Justice Department escalated a criminal investigation over the same-named candidates on the Alaska ballot, issuing a raft of new grand jury subpoenas, a person familiar with the matter told the Associated Press. The FBI also has begun contacting people who donated to Dan J. Sullivan, some of whom told the AP that the agents were asking if they had been misled about which candidate they were supporting.

Riccardi and Bohrer write for the Associated Press. AP photographer Lindsey Wasson in Anchorage contributed to this report.

MARANA, Ariz. — Michael Falk was heading into the Pima County branch library to drop off his ballot when he stopped to discuss Tuesday’s midterm election.

Pima County, in south-central Arizona, is home to one of the most competitive congressional races in the country. Falk, a 66-year-old retiree and political independent, was casting his vote for the Democrat, JoAnna Mendoza, even though he hardly knows a thing about her.

But Falk knows — and loathes — a good deal about President Trump.

“From the very beginning, when he stepped on the political stage, he made it quite clear to the people who were silenced for a long time, the bigots of the United States, he gave them a voice, and he told those people, ‘It’s OK for you to think the way that you do.’

“And then that just took off like wildfire,” Falk said, sweeping his arm like a moving wall of flame, “and that’s why we have all these laws that are against brown people and illegal people.”

Gregory Corron confessed he’s not too familiar with Mendoza’s opponent, the Republican incumbent Juan Ciscomani.

But Corron, a 67-year-old computer programmer, voted for Trump three times and believes the president is moving the country in the right direction.

Gregory Corron likes the way things have gone under Trump and wants him to continue unimpeded by a Democrat-run Congress.

(Cassidy Araiza / For The Times)

“I think, for instance, exposing fraud is a big thing. Technology is taking off. I’m totally excited about that,” said Corron, who was killing time at a strip mall in Oro Valley while the tires on his Lexus were being replaced. “I think the economy is strong. The stock market is doing well. Employment is doing well.”

For that reason, Corron cast his ballot for Ciscomani, fearful of what might happen if Democrats take control of Congress. “The reforms that Trump started,” Corron said, “need to continue.”

Mendoza and Ciscomani have assaulted the voters of southern Arizona for months, overwhelming their senses and curdling the airwaves with a ceaseless barrage of acrid advertising. Together, the two rivals and their allies have spent tens of millions of dollars on the contest, which both parties have made a top priority.

And yet, to a large degree, Mendoza and Ciscomani are mere stand-ins, their candidacies serving as little more than proxies for the president and his opposition.

Laura Lentner, another Oro Valley resident, allowed as how Ciscomani has done some good things. He is not, the Democrat said, a bad man.

“But his continued support of Trump negates it all for me,” said the 73-year-old retired dental hygienist. It’s about time, Lentner suggested, Republican lawmakers stand up and “stop being afraid of [Trump] and his constituents.”

Arizona’s 6th Congressional District is anchored in eastern Tucson and its suburbs, sprawling north toward Phoenix, east to New Mexico and south all the way to the U.S.-Mexico border. The arid landscape is creased with rugged mountain ranges, cleaved by scenic canyons and filled with vast stretches of open space interrupted by midsize cities and small towns that spring like oases from the desert floor.

In recent years, the terrain has been some of the hardest-fought political turf in the nation.

Joe Biden carried the district in 2020 by less than a percentage point. Four years later, Trump flipped it by the same tiny margin.

Ciscomani, bidding for a third term, has won two nail-biters. He’s facing a fresh opponent in Mendoza, a Marine veteran and former congressional staffer.

The district has a significant Latino population — Ciscomani and Mendoza are Mexican American — and a sizable number of seniors, veterans and military personnel. Mendoza has leaned into her Navy and Marine Corps service. “Battle Tested. Ready To Lead,” her billboards declare, including one near the Ft. Huachuca Army base. (His signs tout “Veterans For Ciscomani.”)

Mendoza has attacked the incumbent as a “spineless” tool of Trump, putting the president front and center in her avalanche of advertising. Ciscomani’s incessant ads tout his bipartisanship — he hails from the establishment wing of the Republican Party — and portray Mendoza as a tool of the unhinged left.

In that way their campaigns distill the push-pull of this midterm election, which, like every one before, amounts to a referendum on the occupant of the Oval Office.

For Trump supporters, that means explaining away vexations like inflation and the war with Iran, twin anchors dragging down the president and fellow Republicans.

Higher costs, Trump voters said, are a hangover from Biden’s time in office, a needed sacrifice or an inconvenience that will pass. Echoing the president, they said the record-breaking cost of gas was a trade-off — and a good one — to keep Iran from building a nuclear weapon.

“I wish gas prices were lower,” said Susan Summers, a Republican who stopped to chat while grocery shopping in Vail. The old railroad town has become a destination for retirees like Summers, 74, a former administrator at Cal State San Bernardino, and for commuters who don’t mind the roughly 25-mile drive to Tucson.

But, Summers went on, she’s willing to accept higher gas prices “because I think it was important to stop a fanatical regime from acquiring nuclear weapons that would actually threaten us in the longer range. Once there is some kind of resolution … prices will come down somewhat and it will make life easier for a lot of people.”

Merilyn Prentice, 78, is another refugee from the state next door. She moved to Benson (population 5,500) from Southern California after a career in nursing. She praised Trump for demonstrating a resolve that other presidents lacked.

“They’re terrorist supporters, and we have terrorist cells in this country,” Prentice said of Iran. “No one wants to talk about that. None of the other presidents wanted to touch it.”

An early voting center and ballot drop-off location at the public library in Marana, Ariz.

(Cassidy Araiza / For The Times)

If backers of the president often seemed defensive — justifying, rationalizing, urging patience — Trump critics were seething.

In Sierra Vista, Ann Nichols, 72 and a Democratic-leaning independent, could scarcely get the words out fast enough as she cataloged her outrage.

“Let’s not forget how the tariffs have wrecked the economy,” she said, “how the war that [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu tricked Trump into declaring on Iran has wrecked the economy, driven up gas prices, and the rampant corruption in the government, and how the Environmental Protection Agency might as well be known as the Environmental Pollution Agency, and the attempt to wreck the Education Department, and we’ve got a twit who knows nothing about medicine in charge of medicine.”

Nichols paused to adjust her N95 mask. She spent decades as a medical librarian at the Ft. Huachuca Army base.

Her vote for Mendoza, Nichols said, was a vote to leash Trump and start undoing some of the damage he’s inflicted over the last two years.

For all that passion, however, it would be wrong to assume a blue wave — should one come Tuesday — means there’s great regard or overflowing affection for Democrats.

Clayton Surratt, 63, a retired actor and screenwriter, was passing out boxes of groceries — veggies, protein, a loaf of bread — at the food bank in Vail when he paused to share his unhappiness with both Trump and the Democratic Party.

“I think our current government thrives and lives on cruelty,” he said as a steady stream of cars pulled up for delivery. “It upsets me to see our world, our leaders, acting in ways that we would punish an 8-year-old at school if they behave that way.”

At the same time, Surratt said, he’s not sure what Democrats stand for, beyond opposition to Trump.

Adam Thompson, a Democratic-leaning independent, was blunter still. “I don’t like either party,” he said. The 39-year-old lives in Tanque Verde and travels throughout south-central Arizona, delivering soda and snack foods to major retailers. He’s particularly upset these days with Trump.

Why, Thompson asked, are so much time and resources being devoted to matters overseas?

“We need to take care of the people here,” Thompson said. “The war in Iran, the war in the Middle East is not helping me put food on my table. I work my ass off. But at the end of the day, I have to pay that price because … we’re so busy fighting wars for other people.”

The big question is how many discouraged Trump voters sit the election out. Their level of apathy and absenteeism will spell the difference between a good and a great night for Democrats.

Alex Lagerberg, a 35-year-old tattoo artist and libertarian, is a three-time Trump voter. He was initially attracted by his seeming authenticity and background as a New York real estate developer. “He was a good option because he was not a politician,” Lagerberg said outside a mercado in Casa Grande. But, he continued, it turns out that Trump’s supposed entrepreneurial prowess wasn’t all Lagerberg thought it was, or that Trump purported it to be.

“Treating the country like a business was a good thing for a little bit, but it really hasn’t helped,” Lagerberg said. “We haven’t seen much change.”

He’s not particularly motivated to vote, Lagerberg said, or decide between Ciscomani and Mendoza, especially with the two heaving so much mud at each other.

Alex Lagerberg is disappointed in Trump and not very motivated to vote on Tuesday.

(Cassidy Araiza / For The Times)

Rick, who declined to give his last name because he doesn’t want to be hassled for his opinion, has made up his mind. He’s done voting — forever.

The 67-year-old retired government worker, a right-leaning libertarian, soured on politics and politicians long ago. “Democrat, Republican,” he said, “it’s all the same thing.”

He voted for Trump in 2024, giving the political system one last shot. And now? Trump promised “no new wars. What do we have?” Rick asked. “New wars. Taxes are still too high. And Medicare? Medicare sucks.” So no, he said, he’s not bothering with the election.

As he left Vail’s thrift shop, steamed about Trump, Mendoza, Ciscomani and the whole lot, Rick clutched his purchase, a compilation of Ray Price’s greatest hits. One song by the country singer seemed to sum up Rick’s attitude: “You Done Me Wrong.”

He’s not alone.

WASHINGTON — The specter of a Democratic wave on Tuesday and retreat of Republican power has quietly sparked conversations within GOP circles about President Trump’s eventual exit from the political stage — and the future of a party that has revolved around him for the past decade.

Heading into the vote, Trump faces the lowest job approval ratings of his career. Factions of the Republican Party long loyal to his brand are beginning to break ranks. Candidates who have aligned themselves most closely to the president are among the most imperiled. From the shores of Lake Ontario to rural Kansas, signs point to a voter coalition under strain, as Republicans grappling with a troubled economy question the party’s direction.

Recent polls show that 67% of Trump’s 2024 voters approve of his job performance, down from 95% early in his second term. The steepest drops are among younger voters and Latino support, according to a Pew Research Center poll.

While a majority of Republicans still want to see the next leader of the party follow Trump on most issues, a third want to see the next GOP presidential nominee take a different approach, according to a New York Times/Siena poll in May.

President Trump throws MAGA hats to supporters during a midterm campaign rally at Lubbock Memorial Civic Center in Lubbock, Texas, on Oct. 27.

(Kent Nishimura / AFP via Getty Images)

Marc Short, who served as Trump’s first White House director for legislative affairs, said that Republicans were “essentially in triage mode” entering the midterms, citing “inflation challenges” and an “avalanche of corruption stories.” Bryan Lanza, a former communications director for Trump, expressed concern last week that Republican enthusiasm has reached such lows that races in Mississippi and Texas are genuine toss-ups.

The Republican reckoning tests a party infrastructure reshaped around the president since his insurgent rise in 2015 transformed the GOP.

At the top of the party, warning signs of a splintering coalition have not changed the view that Trump still maintains the grip on the GOP’s future — and that any future decisions should take that into account.

“I think he’ll help decide who the next president is going to be,” Republican National Committee Chairman Joe Gruters said. “I think he’ll be super involved with not only the party but the process, and I welcome that as the chairman.”

Gruters called Trump “the single most important person in the Republican Party” and said he doubts the movement will reshape itself into a different kind of coalition based on the outcome of Tuesday’s election.

“I think it will continue to be Trump’s movement for as long as he’s alive,” he said. “It will be Trump’s movement.”

Others in Trump’s inner circle are making the same bet. His team is still staking Trump’s movement on the same thing that has defined it in the past: Trump himself.

“We’ve been with him for 10 years,” the official said. “Do you think he’s going away after the next two? No.”

What comes after that, the official wouldn’t say.

A person wears a sequined jacket as President Trump speaks on stage during an election rally on Oct. 9 at the Oncenter in Syracuse, N.Y.

(Alex Wong / Getty Images)

“Everyone wants to jump ahead and ask what 2028 looks like and what does beyond look like,” the official said. “I think the really smart thing about the president, and he’s even admitted it about himself, he’s always focused on the now, and he just works his a— off at the task at hand.”

The question of who inherits the movement is already taking shape, but Trump has avoided saying much when asked who he thinks should be the heir apparent.

Asked in the Oval Office last month whether he would endorse Vice President JD Vance — who had said a day earlier that he expected Trump’s backing if he decides to run for president in 2028 — Trump called Vance a “very talented person” and a “very good person,” but would not commit.

“I don’t think we’ve ever talked about it,” Trump said. “It’s early, very early right now. We have to get through the midterms.”

A New York Times/Siena poll released last week found that Republican primary voters favor Vance or Secretary of State Marco Rubio to be the party’s next nominee. Underscoring Trump’s grip on the party, the poll found, 8% said they want it to be Trump, who cannot run because of term limits.

The challenge for Republicans in the future will be to figure out a way to capture the MAGA base without isolating themselves from more mainstream Republican voters, said a GOP lobbyist with ties to Trump speaking on condition of anonymity to speak candidly.

“I think it would be foolish to ignore the MAGA base for any future candidate,” the lobbyist said. “The movement can evolve, but you need those voters to come out and vote.”

People wait for President Trump to arrive at a political rally at Freeman Coliseum in San Antonio on Oct. 7.

(Sam Owens / San Antonio Express-News via Getty Images)

Mike Madrid, a longtime Republican political strategist and co-founder of the Lincoln Project, which staunchly opposes Trump, argued that the future of the GOP will be influenced more by right-wing media personalities than policy because Trump consciously upended the party’s ideology over the last decade.

“The Republican Party is far, far more likely to balkanize than split along ideological lines because there is no ideological glue holding the GOP together anymore,” he said. “That’s gone.”

Madrid doubts Trump will change course even if Republicans suffer big losses on Tuesday night.

“Donald Trump is not going to adjust. He’s not capable of that. He never has. He never will,” Madrid said. “It doesn’t even occur to him. And even if it did, he wouldn’t know how to do it.”

If Democrats win a majority in Congress, history shows that it can be an opening for a president to pivot.

“What often happens in the last two years [of a term] is presidents bounce back,” said Christopher Warshaw, a Georgetown University public policy professor.

Presidents who “lose control of Congress and get shellacked in the midterms” often pivot to the political center, and tell voters “we’re going to try a new approach,” Warshaw said.

“MAGA” merchandise is for sale as supporters listen to President Trump speak at a midterm campaign rally at Guardian Centers of Georgia in Perry, Ga., on Oct. 24.

(Brendan Smialowski / AFP via Getty Images)

President Clinton did that after Republicans swept Congress in 1994, Warshaw said. President Biden did not after the 2022 midterms, a choice Warshaw said probably hurt Democrats in 2024, when Trump was elected. If Democrats win on Tuesday, Trump has signaled that he would be open to working with them to get things done.

“I hope that won’t be the case, but if it is, that has happened before with many presidents,” he told reporters. “You have strong veto and you end up working out deals.”

However Trump might deal with a divided Washington, the coalition he built is unlikely to dissipate when he leaves office, said Lynn Vavreck, a political science professor at UCLA.

“They want to build a very specific kind of world,” Vavreck said. “Those desires are not going to go away next Wednesday, or in 2028.”

Times staff writer Justine McDaniel contributed to this report.

The Trump administration’s online accounts are circulating images of a pumpkin carved with a sombrero design and a fake Halloween-themed background around a Black man apparently accused of food assistance fraud, in social media posts slammed by critics as racially inflammatory rhetoric.

Only days before the midterm elections, the posts coincide with the government’s sweeping campaign to show its aggressive immigration enforcement, and highlight efforts it says are needed to crack down on fraud to save taxpayers money — as rising healthcare costs and other economic stressors have made affordability a top voter concern.

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins posted Saturday on X a photo of the Black man standing in front of stacks of what appear to be U.S. currency with the headline SNAP FRAUDSTER, an apparent reference to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps. He is holding aloft what appears to be a bill set aflame.

“Some costumes come with a price tag. This one comes with a prison sentence,” it says against the backdrop of fake Spirit Halloween costume packaging.

Another photo posted by the White House on X on Thursday showed a pumpkin with the shape of a sombrero carved across it and the words “Spooky szn is here.”

The post by Rollins appears to be taken from an Instagram post from September 2025 by an account under the name Shawty Dred.

Earlier this month, Mercedes Reshard New, identified by the Justice Department as a social media personality also known as “Shawty Dred,” was arrested on federal charges for fraudulently obtaining more than $4 million in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits in Georgia.

It’s not the first time the White House has been accused of posting inflammatory images on official government social media accounts.

Just over a year ago during the government shutdown, the White House revived a deepfake video posted by Trump of House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries in a fake mustache and sombrero to accuse the Democrats of acting on behalf of illegal immigrants instead of U.S. citizens. Jeffries described the meme as bigoted. Administration officials played it on repeat in the White House briefing room, and Vice President JD Vance promised that the “sombrero memes will stop” when Democrats agreed to end the shutdown.

The NAACP did not respond to an email seeking comment, nor did the White House or Rollins.

The Trump administration in recent weeks has ratcheted up its anti-immigrant rhetoric and accusations of fraud, including against U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), whose Washington, D.C., home was searched by federal agents earlier this month. Federal authorities are investigating potential fraud in her family’s immigration paperwork. Omar, who was born in Somalia, is a naturalized U.S. citizen.

It also has taken a series of punitive steps linked to allegations of fraud in mostly Democratic-led states, including California and Minnesota, whose governors accused the federal government of targeting their states for political reasons.

Federal prosecutors said in a news release Oct. 21 that the influencer New controlled more than 350 fraudulent SNAP accounts under stolen identities between January 2020 and July 2026. He allegedly applied for his company, Shawty Dred LLC, to become an authorized SNAP retailer and used EBT debit cards to extract about $4 million from the accounts.

New’s Instagram account, which has more than 2 million followers, has flaunted his extravagant lifestyle, federal prosecutors said. Posts depict him flying on private jets, posing with Rolls-Royce vehicles in front of his “super mansion” and handling massive stacks of cash.

“Instead of this money feeding families in need, New, the social media personality known as ‘Shawty Dred,’ allegedly used the cash to bankroll a life of luxury,” Special Agent in Charge of FBI Atlanta Marlo Graham said in the release.

New was indicted by a federal grand jury Oct. 7 on dozens of counts of mail fraud and aggravated identity theft, and one count each of SNAP fraud and illegal transactions with access devices. He was arrested Oct. 13 and remains in federal custody.

According to Fulton County, Ga., jail records, New has been arrested multiple times on suspicion of crimes including identity theft, insurance fraud, financial transaction card fraud, forgery and simple assault.

A federal defender listed in court records as representing New, Joseph Austin, did not return a phone message.

Los Angeles voters will head to the polls Tuesday to vote on a slew of ballot measures, including a half-cent sales tax that would beef up the city’s Fire Department — but which also would cost Angelenos more to fill up their gas tanks, buy clothes and dine out.

Another measure would allow the City Council to meet just once a week, instead of three times as required by the City Charter.

In all, there are eight ballot measures before L.A. voters that could have a significant impact on how the city government functions, and which take just a simple majority to pass.

Here’s a roundup:

Measure FD: Sales tax hike for the Fire Department

Voters will consider a half-cent increase to the city’s retail sales tax, bumping it from 10.25 cents per dollar spent to 10.75 cents per dollar spent. The tax hike is expected to raise an estimated $345 million annually and would be funneled into a separate fund specifically for the Fire Department.

The sales tax increase was spearheaded by the union representing rank-and-file firefighters, who have long complained the department is underfunded.

The city still would be required to fund the department at the same average percentage out of the general fund, ensuring extra revenue generated by the tax would add to its regular budget.

Opponents say this would be the third sales tax hike since 2024, costing an average of $86 per person and $345 for a family of four in additional sales taxes each year.

The firefighters union said the tax fund is essential to increase the number of firefighters and lower response times across the city.

Charter Amendment EE: Fewer City Council meetings

Amendment EE would allow the Council to meet once a week instead of three times, as required under the City Charter.

The Council voted 12-0 to put the measure on the ballot, with three council members absent. Council members in support of the measure said the three meetings are costly and ineffective, and noted their time is better spent working in their district.

Councilmember Monica Rodriguez opposed the measure, saying it would reduce the time available for L.A. residents to engage with their representatives in a public forum and could lead to council members rushing through deliberations on important matters.

The amendment also would approve changes to how the city governs. If passed, independent inspectors for the L.A. Police and Fire Departments would have more power to conduct audits, and it would increase the penalties for campaign finance violations. The changes also include raising the number of signatures needed for a ballot referendum and would bar ethics commissioners from running for City Council or the Los Angeles Board of Education for five years after they leave office.

Proposition TE: An exception to the ‘mansion tax’

Proposition TE would grant a one-time exemption to Palisades fire victims from paying the so-called “mansion tax” if they sell their home within five years of the disaster.

The “mansion tax,” or Measure ULA, took effect in 2023 and imposed an additional 4% transfer tax on all L.A. property sales above $5.4 million and a 5.5% tax on sales above $10.9 million. Despite its nickname, the tax also falls on more modest multifamily residences like apartment buildings that exceed the sales price benchmarks.

The proposition would exempt Pacific Palisades homeowners from paying the tax, regardless of whether they lived at the property or not. It also would refund any resident who already sold their property and paid the tax.

The proposition was spearheaded by Councilmember Traci Park, who represents the region. Supporters say fire victims have been through enough and should have more flexibility as they navigate expensive rebuilding costs.

Opponents argue the proposition is too broad and should have included only victims whose primary residence was destroyed.

Charter Amendment LA: Restructuring how the city administers public works

Amendment LA is intended to more efficiently deliver basic city services for infrastructure in need of repair, including streets in need of repaving, dangerous sidewalks and broken streetlights. It also would leverage existing resources to open up sources of revenue.

The measure would reduce the sway of the Board of Public Works or pave the way to eliminate it, while also increasing the power of the director of public works. Critics oppose the elimination of the board, saying it would weaken accountability and increase public scrutiny.

Charter Amendment PL: Streamlining the Planning Department

L.A. residents have for years complained that navigating the Planning Department to build or open businesses is complicated and confusing.

Amendment PL includes five proposals that would increase efficiency and streamline certain parts of the Planning Department, which controls land use and approves construction and renovation projects.

The changes would consolidate seven Area Planning Commissions into one, partly to lower costs and ensure that all appeals and applications are governed by the same logic. It also would give the City Council more flexibility in approving taller buildings and set deadlines to speed up rulings from the City Planning Commission.

Charter Amendment PRK: Doubling the money for recreation and parks

Amendment PRK would double the minimum amount of money set aside for the Department of Recreation and Parks by reworking the parameters of the city budget.

The department is in charge of maintaining green spaces, playing fields and senior centers in the city. The City Charter mandates the department receive .0325% of the total assessed value of taxable properties, which is about $303 million for the park system this year and would be around $493 million in 10 years.

If the measure passes, that would double, meaning the park system would get a minimum of $986 million by 2036.

Supporters say the existing city allocation isn’t enough and has led to deteriorating recreation centers, swimming pools and restrooms. Critics warn it would force city officials to cut other services to make room for this additional funding.

Charter Amendment PRT: Changes to airports, harbor and water and power departments

Charter Amendment PRT is part of a package of proposed changes to the City Charter to increase transparency, build public trust and streamline operations. It would change how airports, harbors and the Department of Water and Power are managed.

The amendment would require that two of the seven members of the Los Angeles World Airport’s board of commissioners, who oversee Van Nuys and Los Angeles International airports, live in Van Nuys and three live around LAX.

It also would require the L.A. Board of Harbor Commissioners allocate a portion of its operating income from the Port of Los Angeles to investments in waterfront public access projects. The harbor is one of the busiest in the country and generates revenue from the operators at its terminals. PRT also would broaden public insight into how lease agreements with the port affect the local workforce.

Supporters say people overseeing Van Nuys and LAX should have a firsthand understanding of living near the airports.

No ballot argument against PRT was submitted, although the L.A. Area Chamber of Commerce said it opposes the measure, citing concern over the additional requirements it would impose on businesses and the potential impact on port operations.

Charter Amendment SC: Altering LAUSD’s campaign finance rules

Amendment SC wouldn’t make major changes, but would clarify rules on campaign finance for candidates running for a seat on the Board of Education, which oversees LAUSD.

Language would be simplified to clarify that the same rules apply for mayoral candidates and Board of Education candidates, except in certain instances. Some of those rules include governing campaign contribution limits, filing deadlines, public disclosures and fundraising windows.

Supporters say it won’t make any substantive changes, but instead make the rules easier to understand by deleting duplicated language. No argument was provided against the amendment.

WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Saturday threw out President Trump’s multibillion-dollar lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal and media mogul Rupert Murdoch over an article reporting on his ties to disgraced late financier Jeffrey Epstein.

U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles in Miami ruled that the president did not prove the defendants made defamatory statements with actual malice. Gayles dismissed the suit with prejudice, meaning it cannot be refiled and the dismissal is permanent and incontrovertible.

The ruling said the lawsuit was “grasping at straws” as it attempted to “manufacture” flaws in the Journal’s investigative reporting.

The lawsuit was over an article the Journal published last year describing a sexually suggestive letter that the paper said bore Trump’s name and was included in a 2003 album compiled for Epstein’s 50th birthday.

The letter was reportedly collected by jailed British socialite and Epstein co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell as part of a birthday album for Epstein years before he was first arrested in 2006 and subsequently had a reported falling-out with Trump.

The letter bearing Trump’s name includes text framed by the outline of what appears to be a hand-drawn nude woman and ends with, “Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret,” according to the newspaper.

Trump denied writing it and called the story “false, malicious, and defamatory.”

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Miami, accused the paper and its reporters of having “knowingly and recklessly” published “numerous false, defamatory, and disparaging statements,” which, it alleged, caused “overwhelming financial and reputational harm” to the president.

Collins writes for the Associated Press.

Two decades ago, political scientists identified a certain breed of self-defeating gerrymander that backfired on mapmakers who tried to rig congressional district lines for partisan advantage.

They called it a “dummymander.”

“A dummymander is a gerrymander by one party that, over the course of the decade, benefits the other party, and actually looks as if it was designed by that party rather than the party in power,” Bernard Grofman and Thomas Brunell wrote in “The Art of the Dummymander.”

The phenomenon came out of Democratic legislatures in the Deep South in the 1990s. Attempting to protect incumbents amid a political realignment toward Republicans, they spread what was left of their voting strength across too many districts after the 1990 census.

Grofman and Brunell compared their situation to a lifeboat. “The carrying capacity of any lifeboat is limited,” they said. “If you try to overload it, the boat may sink, or at least tip over, washing a number of people overboard.”

Over the last two years, Democrats and Republicans have battled to redraw House districts, in a process kicked off by Texas Republicans’ adoption of a new map — at the direction of President Trump — that shifted as many as five seats their way. Other states joined in, including retaliation by Democrats in California. Courts blocked some of both parties’ efforts, with the resulting national map tilted toward Republicans by about nine seats, on net.

Now, as analysts forecast a potential “blue wave” of support for Democrats, election watchers are studying whether Republicans’ efforts could backfire. The upshot? Probably not this year. But the election will test just how much partisan advantage mapmakers can squeeze out before a gerrymander starts working against them.

‘A perfect storm’

The Democrats’ 1990s dummymander wasn’t apparent immediately: For one election, in 1992, the Democratic maps worked. Across North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, Democrats won 18 of 29 House seats. Their only misstep: In trying to gerrymander Republican Newt Gingrich out of his district, they forced him to move to a new district where he won narrowly.

Two years later, the weather turned. Gingrich led the “Republican Revolution” during President Clinton’s first midterm and was rewarded with the speaker’s gavel. The 18 dummymandered Democratic seats were reduced to 10.

Today’s potential dummymanders are different. For starters, House districts are meant to be redrawn once a decade, following the U.S. census. The Democratic dummymanders in the ‘90s came after constitutionally required reshuffling. The mid-decade gerrymanders of 2025 and 2026 were purely opportunistic. Republican-led states such as Texas and Florida redrew maps at Trump’s urging, not to protect vulnerable seats, but to extend their partisan advantage.

These gerrymanders are also different in that they could conceivably backfire in their first election, rather than producing the delayed reaction of the Southern Democrats’ earlier dummymander.

“We are in a perfect storm for dummymanders,” said Brunell, now a political science professor at the University of Texas at Dallas. The formula: extreme partisan gerrymandering — mostly by Republicans — and a midterm election with an unpopular president and economic headwinds.

Margin for error

Some dummymanders are dumber than others. The real test isn’t whether Republicans lose seats in Tuesday’s elections — it’s whether they’re left worse off than if they had left the old districts in place. “There can be degrees of dummyness,” Brunell said.

Republicans drew their maps to withstand a blue wave that crests at about a 10- to 12-point margin. The RealClearPolitics average of generic congressional polls now gives Democrats an advantage of just over 8 points — meaning that if the polls are broadly right, Republicans will still likely end up benefiting from the new maps.

Jonathan Cervas, a Carnegie Mellon University professor who has drawn his own maps as a court-appointed special master, said a true dummymander seems unlikely and is “wishful thinking” by Democrats.

And even if it happens, Cervas argues, it won’t be bad mapmaking that loses the House for Republicans, who now control the chamber by just a few seats.

“Everything is so nationalized that the shifts that happen in Texas are the same shifts that happen everywhere,” Cervas said.

Assuming that voters move toward Democrats in roughly equal measures across the country, Republicans will have lost dozens of competitive districts in states that weren’t redrawn — such as Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Iowa, Wisconsin and Colorado — before any blue wave gets to Texas and Florida.

“At that point,” said Cervas, “it would not have mattered because they would have lost so many seats anyway.”

Korte writes for Bloomberg. Adrienne Tong of Bloomberg contributed to this report.

Oct. 31, 2026 2:31 PM PT

A federal immigration officer charged with aggravated assault after he ran over a Mexican man with his car in Houston will turn himself in on Monday, according to his attorney.

Mario Alberto Morales, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer, struck Miguel Parra Hernandez, a 48-year-old construction worker, with his unmarked SUV on Oct. 10, as he chased Parra Hernandez through a parking lot. A grand jury indicted Morales on Friday on a felony charge of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

Morales is planning to turn himself in at a courthouse sometime Monday, his attorney, David Lindenmuth, told the Associated Press. Lindenmuth previously told the AP that the incident was “clearly just an accident” and that local officials had “invented a crime out of thin air.”

Parra Hernandez broke his leg and is recovering at a rehabilitation facility while in federal custody, Harris County Dist. Atty. Sean Teare told reporters Friday.

ICE has said Parra Hernandez ran in front of Morales’ car.

Previously released surveillance camera video shows Morales’ vehicle drive over a median and strike Parra Hernandez as he runs away.

Teare played video from Morales’ body camera on Friday that showed the agent making sharp turns with his steering wheel. He then stops and exits the vehicle and turns toward Parra Hernandez, who is lying on the ground, screaming.

“I was coming in, and I hit him with the car,” Morales can be heard saying after another ICE agent arrives.

Parra Hernandez told deputies that he fled the traffic stop when Morales started pulling on a mask, and Morales “threw the car” at him, according to a Harris County Sheriff’s Office incident report reviewed by the AP. Morales told deputies that he did not brake before he hit Parra Hernandez, but that he did not intentionally strike him, according to the report.

ICE said after the incident that the target of the operation was a man named Jose Mendoza-Cervantes, who the agency said was seen getting into a car with Parra Hernandez. Mendoza-Cervantes’ daughter told the immigrants’ rights group FIEL that her father has been dead for nearly a decade.

Morales is among a small group of federal agents who have been criminally charged for wounding people during the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration crackdown. ICE agent Christian Castro pleaded not guilty last month to charges that he lied to the FBI after he shot and wounded a Venezuelan man as immigration agents swept Minneapolis earlier this year.

Many other ICE shootings, including some that were fatal, have not resulted in charges for the agents involved.

Morales, 34, has served as an ICE agent for a little over a year, according to Lindenmuth.

Teare said Friday that authorities have a “significant amount of information” on Morales, and that, in his experience, law enforcement agencies would not hire someone with his background. He did not elaborate.

Morales was charged with a misdemeanor in 2013 for stealing four DVDs, according to Harris County court records. Those charges were dismissed after he paid a $270 fine and struck a plea deal.

Morales unsuccessfully ran to represent Texas’ 34th Congressional District in this year’s election cycle under the name “Bam Morales,” which Lindenmuth confirmed. Morales served in the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division and later as a corrections officer and law enforcement officer, he wrote in a Ballotpedia candidate survey. He wrote that his top priorities were veterans’ rights, economic issues and service guided by the Christian principles of “compassion, integrity, service, and accountability.” He listed illegal immigration as one of the country’s greatest challenges.

Morales also wrote in the survey that he was endorsed by an organization called Make America Godlier Again.

Morales appeared at a 2024 Christian conference held by televangelist Johnson Suleman. In video of the conference, Morales appears to act as a Spanish translator as Suleman serves free food and “extends his touch of love to migrants.”

“I want to pray for the immigrants,” Suleman said, as Morales translated those words into Spanish. “I bless you. May the Lord grant your request and open your doors.”

Mayes-Osterman and Brook write for the Associated Press.

Oct. 31, 2026 2:13 PM PT

ANCHORAGE — Alaska’s Republican-run state government Saturday urged a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed at President Trump’s direction to stop the certification of a possible Democratic win in that state’s pivotal U.S. Senate race, writing that there is “no reason for this Court to entertain this meritless lawsuit any longer.”

The scathing filing from the state’s attorney general’s office, headed by Republican acting Atty. Gen. Cori Mills, comes as U.S. District Judge Sharon L. Gleason set a deadline of Saturday for arguments over whether she should dismiss the lawsuit without even a hearing.

The complaint from the U.S. Department of Justice has been roundly criticized by election law experts. It demands that the judge halt certification — only in the event of a win by Democrat Mary Peltola — until it is determined whether voters were confused by the presence of a second candidate on the ballot with the same name as her main rival, Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan.

The Department of Justice on Friday added a request that the judge separate all ballots showing votes for the challenger Dan Sullivan until it can be determined whether voters were fooled into wasting their votes for a spoiler candidate. In its Saturday filing, Alaska said this was “both disturbing and impossible.” It added there would be no way to do that without violating voter privacy.

Trump also demanded that Peltola be prosecuted after the New York Times this week reported that internal texts and posts appeared to show the Democrat’s campaign was involved in recruiting the second Sullivan, a retired schoolteacher in the remote fishing village of Petersburg, onto the ballot. But the state filing notes that the two Sullivans are distinguished from each other on the ballot — the senator is listed as a Republican and the incumbent, and the other is simply “Daniel J. Sullivan Jr.” with no party affiliation.

“State officials carefully designed the ballot to minimize voter confusion,” Alaska officials wrote. “The Court should immediately dismiss this lawsuit with prejudice and allow state officials to conduct the general election — including ballot counting and certification — free from unwarranted federal interference.”

The Trump administration argued that a preamble to the 1990s law governing voter registration gave it the responsibility for ensuring states maintained the “integrity” of federal elections. It has claimed it is trying to combat fraud by preventing the Democrat from being declared the victor in a race that could determine which party controls the U.S. Senate.

The Department of Justice issued a wave of subpoenas and announced it was conducting a criminal investigation in the case as the administration has stepped up its use of its legal powers to support Trump’s side in Tuesday’s midterm elections.

Peltola has denied involvement in the presence of the challenger Sullivan on the ballot. The New York Times report was based on interviews with her former campaign manager, texts and contributions from a political group backing Peltola to an out-of-state Democratic consultant who recruited the second Sullivan.

Alaska’s Republican governor, Mike Dunleavy, who announced a state investigation into the situation after the Times article, has condemned the placement of the second Sullivan on the ballot. The Alaska Supreme Court ruled this summer that the second candidate fulfilled all legal requirements to stay on. The state government’s filing on Saturday says that the new revelations about the possible role of Peltola’s campaign don’t change the fact that both Sullivans are legally on the ballot.

“Not every wrong can be righted in federal court,” the state wrote.

Peltola’s campaign and voting rights groups also have urged Gleason to dismiss the case, putting them in unusual alignment with Alaska state officials.

“Imagine if the federal executive could pluck a few words like ‘election integrity’ from some statutory preamble and, on that basis alone, bend the machinery of state elections to his will, preemptively blocking certification of a U.S. Senate election to protect his preferred candidate from defeat and then subjecting voters to a law-enforcement-led inquest about who they ‘really’ supported,” the American Civil Liberties Union wrote in a filing urging the lawsuit’s dismissal.

“Imagine that world and ask whether it is what the Framers wanted or precisely what they most feared.”

Riccardi and Bohrer write for the Associated Press.

When Los Angeles mayoral candidate Nithya Raman was asked recently about the ways the LAPD was falling short, she pointed out that the agency had stopped posting neighborhood-level crime statistics. The lack of data, she said, gives an incomplete picture of how safe the city is — and also undermines the public’s already shaky trust in police.

Her comments during a recent mayoral debate thrust the issue of police secrecy into the spotlight, while giving voice to a growing number of critics of LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell who argue that his department is moving in the wrong direction when it comes to transparency.

Frustration by neighborhood groups over the missing crime data has boiled over in recent weeks, thanks in part to Raman’s comments. But it also comes as free press advocates complain that the department’s responsiveness to public records requests has slowed, and as officers increasingly face accusations of targeting journalists in the field during protests.

When Mayor Karen Bass and LAPD officials were asked about the disappearing crime data at a news conference last week, a senior department official fielded the question and chalked it up to a “software issue,” which the department was working on and hoped to have resolved soon. A Bass spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment Friday afternoon.

In an interview with KNX radio this week, McDonnell claimed that changes to internal policies and state law had made the LAPD more transparent today about its operations and functions than ever before.

McDonnell declined an interview request through a spokesperson on Friday.

“The Department remains committed to transparency and to keeping the public informed,” the spokesperson, Officer Jeff Lee, wrote in an email. “That includes public access to crime data, timely handling of California Public Records Act requests within available resources, and respect for the rights of members of the media covering public events.”

In the spring of 2025, roughly a year after the LAPD released thousands of police officer photos that it later tried to claw back, the department quietly stopped posting files released in response to public records requests, cutting off access to a trove of documents that were once available through the the city’s data portal. Department watchdogs have long argued that such records allow residents to evaluate how the LAPD and other agencies are performing.

Reports based on the investigations of police shootings and other serious uses of force that used to be released shortly after they were presented to the Police Commission, the LAPD’s civilian oversight body, now take months to be produced.

The department’s inability to respond to records requests in a timely fashion seems designed to defuse public outrage, critics argue; dragging out the time it takes to release records means that information becomes available long after most citizens have moved on, they contend. Activists routinely pack the Police Commission’s Tuesday meetings to decry what many refer to as “secret police.”

McDonnell has acknowledged delays in producing records, saying that the unit tasked with reviewing and releasing the information is “grossly understaffed.” But progress on filling some of these vacancies has been slow.

LAPD officials have said that a recent change to state law that now requires police departments to release more information about officer misconduct and cases that involve serious uses of force has placed additional burden on the unit. Adding to the backlog are prolific requesters who flood the department with complex and time-consuming inquiries, all of which have to undergo several levels of review to avoid the release of private data, they argue.

McDonnell has also come under fire for his officers’ behavior toward journalists during protests last year against President Trump’s immigration crackdown. In July 2025, a federal judge issued an order prohibiting LAPD officers from targeting media members with crowd-control weapons.

In the months since, media groups have denounced the department for continuing to violate the order, which has deepened the tensions between police leaders and the press. Since June 2025, the city has been hit with dozens of legal claims from protesters and journalists who claim that LAPD officers used excessive force against them.

Police officials have accused some independent journalists of behaving more like demonstrators than reporters, and argued that the use of less-lethal weapons was justified after officers were provoked or had their commands disobeyed in chaotic situations.

Press freedom advocates say that under McDonnell, the department’s relationship with the local news media has gotten increasingly strained.

McDonnell, some argue, has made himself available only to news outlets that provide favorable coverage of the department.

In more ways than one, McDonnell seems out of step with modern expectations around government transparency by a public that is increasingly wary of public institutions, said Adam Rose, a deputy director of advocacy for the Freedom of the Press Foundation.

Rose said he often disagreed with McDonnnell’s predecessor, Michel Moore, but that the former chief at least made himself accessible. Moore used to opine on national issues and occasionally tried to get in front of brewing controversies, Rose said, but he was also willing to hear out concerns about the treatment of journalists.

McDonnell, he said, hasn’t even bothered to give out his cellphone number.

“[Moore] had at least the courtesy and dignity to address groups speaking on behalf of journalists who while trying to cover the department were injured,” Rose said.

Last November, McDonnell abruptly ousted the department’s former top civilian spokesperson, Jennifer Forkish. Some of her duties were reportedly absorbed by Robert Port, a veteran documentary filmmaker with no PR experience whose own hiring was shrouded in secrecy. Port’s job proposal suggested that he was sought to use his Hollywood connections to help burnish the department’s battered public image.

Port told the news outlet L.A. Material that he was working on a reality show that promises to take viewers behind the scenes of patrolling the city’s streets. The department has sought $15,000 from the City Council to hire an outside law firm to represent the city with negotiations with a company called 44 Blue Productions LLC.

Forkish, the former spokesperson, told The Times that she has heard from journalists “here in Los Angeles and around the world who say they’re struggling to get responses to media inquiries and public records requests.”

“As an Angeleno, that concerns me,” she wrote in a text message. “Responding to the press is part of being accountable to the public, and transparency is essential to maintaining public trust.”

Attorneys who have sued the department, either on behalf of aggrieved officers or members of the public, argue that maintaining secrecy allows the LAPD to dismiss criticism on the grounds that outsiders don’t understand what’s happening.

“The LAPD has now evolved into an inward-facing organization.” said Jorja Leap, a professor of social welfare at the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs. “It’s a pivotal moment. I still see people within the department working on community relations — I don’t want this to be a lost opportunity.”

Voters in the city of Los Angeles will consider eight ballot measures covering everything from taxes and fire resources to governance of airports and the port and the quality of parks.

L.A. City Measure FD

The basics

Measure FD would increase sales taxes by 0.5% to provide additional funding for the city Fire Department. The measure would raise an estimated $345 million annually. Under the plan, the city’s retail sales tax would increase from 10.25 cents per dollar spent to 10.75 cents per dollar spent.

Impact

The ballot initiative was spearheaded by the United Firefighters of Los Angeles City Local 112, the union representing rank-and-file firefighters, which has long argued that the department is underfunded. It claims decades of neglect have left the department understaffed and under-resourced.

Critics point out that this would be the third sales tax hike since 2024, following L.A. County hikes for homelessness (Measure A in 2024) and healthcare (Measure ER in the June 2 primary). The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. estimates that Measure FD will cost an average of $86 per person and $345 for a family of four in additional sales taxes each year.

Read more:

Proposition TE

The basics

Proposition TE would carve out a five-year exemption from L.A.’s “mansion tax” for Pacific Palisades homes damaged or destroyed in the 2025 wildfire, sparing sellers six-figure transfer bills on high-end properties. The mansion tax levies a 4% transfer tax on all L.A. property sales above $5.4 million and a 5.5% tax on sales above $10.9 million. At the current level, if a Pacific Palisades resident who lost their home in the fire sold the vacant lot for, say, $6 million, they would owe $240,000 in transfer taxes.

The impact

Supporters say fire survivors shouldn’t owe hefty taxes when selling burned-out lots, arguing the break offers basic fairness for families facing insurance shortfalls and steep rebuilding costs. Opponents warn the exemption covers wealthy landlords and investors as well as homeowners, creating a “loophole for the ultrawealthy” and stripping millions annually from the mansion tax’s homeless and affordable housing programs.

Charter Amendment LA

The basics:

Charter Amendment LA would change the way public works are administered in Los Angeles, allow the city to lease its underused land to tenants and open the door to greater city involvement in business enterprises. It also would ease some competitive bidding rules.

The impact

The proposed changes to the Los Angeles City Charter are intended to more efficiently deliver basic city services and speed repairs to deteriorating infrastructure such as streets in need of repaving, unsafe sidewalks and broken streetlights.

Charter Amendment PL

The basics

Charter Amendment PL would tweak L.A.’s Planning Department, promising faster decisions, clearer rules and more consistent oversight of development citywide. Seven volunteer Area Planning Commissions would be replaced by a single Neighborhood Appeals Board, cutting costs and standardizing rulings on liquor licenses, hillside homes and small-business projects.

The measure would let the City Council raise building height limits, set strict timelines on planning votes and automatically approve some amendments, opening the door to taller towers and speedier permitting.

The impact

Homeowners, developers and businesses have complained that navigating the Planning Department can be complicated and confusing. These changes aim to streamline how permits and projects move through the department.

Charter Amendment EE

The basics

Charter Amendment EE would cut the number of required L.A. City Council meetings from three to one weekly while reshaping ethics rules, watchdog powers and referendum signature thresholds.

The impact

Supporters call three weekly meetings inefficient and costly, arguing fewer full sessions would free council members to work in their districts and steer more detailed public debate into committee hearings. Opponents warn EE would shrink public access, rush deliberations and effectively neuter referendums, casting the ethics and oversight tweaks as modest cover for a deeper retreat from transparency.

Charter Amendment PRK

The basics

Charter Amendment PRK would double the minimum budget allocation set aside for the Department of Recreation and Parks, which oversees the upkeep of green spaces, playing fields and senior centers. It is not a new tax or bond.

The impact

Supporters say that the change will allow the city to give Angelenos the park and recreation services they deserve. Critics contend it will tie the hands of the city’s elected officials, forcing them to cut other services to make room for additional park funding.

Charter Amendment PRT

The basics

Charter Amendment PRT would change the composition of the Los Angeles World Airport’s board of commissioners, which oversees Van Nuys and Los Angeles International airports. It would require that two of the seven board members live in Van Nuys and three live around LAX — a footprint that the amendment does not define. As for the Port of Los Angeles, the amendment would require the Los Angeles Board of Harbor Commissioners to annually allocate a portion of the harbor’s operating income to investments in waterfront public access projects. It also would broaden public insight into how lease agreements with the port affect the local workforce by adding employment reporting requirements for any leaseholder extending a lease or any lease applicant.

The impact

The measure was developed through a reform effort started after a series of scandals. Backers say it will boost public accountability. There was initial pushback among some terminal leaseholders at the Port of Los Angeles.

Charter Amendment SC

The basics

Charter Amendment SC aims to clarify campaign finance rules for candidates running for a seat on the L.A. Unified Board of Education, which overseas the school district and around 350,000 students.

The impact

Repetitive language in the Los Angeles City Charter would be deleted and the charter would make clear that the same campaign finance rules apply to both mayoral candidates and Board of Education candidates, except in certain instances, the measure says. Among those requirements are rules governing campaign contribution limits, filing deadlines, public disclosures and fundraising windows.

In a cascade of rulings in the days before Tuesday’s elections, federal judges have rejected the Trump administration’s efforts to wrest control over state voting processes, pressure state and local elections officials into complying with their demands and turn the midterm vote into another opportunity for immigration enforcement.

In Northern California late Friday, U.S. District Judge Trina L. Thompson granted labor unions representing California poll workers a sweeping order barring the Trump administration from an array of election-related actions, including demanding that those workers set aside ballots from voters whose eligibility the administration has questioned, and threatening them with criminal sanctions if they refuse to do so.

“Election Day is around the corner. Ballots have already been issued. Americans have already begun voting. Workers have already begun processing ballots,” Thompson wrote. “Given the consequences of inaction, the Court sees no reason to delay its ruling.”

A Justice Department spokesperson criticized Thompson for ruling “without even waiting to hear from the United States,” and said her decision was part of a “two-track system of justice” in which other federal judges have delayed the Trump administration’s “own urgent election claims” until after election day.

“The Department is reviewing the order and evaluating all options,” the spokesperson said.

The ruling followed three others — one in district court in Los Angeles and two in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals — in which federal judges blocked the administration’s effort to force California elections officials to immediately set aside the ballots of 20,000 voters the administration alleges may be noncitizens, instead setting a schedule for more fact-finding in the case after polls close.

It followed a ruling in a separate case in Washington, D.C., in which a federal judge demanded that the Trump administration turn over its list of alleged noncitizen voters to advocacy groups, including the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles. Data analysts from the UCLA Voting Rights Project wrote in court Saturday that their review of the provided list found it “contains extensive errors” and includes citizens and thousands of others who are not on California’s voter list.

And it came about the same time as a decision late Friday by the full 9th Circuit not to reconsider a ruling by a smaller three-judge panel upholding an earlier ruling by U.S. District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguin in Oakland. She had barred federal immigration agents looking for noncitizen voters from conducting door knocks, street stops and other field interviews in California and eight other states.

The administration’s losses — in cases with broad scope and real implications in an election that will determine control of Congress — are the result of legal challenges from a coalition of liberal states such as California, localities such as Los Angeles County, and immigration, voting rights and labor groups.

But they are also the product of a bipartisan stable of federal judges — including appointees of President Trump — who have described the administration’s efforts as unconstitutional and a threat to one of the most core functions of American democracy.

Those judges weighed that threat against the alleged threats to election integrity from noncitizen voters that the Trump administration claimed, and found the former to be greater than the latter.

“To be sure, there are countervailing public interests at stake. There is a public interest in maintaining the integrity of elections. But as discussed, the district court found that the risks that noncitizens are voting are, at best, uncertain, and also tempered by California’s established voter-eligibility procedures,” wrote the 9th Circuit majority — one Trump appointee, one President Biden appointee — that refused to block the 20,000 votes. “In contrast, there is a material risk that granting the United States its requested relief would result in disenfranchisement and could jeopardize the County’s entire election.”

Those in the coalition resisting the administration’s efforts celebrated the rulings and praised the courts.

“The judicial smack down on Trump’s unlawful efforts to undermine our elections continues,” wrote California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, whose office has litigated several of the cases, in response to Thompson’s Friday night ruling in favor of the labor unions. “Trump is racking up loss after loss as he enters the final death throes of this election and desperately and wildly lashes out against the will of the voters.”

“4 DAYS UNTIL ELECTION DAY. Remember: Your vote matters. Don’t be intimidated. Keep voting as normal,” wrote Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), in response to the same ruling. “The courts are upholding the rule of law, and states — not Donald Trump — run our elections.”

“We said we would not let the Trump administration bully election workers, and today we won a critical court order blocking those threats,” SEIU International President April Verrett said. “This ruling is a victory for the workers who make our elections possible and the communities they serve.”

The flurry of rulings has been prompted in part by the administration itself, as Justice Department officials have worked to push the cases through the courts at breakneck speed in search of relief ahead of election day.

The 9th Circuit has already ruled twice in the case over the 20,000 California ballots, for instance, because Justice Department lawyers appealed the matter before the district court ever ruled, on the notion that U.S. District Judge David O. Carter was taking too long to make a decision.

When the 9th Circuit rejected that effort and kicked the case back down to Carter, he issued one of the most striking rulings of the week.

“Constitutional rights and our democracy are at stake. The public interest favors their protection. Individuals who have met the requirements of California’s voter registration laws must not be deprived of a core right merely because of unfounded allegations stemming from a procedure rife with uncertainty and errors,” Carter wrote. “The public interest also favors the protection of election staff, who are working diligently to ensure that all citizens can cast their votes.”

When the Trump administration appealed that ruling once more to the 9th Circuit, the same panel majority — Trump appointee Mark J. Bennett and Biden appointee Gabriel P. Sanchez — slapped it back again. They wrote that the administration’s arguments were legally flawed in multiple ways, not least in that they sought clearly unconstitutional executive authority to intervene in an election.

“We decline the United States’s invitation to contravene the Elections Clause by undermining the Constitution’s plain text,” they wrote.

The Trump administration’s immediate response was striking — in that there was none.

After weeks of denouncing California officials for continuing to tabulate ballots and stressing to the courts that such counting constituted an emergency from which it required immediate relief, rapidly appealing adverse rulings and arguing over the merits of each twist with California officials on social media, the administration was silent.

The administration missed a deadline for requesting that the three-judge panel’s ruling be revisited by the full appellate court. It made no immediate appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. First Assistant U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli, the lead federal prosecutor in L.A. who argued the case before Carter and has vociferously defended the case on social media, was silent. Neither the Justice Department nor Essayli’s office responded to requests for comment on the ruling.