Politics Desk

Supreme Court rebuffs Missouri’s push to use new U.S. House map backed by Trump in November

Lindsay Whitehurst and David A. Lieb

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rebuffed an appeal from Missouri officials who wanted to use new congressional districts backed by President Trump in the November election, a defeat for Republicans who had hoped the new map could help them hold onto their slim House majority.

The justices let stand a decision by Missouri’s top court, which said the new districts were automatically suspended by a citizen petition demanding a statewide vote.

The ruling marks a rare setback for Republicans in a nationwide redistricting battle that Trump urged Republicans to launch last year.

Missouri’s new districts were used in the August primaries. But the Missouri Supreme Court ruled in September that the state must revert to districts adopted after the last census.

Republican state Atty. Gen. Catherine Hanaway, who appealed, had argued it would violate federal rights to switch districts for voters between the primary and general elections. She also said it would cause confusion.

Missouri currently is represented in the U.S. House by six Republicans and two Democrats who were elected under districts that Republican state officials approved in 2022.

But at Trump’s urging, Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe called the Legislature into a special session last year to redraw congressional boundaries to their advantage ahead of the midterms.

The revised map targeted the 5th Congressional District, held by longtime Democratic Rep. Emanuel Cleaver of Kansas City. It reassigned portions of Kansas City to two neighboring districts represented by Republicans and stretched the remainder of Cleaver’s district far eastward into rural Republican areas.

Cleaver was unopposed in the Democratic primary. State Sen. Rick Brattin won the Republican primary in the reshaped district.

On the same day as the primary, Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins rejected a petition with thousands of signatures seeking to force a November referendum on the map. Hoskins asserted that Missouri’s Constitution doesn’t allow a referendum on congressional redistricting. A lower court agreed, but the state Supreme Court reversed Hoskins’ decision.

The state’s top court said the new districts were retroactively frozen in December, when the petition signatures were submitted, and thus never became law. Hoskins on Tuesday assigned the redistricting referendum as Proposition A on the November ballot, in compliance with the state court order.

The Missouri Constitution does not specifically say that a referendum can be used for congressional redistricting. But the state Supreme Court said a constitutional provision allowing a referendum on “any act” of the Legislature encompasses congressional redistricting legislation.

Missouri was the second Republican-led state, after Texas, to respond to Trump’s call last year to redraw congressional districts. Several other states followed. All told, Republicans had hoped to win as many as 16 additional seats from new House maps enacted in eight states — Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Florida, Tennessee, Louisiana and Alabama. Democrats, whose counterattack faced several setbacks, think they could win up to six additional seats from new districts in California and Utah.

It remains to be seen whether the redistricting works as intended for Republicans. The president’s party historically has lost congressional seats in the midterms, and Trump’s poor approval ratings could provide an extra hurdle for Republican candidates.

Whitehurst and Lieb write for the Associated Press.

Source link

Trump’s White House North Portico project nears completion with shroud and scaffolding taken down

Bill Barrow and Jacquelyn Martin

Work on the White House North Portico appears to be nearing completion before Chinese President Xi Jinping’s state visit to the United States in late September.

Scaffolding was being taken down Tuesday after workers over Labor Day weekend removed a shroud that had obscured the work. The Executive Mansion’s front columns had been covered since July. The work, ordered by President Trump, began in June.

The portico was first completed in 1830 during Andrew Jackson’s presidency. Administration officials said previously that stonework and plaster on the structure were being refurbished because of routine damage from age and weather exposure.

Trump has said he noticed it was in “deplorable condition” before insisting on repairs. The work is part of the president’s sweeping overhaul of the White House and other federal property in the nation’s capital — with most of his more ambitious moves drawing lawsuits and criticism from preservationists.

Trump said last week that workers finished construction of a helipad on the South Lawn.

His signature project, a White House ballroom and underground bunker, continues as legal fights play out. Multiple lawsuits were filed after Trump demolished the East Wing before going through the usual regulatory steps for major work on historic federal buildings in Washington. The massive project will add more square footage than what the existing White House footprint comprises.

That means Trump must host Xi’s state dinner, scheduled for Sept. 24, in existing spaces and in a construction zone — a circumstance that will afford the president a new opportunity to extol his ballroom project.

Barrow and Martin write for the Associated Press. Barrow reported from Atlanta.

Source link

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s former chief of staff seeks to delay sentencing because of health issues

Dana Williamson, California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s onetime chief of staff, is seeking to delay her criminal sentencing date for political corruption because of health issues, according to documents filed last week in federal court.

Williamson’s attorney McGregor Scott, asked the court to delay her Sept. 17 sentencing and seal documents related to her health condition.

Scott submitted documents that reference a Sept. 4 surgery that Williamson underwent, medical records, and a text message from Williamson’s mother about the surgery.

Williamson underwent a liver transplant earlier this year, prompting a judge to delay a February hearing in her case.

A spokesperson for the U.S. attorney’s office for the Eastern District of California didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment about the requested sentencing delay.

Scott declined to comment.

Williamson, who worked for Newsom until 2024, pleaded guilty in May to three counts, including committing bank and wire fraud.

Williamson, a veteran political consultant who also formerly worked for former Govs. Jerry Brown and Gray Davis, admitted she took part in a scheme from 2022 to 2024 to skim campaign funds from then-U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, now a leading candidate for governor, and divert the money to Becerra’s then-chief of staff.

She also admitted in her plea deal to filing a false tax form in 2024 and lying to FBI agents that same year.

Beyond lying to the FBI about the scheme involving Becerra, Williamson misled federal authorities on another topic, the plea agreement stated.

She lied to FBI agents when asked about the state’s lawsuit against video game company Activision Blizzard Inc., details contained in the November indictment against Williamson and other public records show.

Source link

Trump honors 9/11 victims at the Ellipse, pledging to ‘never forget’

Nearly a quarter century after a day “etched forever into the memories of Americans,” President Trump honored the victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on Tuesday by vowing to “never forget.”

The event at the Ellipse was spearheaded by the Tunnel to Towers Foundation and showcased a massive, 21-foot, nearly 17,000-pound steel beam recovered from the South Tower of the World Trade Center in New York, which had traveled for months across the country as part of the Steel Across America tour.

The steel beam will make its way through New York in a procession on Friday by retracing the steps of fallen New York City firefighter Stephen Siller. Trump’s presence at the event on Tuesday just outside the White House began a week of commemorations that will culminate in several events on Friday, including one at the Pentagon that Trump will attend.

“This battered piece of steel here today on the Ellipse is a reminder that America is blessed with a strength no fire can consume, no evil can conquer and no terror can destroy,” Trump said.

Trump noted that the Sept. 11 attacks were one of few moments in history that “divide time into really what came before” and after.

His remarks briefly dipped into the political, as Trump warned of people turning a “communistic way” — a reference to his frequent attacks on Democrats as more democratic socialists gain influence in the party.

During his remarks, Trump paid particular tribute to two men who died in the attacks: Jeffrey Palazzo, a New York City firefighter, and Welles Crowther, a young equities trader who became known as the “man in the red bandanna” after rescuing several people in the attacks.

Trump said the U.S. Coast Guard will commission a new fast-response cutter this weekend in New York in honor of Palazzo, a Coast Guard reservist who was working out of Staten Island’s Rescue Squad 5 when he responded to the attacks 25 years ago.

And the president recognized Crowther, also a volunteer firefighter, by awarding him the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Crowther’s mother, Alison, and sister, Paige, accepted the award, which is considered the nation’s highest civilian honor.

In attendance were a smattering of top Cabinet officials and members of Congress, including Republican Reps. Mike Lawler of New York and Dan Meuser, whose Pennsylvania district is near Shanksville, where Flight 93 crashed on Sept. 11, 2001.

Trump praised at length Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who was chairman and CEO of Cantor Fitzgerald, a financial firm that had been housed at the World Trade Center. Lutnick lost his younger brother, Gary, as well as more than 650 employees in the attacks.

“He’s done an amazing job,” Trump said of Lutnick. “He’s rebuilt Cantor Fitzgerald, and he’s given much of the profits to some of the families or the families of people who perished.”

About 150 first responders from New York, as well as some from Washington and Pennsylvania, were in attendance, Trump said.

“This steel beam represents the best of our country,” said Frank Siller, the foundation’s chairman and CEO who is the brother of Stephen Siller. “It’s important to recognize that the heroism that was exhibited that fateful day was nothing short of incredible.”

Kim writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Will Weissert contributed to this report.

Source link

The GOP was confident about keeping its Senate majority. Now the fight for control is wide open

Republicans appeared to have a firm grip on the Senate heading into the final two years of President Trump’s term. But with less than two months until Election Day, control of the chamber is now up for grabs.

Democrats have found themselves competing in states that once seemed beyond their reach as Trump’s slipping approval ratings and voters’ dissatisfaction with the economy create a difficult political environment for Republicans. But races Democrats once counted on winning have also become more complicated.

It’s a battle that’s expected to exceed $3.4 billion in spending across all races during the midterm campaign. The implications are huge for Trump’s agenda and his ability to fill administration jobs and open court seats for the remainder of his term, as the Senate is empowered to confirm or block presidential nominees.

Republicans say it’s unlikely for everything to break in Democrats’ favor, but they acknowledge they’re facing a difficult landscape. Senate Majority Leader John Thune told South Dakota’s KELOLAND News last week that he does “worry” about losing the chamber.

“I’m a realist,” Thune said. “I don’t ever try and sugarcoat things. I think it’s a competitive environment right now.”

Democrats face a scrambled path to the majority

Democrats need to net four seats to win the majority. The original path had been to hold Michigan, Georgia and New Hampshire while winning back Republican-held seats in Alaska, Maine, North Carolina and Ohio. But things have changed.

“We now have multiple paths for the majority,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said last month. “We found new states — Iowa, Texas — which people a year ago weren’t even paying attention to.”

Some of the states where Democrats were feeling most optimistic at the start of the election cycle, such as Michigan and Maine, have grown murkier.

In Michigan, where there’s an open seat this fall, no GOP candidate has won a Senate race since 1994. But Democrats are struggling to unite behind nominee Abdul El-Sayed. The favorite of progressives narrowly defeated moderate U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens in the August primary, and feelings remain raw from a bruising contest that saw nearly $70 million spent against El-Sayed.

Republicans believe Mike Rogers, who lost the 2024 Senate race by fewer than 20,000 votes, has an improved shot against El-Sayed. The Senate Leadership Fund — Senate Republicans’ spending PAC — added $6 million to its Michigan advertising investment after El-Sayed won, bringing their total spending to $51 million, the third-highest total.

Democrats also saw a prime opportunity to finally defeat five-term Republican Sen. Susan Collins in Maine, where Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris won more votes than Trump in 2024.

Progressive Graham Platner easily won the nomination in June, but he left the race the next month over a sexual assault allegation that he denies. Democratic delegates in late July chose Troy Jackson, a lesser-known former state legislative leader, to replace him.

Jackson has been forced to play catch-up. Collins and aligned super PACs have spent almost $80 million so far, according to the ad-tracking firm AdImpact, while Jackson and Democratic-aligned groups have spent and reserved close to $45 million since he became the nominee.

As one path narrowed for Democrats, others widened

Democrats increasingly see a real possibility in Texas, a state that has been an elusive goal for decades, and other GOP-led states including Iowa, Alaska and Ohio.

In Texas, Democrat James Talarico faces state Attorney General Ken Paxton, who ousted four-term incumbent Republican Sen. John Cornyn to win the GOP nomination. Senate GOP leadership backed Cornyn, seeing him as the stronger general election candidate.

Paxton has been shadowed for decades by legal and ethical questions, including indictments for securities fraud, though he was not convicted.

Talarico and allied groups have spent nearly $30 million on advertising since the May runoff, compared to less than $3 million by pro-Paxton groups. The political fund associated with Trump last week spent $10 million on TV and digital ads to help Paxton — the first major general election investment by MAGA Inc. for the midterms. Senate GOP leaders had petitioned Trump’s political team to spend some of the more than $400 million it had last month to help Paxton.

Democrats have also upped their spending in Alaska, Iowa, Ohio and North Carolina, all states currently held by Republicans. The GOP, meanwhile, is feeling more optimistic about New Hampshire as well as Michigan, while spending more to defend seats in Iowa and Alaska.

The expanded map has upped the anticipated total spending this cycle. AdImpact in June projected $3.4 billion in advertising spending on Senate races, a significant increase from the $2.8 billion the ad spending firm projected in the fall of 2025.

Why more states are in play than expected

Democrats’ path has widened in part because of Trump’s slumping job approval, notably on handling the economy, which was at 32% according to an AP-NORC poll in July — down from 40% in March 2025, shortly after he took office.

Trump’s trade policies and the war in Iran, with its corresponding inflated fuel costs, have added to the economic uncertainty for voters less than two months before Election Day.

“Things still cost too much. And so we’ve got to work on that issue,” Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio told The Associated Press. “We understand that and we know that’s real.”

Ohio Sen. Jon Husted heard the concern firsthand at a roundtable last month. Husted is looking to fend off a comeback from former Sen. Sherrod Brown in another key matchup for both parties.

During the discussion on housing, one attendee told Husted that costs were “skyrocketing” in part because of uncertainty around tariffs.

“Uncertainty is the killer to this economy,” said Dean Windham, a real estate developer who previously ran for office as a Republican.

Some Republican Senate candidates have defended Trump’s policies while confronting concerns about their economic impact.

In Michigan, where Trump’s tariffs on Canada have become a central issue, Rogers has backed the president’s approach while leaving room for disagreement.

“President Trump is right to put America First — and tariffs are necessary, but are not a one-size-fits-all solution,” Rogers said in a recent statement.

Republicans believe the math still favors them

Even if Democrats hold every seat they currently control, they would need to flip at least two seats in states Trump carried by double digits in 2024 to win the majority.

Republicans are betting that those underlying advantages will matter more as Election Day approaches — particularly as Trump and the party turn their attention toward mobilizing voters who helped return him to the White House.

Trump told reporters last week that he will “be making a lot of stops” in the last 30 days before the election.

This week, Republicans will hold a midterm convention in Texas, where Trump is set to speak and top Senate candidates including Rogers and Husted are expected to attend.

But Republicans acknowledge they have work to do.

“Politics is local,” Republican Sen. Mike Rounds of South Dakota said. He pointed to Trump’s decision to import beef, which he said made farmers and ranchers “feel just like the administration pulled the rug right off from underneath” them.

“They’re hurt,” Rounds said. “They feel like they’ve been let down.”

Cappelletti, Beaumont and Jalonick write for the Associated Press. Beaumont reported from Des Moines, Iowa.

Source link

Rubio heads to Latin America to push U.S. counter-drug priorities with Trump-friendly leaders

Matthew Lee and Astrid Suárez

Secretary of State Marco Rubio begins a three-nation tour of Latin America on Tuesday, visiting U.S.-aligned conservative leaders as the Trump administration steps up military operations to combat drug trafficking and seeks further inroads in the Western Hemisphere aimed at improving America’s energy standing and combating illegal migration.

Just a week after sealing a massive oil deal with Venezuelan leaders after a U.S. military operation in January deposed then-leader Nicolás Maduro, Rubio was traveling to neighboring Colombia to meet President Abelardo de la Espriella. Colombia’s new leader has embraced President Trump’s policies on issues ranging from drugs to immigration and energy.

De la Espriella is one of a new generation of right-wing conservatives to win election and show support for Trump’s muscular approach to a region that had tilted leftward in recent decades.

In announcing the trip last week, which also will take Rubio to Ecuador and Peru, the State Department said Rubio and all three leaders would be discussing “enhanced cooperation in the shared fight against narcoterrorism, which threatens our hemisphere.”

Rubio visits as Latin American allies help expanded efforts to fight drug trafficking

The trip comes a day after U.S. forces intercepted and sank another Ecuadorian vessel that Washington accuses of links to the criminal group Los Choneros.

It was the latest action by the U.S. against boats and vessels in Latin America that it says are involved in drug trafficking. Expanded operations in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean began a year ago, coinciding with an extreme crackdown on migrants in the U.S. illegally, many of them from Latin America.

The vessel sunk Monday was the fifth targeted by U.S. forces in the region in less than two weeks — in most cases with the cooperation or at least tacit support of the conservative leaders with whom Rubio will meet.

But unlike strikes on alleged drug-trafficking boats in Latin American waters that began in September 2025, those on board the vessel were removed and transferred to Ecuadorian authorities. It appears to be a shift after a series of strikes on boats over the year have killed at least 227 people, which the Trump administration accuses of being “narcoterrorists” but without providing evidence.

The U.S. military carried out at least two of those deadly strikes last month before starting to intercept floating refueling stations that it says support illicit drug trafficking operations at sea.

Colombia’s president vows to crack down on drug trafficking and immigration

Colombian Foreign Minister Omar Bula said in a video released Tuesday that Rubio’s visit marks the beginning of “rebuilding a strategic alliance with the United States, our main partner in the region.” He affirmed that Colombia will focus on discussing security, which includes combating drug trafficking, trade, and the defense of “shared values.”

De la Espriella has promised to take a hard line against drug traffickers and pledges to deport thousands of migrants who are in Colombia without residence permits, mainly Venezuelans, as he tries to make significant changes to the nation’s immigration policies that he says will reduce crime.

After taking office last month, De la Espriella brought Colombia into the Americas Counter Cartels Coalition and strengthened long-standing security cooperation with the United States, following strained relations during the 2022-2026 administration of progressive Gustavo Petro.

In just a month in office, De la Espriella has carried out at least three bombings against illegal armed groups and increased military operations. However, several minors have died during the bombings, which has drawn criticism from opposition leaders.

As part of his security strategy, he has focused his efforts on showcasing the results of military operations. However, there was criticism from the opposition and the state-run Ombudsman’s Office after De la Espriella displayed the bodies of alleged criminals wrapped in white bags on the ground alongside seized ammunition.

After winning the election, De la Espriella identified several leaders of Colombia’s illegal armed groups as “military targets.” Last week, he announced that the first of these, Naín Andrés Pérez Toncel, alias “Bendito Menor,” one of the leaders of the Self-Defense Forces of the Sierra Nevada, an illegal armed group in the north of the country, had been killed by police.

Nicknamed “El Tigre,” or The Tiger, the president has shifted the country’s security policy, closing the peace negotiations initiated by Petro during his administration, which he considers a failed effort that only increased violence in Colombia.

Colombia grapples with illegal armed groups vying for control of territories strategically important for drug trafficking and illegal mining, despite the fact that a decade ago the state signed a historic peace agreement with the FARC rebel group.

After meeting De la Espriella in Barranquilla on the Caribbean, where he will sign a civil nuclear cooperation deal and a critical minerals agreement, Rubio will make a brief stop in Quito.

He will meet Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa whose government has steadily increased counternarcotics operations conducted with the U.S. military.

Rubio will round out the visit with a stop in Lima, Peru, where he will meet new President Keiko Fujimori — the daughter of former leader Alberto Fujimori — as the government also has taken a rightward turn.

Lee and Suárez write for the Associated Press. Suarez reported from Bogota, Colombia.

Source link

Candidates for governor Becerra, Hilton to debate after all

Days before California voters receive their mail-in ballots, gubernatorial candidates Xavier Becerra, a Democrat, and Steve Hilton, a Republican, will debate in a nationally televised face-off.

On Sept. 30 at CNN’s Burbank studio, the two candidates hoping to succeed termed-out Gov. Gavin Newson are expected to spar over sharply divergent visions for the future of the state. California’s next leader is expected to face pressing fiscal issues, as well as continued battle with the Trump administration.

Given California’s deep Democratic tilt, there was a question whether the two men would debate.

On Aug. 19, Becerra promised multiple debates with Hilton ahead of the general election.

“We will have debates, and between now and Nov. 3, we will continue to go out there and meet with folks to make sure they have an opportunity to see the candidates,” Becerra told reporters after greeting business owners, community leaders and voters in a walking tour of Little Tokyo in downtown Los Angeles. “Voters need to have good information. We’ll make sure they have it, and there will be debates.”

The following day, Hilton said he was skeptical of Becerra’s promise.

“I don’t believe him unless he commits to an actual debate. Invitations are on the table for dates and places,” Hilton said. “Why can’t he just accept them? I think he’s lying. I don’t think he wants to do debates because he doesn’t want to debate his record.”

September’s hour-long debate, taking place shortly before county elections officials begin mailing ballots to all the state’s registered voters, will be moderated by the cable network’s anchors Dana Bash and Jake Tapper.

It is the most attention a California gubernatorial contest has drawn since 2010, when “Today” show host Matt Lauer and NBC News Political Director Chuck Todd moderated nationally televised clashes.

That is perhaps unsurprising given how sharply the California electorate has swung left, with no Republican winning a statewide contest since 2006. Two did that year.

While there will not be a studio audience, the debate will air on CNN, CNN International, CNN en Español, CNN.com and related TV and mobile apps for subscribers.

Times staff writer Nicole Nixon contributed to this report.

Source link

Becerra would extend moratorium on death penalty if elected governor

Democrat Xavier Becerra defended the death penalty while serving as California’s attorney general, a punishment his office actively sought in the case of a gunman convicted of an Orange County mass shooting, but as the front-running candidate for governor he has vowed to block executions if elected in November.

Becerra said he will extend the blanket reprieve for all death row inmates that Gov. Gavin Newsom enacted by executive order in 2019, saying he supported “moving our state away from a costly, flawed system that disproportionately impacts Black and brown communities and too often gets it wrong.”

Those comments have reassured anti-death penalty advocates wary of Becerra, who has stated throughout his career that capital punishment should be an option for victims seeking justice. He reiterated that stance just a decade ago during his confirmation hearing for attorney general, though he also expressed concerns about the unjust application of the punishment.

“I support the death penalty, but I hate the way it’s being executed,” Becerra told state lawmakers in 2017.

“If you commit some heinous crime where you have taken the life of someone else, and you knew that there was a death penalty in place in that place where you committed that crime, then you should face the punishment for what you’ve done,” he explained. “It doesn’t give me pleasure to say that, but I simply do believe there’s a simple justice in that.”

Becerra’s challenger in the Nov. 3 election, former Fox News commentator Steve Hilton, opposes the death penalty but said he would rescind Newsom’s moratorium because it defies the will of voters.

Becerra has said he is concerned by how death sentences historically have been applied, including a highly disproportionate number of condemned inmates who are Black or Latino men and cases in which they later have been exonerated of crimes.

He repeated similar positions last year during a gubernatorial forum in Los Angeles.

“I do not believe every Californian has gotten a fair verdict in these fights,” he said in response to a question about extending Newsom’s moratorium. “But here is what I will tell you: We have to be aggressive in going after crime, especially the most heinous crime. … I will make sure that we have a judiciary system and a prosecution system that takes into account that we must show fairness.”

Though California has not performed an execution since 2006, prosecutors in some areas of the state continue to seek and win death sentences. As of early August, there were 565 condemned inmates in California prisons, according to the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

Newsom’s moratorium stops the state from carrying out those sentences.

In California, county district attorneys are responsible for prosecuting the vast majority of accused murderers when they go to trial and also deciding whether to seek the death penalty. The office of the state attorney general is responsible for defending death penalty convictions on appeal.

Becerra sought the death penalty in a murder case his office prosecuted early in his tenure, though unsuccessfully. Scott Dekraai, who was convicted of killing his ex-wife and seven others in a shooting at a Seal Beach beauty salon, was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole after a prosecution scandal involving his case.

Some death penalty opponents criticized Becerra for fighting to uphold the death sentence of Robert Lewis Jr., who was deemed by the California Supreme Court in 2018 to have an intellectual disability that made him ineligible for execution.

“I find that reprehensible,” said Mike Farrell, president of Death Penalty Focus, an advocacy group. A longtime anti-death penalty activist, Farrell is better-known for starring as B.J. Hunnicutt in the TV show “M*A*S*H.”

“It may not have been his idea, but he was part of that process,” he said of Becerra.

Others said Becerra cannot be blamed for doing his job. Former Vice President Kamala Harris faced the same dilemma when she served as state attorney general, as does Rob Bonta, who currently holds the office.

“The AG is in a different position because it’s just inherent in their role to defend convictions and sentences,” said Natasha Minsker of the California Anti-Death Penalty Coalition. “For example, Kamala Harris is very strongly personally opposed to the death penalty and still, while she was AG, the office defended hundreds of death sentences. Same with Rob Bonta. He’s very clearly personally against the death penalty, and his office continues to defend death sentences.”

Becerra’s campaign declined an interview on the subject and referred to his statement in support of extending Newsom’s freeze on executions.

Hilton, his Republican opponent in the race, holds starkly different views.

“If you’re arguing that taking a life is such a serious crime, then I don’t think responding by taking a life actually makes that argument,” he said in an interview last month.

But he said California voters spoke clearly by voting twice — in 2012 and 2016 — against ballot measures that would have repealed the death penalty. “I don’t think it’s OK for a governor to just substitute their personal opinion on an issue where the voters had an explicit and direct say,” he said.

“I strongly believe in holding people accountable for what they do,” Hilton said. “But my sort of fundamental belief is that if we’re saying it’s wrong to kill someone, then the state shouldn’t be doing it, either.”

Hilton also would roll back Democratic-led reforms that have shortened many inmates’ prison sentences by allowing them to seek parole sooner.

End or extend? It’s not that simple

Even if a governor rescinds the moratorium, resuming executions would be a long and complicated process because the state has no approved protocol or facilities to carry out death sentences.

Newsom ordered the dismantling of San Quentin’s death row and execution chamber. Even before he took office, the state’s use of lethal injection drugs was part of a long-running and now-dormant legal battle. And a dwindling number of attorneys who specialize in death penalty cases meant 70% of condemned inmates did not have a lawyer at the end of last year, according to a state report.

California’s death penalty also faces a new legal challenge from groups arguing that capital punishment cases have been administered in a way that is racially discriminatory. In May, the California Supreme Court ordered the attorney general’s office to respond to the arguments and assigned the case to a superior court.

The shifts in California’s criminal justice system are reflected in legal battles waged by the pro-death penalty Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, a nonprofit that supports victims of crime and their families in court.

“We used to do a lot of work in the capital punishment area because that was the area where justice and the sentences were under the greatest attack,” said Kent Scheidegger, the group’s legal director.

But as California’s Democratic-controlled Legislature, governor and, at times, voters adopted measures aimed at reducing the prison population, Scheidegger said the foundation’s efforts increasingly are focused on preserving “the finality of sentences.”

Many capital cases were negotiated as “plea bargains to life without parole on the express promise that this will provide the finality that the victims need most,” he said. “Life without possibility of parole, until recently, meant life without possibility of parole. And now we’ve got one action after another coming out of the government to break down that finality and give people sentenced to life without parole opportunities to get out.”

The group has challenged attempts to expand early release for violent offenders under 2016’s Proposition 57 and new regulations that would allow people sentenced to life without the possibility of parole to seek release.

Twenty-seven states allow the death penalty, but governors in four of them — California, Ohio, Oregon and Pennsylvania — have paused executions.

Slow shifts in public opinion

Attitudes about capital punishment have shifted over time. A 2025 Gallup poll showed 52% of Americans favor the death penalty for people convicted of murder, down from its peak of 80% in 1994.

In a 2023 survey by the Public Policy Institute of California, 62% of adults in the state said they “strongly favor” or “somewhat favor” the death penalty in murder cases. When asked which punishment they prefer for a first-degree murder case, 55% said life without parole and 43% chose the death penalty. More than three-quarters believe there “is some risk that an innocent person will be put to death.”

Despite the changing opinions, Minsker, of the California Anti-Death Penalty Coalition, said there’s little appetite for another repeal attempt because of how expensive ballot measure campaigns have become.

“I am personally one of the strongest proponents of ending the death penalty, and I am not sure I would spend $30 million on that right now, given all the other needs that California has,” said Minsker, a former attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union who ran the unsuccessful 2012 death penalty repeal measure.

Putting an anti-death penalty measure on the statewide ballot also could have put Newsom in an precarious political position. If it failed, Californians would be sending a stinging rebuke to the Democratic governor’s executive decision to grant a blanket reprieve to all condemned inmates.

Minsker is leading a group of criminal justice advocates, faith organizations, prosecutors, murder victim family members and others urging Newsom to commute every death sentence in California before he leaves office.

But advocates are unsure whether Newsom, who is considering a run for president in 2028, would risk the backlash a mass commutation would probably bring. The California Supreme Court also must review executive clemency actions for inmates with more than one felony charge.

Commuting all death sentences to life in prison “would be the coup de grâce,” Farrell said. “However, politically, I’m sure those who are advising him are urging him to have caution in that regard.”

Source link

L.A. fast-food workers could get greater protections

Retail employees in Los Angeles working irregular schedules, called in for shifts with just a few hours’ notice, got some relief years ago in the form of a city law requiring large retailers to give them notice of their schedules at least two weeks in advance.

Now, that 2024 law could be expanded to encompass the city’s fast-food industry, whose precarious workforce — largely women from immigrant communities — has long raised concerns over unstable schedules that they say make it difficult to plan their finances, child care, medical appointments and other obligations.

The L.A. City Council’s economic development and jobs committee late last month approved the ordinance, which also would establish a mandatory six-hour paid training to educate workers on minimum wage laws and other labor protections. It goes to the full council for a vote on Tuesday.

The proposal is backed by a statewide union of fast-food workers — established in 2024 — that is affiliated with the Service Employees International Union, which for years has helped organize fast-food employee walkouts over wage theft, safety and pay.

The California Fast Food Workers Union‘s organizing director, Maria Maldonado, said workers often are unaware of their rights regarding heat exposure and other risky conditions common in kitchens. The training, she said, would show them they have recourse and city support for reporting employers when conditions are unsafe.

“If you know there is support to enforce the law, we are going to see a difference in the industry,” Maldonado said.

City Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martinez first introduced the ordinance in 2024.

Although worker-friendly proposals usually are ultimately backed by the L.A. City Council, the process often is lengthy, with business interests lobbying against such measures.

The California Restaurant Assn. wrote in a letter to the council that the ordinance would greatly increase costs in a state that already is expensive to operate in and that it unfairly singles out an industry that has long served as a successful pathway to business ownership for minority entrepreneurs.

In the letter, business groups took issue with third parties administering worker training, arguing that labor groups could use them to prime the workforce for union campaigns.

The ordinance would “not only duplicate existing law but also force neighborhood restaurants to pay thousands of dollars so groups with ulterior motives can hold team members as a captive audience,” the letter said.

The group also argued that training would create third-party access to workers’ data even as many immigrant workers are fearful of heightened immigration enforcement, noting that the training might “require employers to disclose sensitive information to outside entities, creating serious privacy risks.”

A report commissioned by McDonald’s, compiled by the firm Beacon Economics and Pepperdine University, surveyed some 1,200 workers in L.A. County and found that a majority, about 70.6%, opposed the proposed paid training, while 29.4% said they would want such training, the survey said.

California’s fast-food industry employs more than 750,000 people and is a growing sector, according to state data. The state fast-food union has argued that local and state protections are crucial.

Source link

L.A. Labor Day rally: Union workers warn of automation, job losses

Thousands of union workers, their family members and supporters marched through the streets of industrial Wilmington on Monday, taking part in a Labor Day parade whose festive mood overshadowed their serious concerns about the future.

Jesse Munoz, a 63-year-old longshoreman, who belongs to International Longshore and Warehouse Union Local 13, talked of how automation has eliminated more than 2,000 jobs over the last 15 years or so and worries that foreign-owned companies will do more to shrink the workforce and worsen working conditions.

“The concern is the future,” Munoz said. “I have a son that’s on a list to become a casual worker, which is a worker that will accumulate his hours, and then hopefully within time become a regular member of the union. But the future is not as promising as we would like it to be.”

“If you eliminate the workforce, you eliminate taxes. You eliminate pensions,” he said.

International Longshore and Warehouse Union members throw candy to onlookers at Monday's Labor Day parade.

International Longshore and Warehouse Union members throw candy to onlookers at Monday’s Labor Day parade.

(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)

The Wilmington rally joined Labor Day events throughout the nation Monday, a holiday that also marks a prime campaign opportunity for candidates in midterm elections and other political races.

The first U.S. Labor Day celebration took place in New York City on Sept. 5, 1882, with 10,000 marchers. In 1894, President Cleveland signed a congressional act establishing the first Monday of September as a legal holiday, which has become known for promotional sales as well as a day off for many.

The holiday has particular resonance in Southern California, where the labor movement remains large in numbers and powerful in political influence. Across the nation, that’s far from a given.

The number of workers represented by unions rose by 463,000 in 2025, according to data collected by the pro-labor American Prospect, and national density — meaning the number of U.S. workers who are unionized — edged from 9.9% to 10.0%. However, private-sector union density stayed at 5.9%, meaning the numerical gain came chiefly from government employment.

Munoz said he has a message for President Trump, who has used steep tariffs on foreign-made goods in an attempt to return more manufacturing to the United States, leading to price increases domestically.

“Stop those tariffs and stop this automation,” Munoz said. “Just get the people back to work. Help the economy build itself up again with the workers, not with politicians.”

Giovanna Mendez, right, hugs a teacher during a Labor Day parade

Giovanna Mendez, right, hugs her sibling’s elementary school teacher during the Labor Day parade in Wilmington.

(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)

While the Wilmington crowd was heavily Democratic, one longshoreman in his early 60s showed it was possible to be pro-labor and pro-Trump.

“We’re a lot better than when [President] Biden was in, way better,” said the worker, who also spoke of his union as “wonderful.”

Jordan Gonzales, a 20-year longshoreman, expressed worries about the future of trade work.

“A lot of people would rather be in the office and in the AC,” said Gonzales. “We’ve lost our workers that are outside of an office.”

He was enjoying a hearty free breakfast at a union hall and looking forward to his 12-year-old’s marching band performance in the parade, where she played a glockenspiel.

Participating school bands included San Pedro High, Banning High, Harry Bridges Middle, Port of Los Angeles High and Garfield High.

Delegations from many unions marched with their local chapters and a procession of restored and souped-up cars completed the picture. L.A. Mayor Bass was front and center behind the banner of the shore workers.

Politicians at work on Labor Day

In the pre-parade free breakfast inside the Longshoremen’s & Warehousemen’s Memorial Assn. cavernous meeting hall, a parade of elected and aspiring politicians introduced themselves, straining to be heard and noticed in brief remarks over a sometimes inattentive din.

Xavier Becerra, the Democratic candidate for California governor spoke briefly, thanking union members for their daily labors and campaign support.

“None of us should forget where we came from,” Becerra said. “Let us work hard,” he said, referring to election day. “November 3rd belongs to us just the way Labor Day belongs to us.”

Also on hand were both Los Angeles mayoral candidates: incumbent Bass and challenger Nithya Raman.

1

L.A. Mayor Karen Bass speaking to security

2

L.A. mayoral candidate Nithya Raman greeting parade watchers

1. L.A. Mayor Karen Bass speaks to security during the Labor Day parade in Wilmington. 2. L.A. mayoral candidate Nithya Raman greets parade watchers. (Photographs by Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)

Bass praised the city and union movement for positive strides “even in the midst of Donald Trump, who has done everything he can do against working people, including invading our city, but we are back, and we stay united, and we’re going to continue to do that,” she said. “L.A. is a labor city, and I am there with you 100%.”

Labor leaders also are almost 100% behind her in terms of endorsements. One exception is the Western States Regional Council of Carpenters, which endorsed Raman. The union represents about 65,000 members across 10 states.

“We need more housing in L.A.,” said Doug Hicks, the union’s vice president and director of organizing. “How many cranes are there in downtown Los Angeles today?”

In her brief breakfast remarks, Raman, an L.A. City councilmember, said that “automation, AI, are taking away jobs all over this country, and it is up to us to step up and fight back, and that is why I’m here to stand alongside the workers of this country.”

Master carpenter Joseph W., who did not want to give his last name, declined to speak about endorsements, focusing instead on the challenges of workers.

“We build the houses, but we can’t buy them,” he said. In 1977, his dad bought a house in Norwalk in 1977 for less than $50,000. Now that property is worth close to a million dollars.

“That’s 20 times what my dad paid for it,” said Joseph, who is 55 and rents his own home. “I don’t make 20 times what my dad got paid.”

The younger workers included members of ILWU Local 56, the “ship scalers” union, which cleans up hazardous materials and provides environmental remediation both in the ports and beyond. Its members were involved in wildfire cleanups and removing waste from the hazardous Lineage warehouse fire in Boyle Heights in June.

Two members of the Western States Regional Council of Carpenters fist bump.

Two members of the Western States Regional Council of Carpenters bump fists after Monday’s Labor Day parade.

(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)

Evan Briseno, 18, would like to move on to safer work before his health is potentially affected. But fellow union member Francisco, 21 — who declined to give his last name, wants to move up in the trade, while noting that some areas are so dangerous that every patch of skin needs to be covered.

Neither follows politics, but they’re both concerned with workplace safety issues.

Other unions included Teamsters, Service Employees International, SAG-AFTRA (for performers) and teachers — along with their students.

Mark Ramos wore multiple hats as chair of the Los Angeles County Democratic Party and president of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union Western States Council and UFCW Local 1428.

Ramos said one current union battle is to make self-serve checkout lines manageable for the workers who must supervise them.

Source link

Trump’s economic record is working against him in the midterms

A sporadic global trade war led by President Trump is fueling inflation across the U.S. economy, elevating prices on everyday goods, as the war with Iran sends the price of gas on a roller coaster.

Aggressive tax cuts have pushed the national debt past $40 trillion, driving a growing crisis in the bond market. And an unprecedented immigration crackdown is disrupting the labor supply in agriculture, construction, hospitality and food processing, raising prices even further.

Approaching the halfway point of Trump’s second term, a president who won reelection based on a promise to turn the economy around now faces a reckoning in the midterm elections centered largely on his economic record.

Trump’s economic agenda has emerged as an increasingly awkward liability for Republicans heading into the November elections, leaving lawmakers to defend policies that have delivered political pain at home, even as the White House argues they will pay off in the long run.

Polling on Trump’s handling of the economy has remained in precariously low territory throughout the summer, entering Labor Day weekend with less than a third of Americans supporting his job performance on their most pressing concerns. One recent poll, from the University of Massachusetts Amherst, found that only 22% perceive the economy in a good or fair state.

Shoppers at Lincoln Heights Certified Farmers Market in Los Angeles on Wednesday.

Shoppers at Lincoln Heights Certified Farmers Market in Los Angeles on Wednesday.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

And Americans’ confidence in the economy is unlikely to improve much ahead of election day, Nov. 3, in part because bad economic news has shown to sink confidence fast. Good news takes much longer to win people back, experts said.

“Voters’ opinion of the economy has mostly hardened,” said Aaron Klein, chair of economic studies at the Brookings Institution. “People vote the economy of the spring and summer, not November.”

Good news has been harder to come by.

Heading into the holiday weekend, Trump dismissed communities opposed to data-center construction as “backwards and poor.” A rapidly escalating trade dispute with Canada threatens Republican gains in battlegrounds along the northern border that could determine control of the Senate.

Sean Zabriskie, center, helps his son Connor, 7, try on hockey pants

Sean Zabriskie, center, helps his son Connor, 7, try on hockey pants at The Ice Box Hockey shop in Harbor City. The trade war between the U.S. and Canada is affecting products like hockey gear, most of which is made in Canada and imported to the U.S.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

And fresh polling found that more than 90% of Americans believe corruption is rampant in Trump’s government, even as the president spends hundreds of millions of dollars on vanity projects across the capital.

Susan Collins, the incumbent Republican senator from Maine seeking another term in a strategically critical race, chastised the Trump administration for its latest trade spat with Ottawa as “making the job harder” of securing reelection.

“There’s just nothing good you can say about them,” Collins said of the tariffs.

Trump has pushed back on criticisms of his record, declaring the country has “the greatest economy we’ve ever had” and touting what he calls a manufacturing boom, all while distancing himself from potential midterm losses.

“I’m not affected by the election,” Trump told reporters last week. “I’m not running. But my party’s running, and I’m going to help my party.”

But Rep. Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican and speaker of the House, said last week that the midterms would serve as a referendum on Trump’s presidency.

Rep. Aisha Wahab (D-CA) and Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) arrive for a a ceremonial swearing-in

Rep. Aisha Wahab (D-Hayward) and Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La. ) arrive for a ceremonial swearing-in at the Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 2.

(Andrew Harnik / Getty Images)

“Even though his name isn’t in the midterm, his legacy is,” Johnson said. “The America First priorities and principles are. His administration is.”

Several embattled incumbents fear that’s the case and are distancing themselves from the president. Several Republican lawmakers — including Reps. Tom Barrett of Michigan and Zach Nunn of Iowa — plan on skipping a midterm GOP convention called by Trump for this week in Texas.

Joanne Hsu, director of the University of Michigan’s Survey of Consumers, said that gas prices were a chief frustration among Americans, and found that consumer sentiment soured rapidly once it became clear the conflict in Iran would not be short-lived.

“Consumers are absolutely not feeling great about the economy right now, and the factors that are underpinning their frustrations with the economy at this time are factors that are pretty tough to turn around on short notice,” Hsu said.

Even if the Iran conflict reached a resolution, confidence in the economy is likely to change only when the prices are reflected at the gas station, she said.

“When it comes to the views of the economy, it’s really about what’s happening to my wallet,” Hsu said.

During a White House press media briefing on Thursday,Vice President JD Vance acknowledged the Iran war has led gas prices to rise and that he does not know when Americans can expect those prices to go down.

Vice President JD Vance talks to reporters during a news briefing

Vice President JD Vance talks to reporters during a news briefing at the White House on Sept. 3.

(Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

“The reason gas prices are so high now is because the Iranians are shooting at commercial shipping,” Vance said. “Gas, frankly, could have been much, much higher were it not for our efforts. But I am not going to make a promise about when it is going to return to $3.”

The day after Vance spoke, diesel hit a record all-time high of $5.85 a gallon. In California, it sold for as much as $7.71.

Yet Trump has tried to downplay the economic pressure the war in Iran is placing on Americans, in particular as the Strait of Hormuz — a vital shipping corridor for oil and gas — remains under threat by Iranian troops.

Diesel prices over $7 a gallon are displayed on a pump at a gas station

Diesel prices over $7 a gallon are displayed at a gas station in Los Angeles on Aug. 21.

(Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)

“We have the Strait of Hormuz in extremely good shape,” Trump said, adding that the U.S. Navy has escorted ships through the channel. “A lot of oil is coming out. That’s why you haven’t seen the price of oil going the way they thought it might have to go.”

Trump on Monday also touted an agreement with the Venezuelan government to develop a vast amount of the South American country’s oil reserves. Asked how he sees the deal affecting American consumers, Trump said: “Ultimately prices are going to come down.”

One of the Arts of War statues, newly covered in gold leaf

One of the Arts of War statues, newly covered in gold leaf, is visible at Arlington Memorial Bridge near the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C.

(Andrew Harnik / Getty Images)

“Now, will it happen before the election? I can’t tell you that. But I think people are very smart,” he said.

For some Americans, the economic pressures are a key driver ahead of the midterm elections.

Monica Escalante, a home care provider who is a member of the United Domestic Workers union, said she started feeling the pinch on her wallet after Trump imposed sweeping tariffs on a number of products she buys at the grocery store. Gas, she noticed, became harder to cover after the Iran war started.

Escalante, who lives in Bakersfield, said she also has to drive her client to the grocery store, and that mileage reimbursements are not enough to cover her costs.

“It’s really hard when I don’t have the money for gas, and she doesn’t have the money for gas. Then it is like: What do we do?” she said. “It is either she’s borrowing or I’m trying to figure out how I can get gas in my tank.”

Source link

As Trump locks in oil deal, Venezuelans ask: What happened to elections?

President Trump has locked in a deal to develop Venezuela’s vast oil resources, an arrangement the White House says will bring a country battered by years of economic collapse to a “place where elections are possible.”

But the agreement — backed by acting President Delcy Rodríguez, a holdover from the Nicolás Maduro government that Washington deems “illegitimate” — is raising new uncertainty about how entrenched the unelected government may become.

In January, when the U.S. military captured Maduro, Trump did not say how long a democratic transition would take but said Rodríguez was “gracious” and “essentially willing to do what we think is necessary.”

Asked by The Times on Wednesday what was stopping him from demanding Venezuela set a firm election date, Trump was blunt: “I just don’t think they are ready yet.”

“It’s very new. We took them out of a dictatorship and we’re getting along great with the government,” Trump said. But he said an election would happen “soon.”

U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright walks alongside Venezuela's interim president Delcy Rodríguez

U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright walks alongside Venezuela’s interim president, Delcy Rodríguez, after a news conference on the deal to develop 17 oil fields in the country.

(Jesus Vargas / Getty Images)

Under the deal, the U.S. government is partnering with an oil producer to create a new company, North American Blue Energy Partners, to develop 17 fields with a proven potential of 65 billion barrels. NABEP will have rights to the fields for 100 years.

For many Venezuelans, the lack of urgency around elections — set against a deal that gives the United States majority control over roughly a third of the country’s oil reserves — is starting to feel like a broken promise.

“They tell us we have to wait two years, maybe more, while in the meantime they do business with a government that wasn’t elected, that was imposed on us, and that we don’t want,” Carlos Pérez, a 23-year-old automotive mechanics student, told The Times.

Antonio Marchetti, a 45-year-old plumber and electrician, said that while he sees the removal of Maduro as a “good thing,” the oil deal makes it seem as though Trump’s plans were those of a “cowboy, the invader John Wayne,” all along.

“We were expecting elections,” Marchetti said. “This pact with Trump entrenched the dictatorship that he himself declared war on. But to get rid of Maduro, he left the rest and did business with them. It disgusts me.”

A man holds a sign with a message that reads in Spanish; "Yankee out, murderers" during a protest

A man holds a sign that reads in Spanish, “Yankee out, murderers” during a protest in Caracas on Aug. 29 against President Trump’s deal giving the United States a stake in Venezuela’s oil reserves.

(Pedro Mattey / Associated Press)

The frustrations go beyond Venezuela. In Washington, Republican lawmakers have praised the oil deal, while calling Rodríguez an “interim dictator” who cannot be trusted.

María Corina Machado, the exiled leader of the Venezuelan opposition and a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, on Thursday raised her own worries about what the oil deal means for the future of Venezuela.

In a video message, Machado stopped short of criticizing Trump’s oil deal, but acknowledged concerns about a pact negotiated with an “illegitimate” government.

“Venezuelans know that there can be no development without strong institutions and a government elected by popular vote,” she said. “That is the only real guarantee of success and stability for any large-scale investment.”

A plan in the works

Trump administration officials have characterized the deal as an economic lifeline that will eventually stabilize a country and prepare it for free and fair elections.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said last week that the United States is facilitating talks between Venezuela’s interim government and Dinorah Figuera, an opposition figure leading Venezuela’s 2015 National Assembly, the last democratically elected legislature recognized by the United States.

Machado has been left out of those talks. They are expected to resume in mid-September.

Rubio says that for any election to be “credible,” the voting system will require an overhaul and political parties will need time to organize. Steps also must be taken to ensure the country has a free press.

Echoing Rubio’s comments, the White House said Friday that Trump wants elections held at the “right time,” but that his top priority is to bring Venezuela “back from the dead and rebuild the country after it was incompetently ruled by a nasty dictatorship.”

Energy Secretary Chris Wright and with Venezuelan acting President Delcy Rodríguez

U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright meets with Venezuelan acting President Delcy Rodríguez at Miraflores presidential palace in Caracas on Sept. 2.

(Pedro Mattey / Ap Photo/pedro Mattey)

On Wednesday, while Energy Secretary Chris Wright visited Caracas, Rodríguez declined to set a firm date for an election, but added, “I have worked tirelessly to ensure that Venezuela is ready and prepared when the time comes for its electoral process, which will take place — have no doubt about that: There will be an electoral process.”

The open-ended approach to holding an election, however, has drawn criticism from former Trump administration officials, who argue the lack of a timeline essentially lets Rodríguez govern indefinitely.

“Here’s my fear: It makes us Delcy’s partner, and gives the president a reason to want her to remain in power,” Elliott Abrams, who served as U.S. special envoy to Venezuela during Trump’s first term, told The Times.

He contended that the White House so far appears to prefer a pliant interlocutor, and Rodríguez, he says, will do “whatever Trump tells her to do.”

If an election is to take place in Venezuela, a nine-month runway for preparation is likely to be expected, Abrams said.

People shop for produce at a market in Maracaibo, the heart of Venezuela's oil industry. .

People shop for produce at a market in Maracaibo, the heart of Venezuela’s oil industry. .

(Ariana Cubillos / Associated Press)

In Washington, some Republican lawmakers have continued to call for elections in Venezuela, arguing that Rodríguez cannot be trusted.

“The only way we will have a prosperous Venezuela is with the end of the murderous regime and the return of democracy,” Rep. Carlos A. Gimenez (R-Fla.) wrote on social media. He also called Rodríguez an “interim dictator.”

In an interview with NBC News’ “Meet the Press,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said he does not necessarily think elections should happen before the oil agreement is finalized, but he said they “need to proceed rapidly.”

“I believe they should proceed no later than midway through next year,” he said.

Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) said he is working with Trump and Rubio to ensure “free, fair and transparent elections as soon as possible.” He did not, however, say what would constitute “soon.”

Mixed views on economic hope

In the Lake Maracaibo region, an area that would see renewed investments under the oil agreement, Junior Araujo — a 47-year-old oil worker — sees a “wonderful opportunity to be reborn.”

Araujo, the father of three, is in desperate need of a better economic outlook. He works 120 hours a week and earns only $20. For his family, food alone usually costs about $150 a week.

“We have to get creative and find new ways to make ends meet through side jobs like selling clothes and making yogurt,” he said. “That’s our real financial situation.”

Venezuelans watch oil tankers anchored in Lake Maracaibo

Venezuelans watch oil tankers anchored in Lake Maracaibo on Sept. 4. Much of the country’s oil industry is centered in the Maracaibo region.

(Humberto Matheus/Sipa USA via Associated Press)

For Araujo, the hope for a better economy does not take away his frustrations with the government.

“We’re neither happy nor dancing here, all our benefits have been taken away from us,” he said. “Our main problem is the current government; we need to restore our institutions.”

Nazareth Lezama, a 35-year-old teacher, also sees the oil deal as an economic opportunity but remains concerned that the current government may not have negotiated the best price or conditions for Venezuela. She added this has happened in the past.

“We must be clear that this regime destroyed the oil industry,” she said, adding that Venezuelans “need elections to choose leaders based on merit.”

Marchetti, the plumber from Caracas, says the oil deal is a “100-year chain” on Venezuelans imposed by Trump. He said it has become the “last straw” for him, and he has decided to leave Venezuela and emigrate to Europe.

“With all the pain in my heart, I will leave everything behind. I have a European passport; it won’t be easy to start a life from scratch, but there is no hope left here,” he said.

He does not know where he will land yet. But he knows he needs to leave Venezuela.

“This ship is sinking,” he said.

Times staff writer Ceballos reported from Washington. Special correspondent Mogollón reported from Caracas.

Source link

Column: Wildfire bill flameout sad for California

It was unprecedented and stunning: California’s governor and top two legislative leaders negotiated a compromise on a big bill — and one house rebelled, refusing to bring it to a vote.

Not just any bill, but this year’s biggest in the state Legislature, dealing with catastrophic wildfires, arguably the state’s most perilous problem.

The issue: who gets hit the hardest financially when a for-profit utility’s electrical equipment ignites a blaze. The utility’s investors? Its ratepayers? The insurers? Their premium payers?

At stake, depending on who you talk to, is whether the electricity providers can afford to stay in business and keep our lights on. Will some utility — Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric or San Diego Gas & Election — be forced into bankruptcy when the next powerline-caused wildfire explodes?

Alternatively, there’s another unacceptable potential outcome: Property insurance companies completely stop issuing policies — not just in obvious fire-prone areas, but in tree-lined urban neighborhoods — and basically pull out of California. Or their premiums become flat-out unaffordable.

You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter

George Skelton and other analysts cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know. In your inbox Monday and Thursday mornings.

Politically, the wildfire legislation’s flameout called into question Gov. Gavin Newsom’s seeming weakness as a lame duck chief executive who will be termed-out of office in January.

Newsom stuck out his neck and took it on the chin from fellow Democrats — showing that even with lopsided one-party rule, unity and success aren’t always guaranteed.

But the episode also raised doubts about Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas’ leadership capability. The Hollister Democrat signed off on the deal with Newsom and Senate President Pro Tem Monique Limon (D-Santa Barbara), but reneged at the last minute under pressure from the Assembly Democratic Caucus. They killed the bill without a floor vote.

I’m in my seventh decade of covering California governors and legislatures and never have seen — or heard of — anything like this: a legislative leader backing out of a deal agreed to with the governor and the other house’s leader.

But in truth, Newsom didn’t really like the agreement much anyway. He was on the utilities’ side, and they were out-lobbied by the insurers and ratepayers.

“I know we all hate utilities, so no one wants to defend a utility. But you’ve got to deal with reality. This thing’s not going to get better on its own,” Newsom told reporters at the Capitol on the night before the deal collapsed, referring to the utilities’ worsening financial liability.

Personally, I think it’s an overreach to conclude that Newsom’s power has been severely weakened — or that Rivas necessarily showed lack of leadership. One can question their reasons for doing what they did, but that doesn’t mean it was because of political debility.

“Newsom’s still a powerful lame duck because he could be a presidential nominee,” Republican consultant Rob Stutzman says.

“One of the better things he has done all year is taking on this issue. It would have been very easy for him to just pass it on to the next governor.”

Leaving aside whether this governor could become a president, there are hundreds of bills piling up on his desk that he must sign or veto by Sept. 30. That gives him tremendous clout. It’s good politics — and human nature — for a governor to lean more favorably toward a measure if it’s authored by a legislator who has voted with him.

Plus, one of the Legislature’s last acts last week was to send Newsom a bloated supplemental budget bill containing more than $3 billion in spending, including countless stacks of pork sought by lawmakers for their districts. Newsom easily and gleefully could discard any or all of it.

So Newsom has awesome power, lame duck or not.

But he’s vulnerable to criticism for his style. He has had an annoying habit of waiting until the very end of a legislative session to spring a hefty proposal on the lawmakers. It’s called “jamming.”

In the past, this pressure tactic mostly worked, although it ticked off lawmakers. This time Assembly members rebelled.

It’s not clear whether his jamming is mainly strategy, or just lack of focus and a tendency to push too many projects at once. Or is he preoccupied with positioning himself to run for president in 2028? Probably all of the above.

“If we had more time, we could have had a different outcome,” Rivas told me.

With only a few days remaining in the legislative session, Newsom initially proposed an ambitious plan that would have shifted more cost for utility-sparked wildfires to property insurers, sharply raising premiums across California. Utilities would have gotten some relief.

It became a titanic fight between two powerful special interests. And insurers — teamed with consumer advocates — triumphed, forcing Newsom to back down.

After hard bargaining, the governor and legislative leaders finally agreed on a post-midnight deal to help wildfire victims receive compensation more quickly — a so-called fast-pay program — and to step up fire preventative efforts.

But utilities’ financial risks weren’t significantly reduced, and they quickly mounted an opposition campaign. That resulted in Assembly Democrats scuttling all of it on the session’s last day.

“It’s unfortunate that [bill] was not given a vote,” Limon said, adding that the Senate was prepared to pass it.

“I don’t want us to do the easy stuff and call it a day,” Rivas told me. “I wanted to see real utility accountability. This bill did not go nearly far enough.”

It went a fair distance, however, in helping future fire victims get their insurance payouts faster. And it probably should have been passed.

Half a loaf. Bird in hand. Incremental change. Next year more incrementalism. Ultimately it can add to massive reform.

Some problems are just too tough to resolve in one sitting.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Reining in Big Tech: How California lawmakers plan to regulate AI and social media
California vs. Trump: Judge dismisses Justice Department lawsuit challenging California transgender sports policies
The L.A. Times Special: Texas is red, California blue — but for how much longer? A Lone Star toss-up will tell

Until next week,
George Skelton

—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

Source link

Armed man charges toward Democratic candidate for Ohio governor

An armed assailant charged toward the Democratic candidate for Ohio governor, Amy Acton, on Sunday during a campaign stop at the Canfield Fair, injuring several people before he was stopped by troopers, the Ohio State Highway Patrol said.

The Highway Patrol said in a statement that a man it identified as Patrick Havas, 38, forced his way through a crowd, knocking over members of the audience as he moved toward Acton, the state’s former public health director. He had a taser and two pistols, the statement said.

The Mahoning County Sheriff’s Office said two handguns and a set of brass knuckles were recovered after his arrest, and “no weapons were ever brandished or even removed from their holsters.”

Havas was taken to the county jail and booked on charges of disorderly conduct and two counts of assault, the Highway Patrol statement said, adding that no other details were available pending an investigation. Online court records didn’t yet list the case, and it wasn’t clear as of Sunday night whether Havas has an attorney.

Republican Gov. Mike DeWine said in a statement that the man “tried to forcefully push himself” toward Acton as she was speaking at the fair in Canfield, in northeastern Ohio.

“Violence or the threat of violence at political or public events is always unacceptable,” DeWine added.

The attack is the latest act of political violence to roil the United States. The Ohio gubernatorial contest is one of the most high-profile races this year as the campaigns enter the final six weeks of campaigning before the election in November.

Acton is facing Republican Vivek Ramaswamy, who has parlayed his national name recognition from his 2024 presidential run, tech industry connections and alliance with President Trump into a record fundraising haul that he is tapping for advertising spots. He is using campaign rallies and advertising to criticize Acton.

Ramaswamy’s campaign called Sunday’s attack unacceptable.

“Candidates should be able to meet with voters without having to worry about threats or violence. What happened today is completely unacceptable and has no place in politics, and we hope that no one was hurt,” Ramaswamy’s communications director, Connie Luck, said in a statement Sunday.

Addie Bullock, communications director for Acton’s campaign, said in a statement that the assailant lunged at Acton. She said the candidate “will always stand up to the chaos, hate and vitriol that pits us against one another.”

The incident brought condemnation from Ohio Republican Sen. Jon Husted, who said on X that he and his wife were “disturbed by the attempted attack on Amy Acton today at the Canfield Fair. We are grateful for law enforcement’s quick response. There is no place for this kind of behavior, and it must never be tolerated.”

The country has seen a rise in political violence over the last decade, including assassination attempts against Donald Trump at a rally in 2024 and at the White House Correspondents Assn. dinner in April, and the Jan. 6, 2021, riot by a pro-Trump mob at the U.S. Capitol.

Other examples include a 2017 shooting at a Republican congressional baseball team practice in Alexandria, Va., a 2022 hammer assault on then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband at the couple’s San Francisco home, and the fatal shootings last year of a Democratic Minnesota state lawmaker and her husband and of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk in Utah.

Federal political committees spent more than $40 million on expenses labeled as security during the 2023-24 campaign cycle, the most recent one for which data are publicly available, according to a report released in April from the Public Service Alliance, a nonpartisan group that focuses on security for public officials.

Before running for governor, Acton had been recruited by DeWine in 2019 to lead the Ohio Department of Health while serving as an associate professor of public health at Ohio State University. As the COVID-19 pandemic ramped up in early 2020, she was thrown into the state and national spotlight — becoming a source of comfort to many viewers of the governor’s daily news conferences.

For her service as health director, Acton earned the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation’s Profile in COVID Courage Award, the Columbus Foundation’s Spirit of Columbus Award and Ohio State’s highest alumni honor, the Alumni Medalist Award.

Her position as the face of the DeWine administration’s aggressive stance against the coronavirus also earned Acton many enemies, among them statehouse Republicans and conservative Ohioans who opposed pandemic public health restrictions.

Fields writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Ryan J. Foley in Iowa City, Iowa, contributed to this report.

Source link

Trump administration makes another appeal to the Supreme Court to allow mail ballot restrictions

Lindsay Whitehurst and Gary Fields

The Trump administration on Sunday renewed its appeal to the Supreme Court after a federal judge blocked new restrictions on mail ballots ahead of the midterms.

The filing came after U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani extended an order against the U.S. Postal Service enforcing President Trump’s executive order for the November elections.

The legal wrangling comes even as states start sending out mail ballots, leaving the administration little time to make big changes in mail ballot rules.

“Ballots have already begun to be mailed in North Carolina, and more States will begin the mailing process as the injunction remains in place — including Alabama on September 9 and at least five States the week of September 13,” Solicitor Gen. John Sauer said in the filing.

“Once those ballot envelopes enter the mailstream, there is no retrieving them. And while the injunction allows the Postal Service and the States to continue taking steps to ensure that their envelopes satisfy the Rule’s requirements … each day the injunction is in place risks sowing confusion and chaos because the injunction makes those preparatory steps voluntary, rather than mandatory.”

The appeal marks the third time the administration has asked the high court to intervene. The high court has allowed the plan to move forward but not ruled on whether it is legal.

The battle could have major ramifications for this year’s elections, when control of Congress is at stake. Nearly one-third of voters in the U.S. cast mail ballots. Mail ballots are sent to every California voter.

Democratic states and voting rights groups say the changes are unconstitutional and amount to voter suppression. Election officials contend that there isn’t enough time to revise their systems to comply with the new Postal Service directives.

The Trump administration has framed the restrictions as commonsense changes that are within its power to regulate the mail.

“Simply put, the best way to address respondents’ fears about inability to comply with the Rule is to grant an immediate administrative stay of the order, followed by a full stay pending further review,” Sauer said. “That will remove the improper cloud of uncertainty that the district court has cast over the Rule, making clear to all involved that compliance with the Rule is not optional and must start without further delay.”

Trump has long sought to limit mail voting, even though he himself often uses that method to cast his own ballot. He has falsely blamed mail balloting for his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden, spreading baseless claims of fraud. But so far, he has been unable to change the long-standing voting procedure.

Whitehurst and Fields write for the Associated Press.

Source link

Turning Point lays groundwork to shape GOP presidential race in 2028

Alongside the familiar sounds of roosters crowing and thrill seekers screaming on rides at the recent Iowa State Fair, there was a chorus of boos from Turning Point Action activists who were heckling Democratic politicians making their way through the crowds.

Videos of the confrontations got hundreds of thousands of views on social media, a burst of attention for a conservative youth organization that is charting its next chapter after last year’s fatal shooting of its leader Charlie Kirk. But the true test of Turning Point Action’s clout was unfolding inside the exhibition center, where staff members were registering voters, handing out buttons and signing people up for social events.

“Building the foundation for 2028,” said one of the fliers.

While Democrats have punted Iowa from the top of its presidential primary calendar, the state’s caucuses will still kick off Republicans’ next nominating process. Turning Point Action is positioning itself to shape that contest, a reminder that preparations for the next White House campaign are already in motion even though no candidates have announced and the midterm elections are still two months away.

Turning Point Action wants at least one staffer in each of Iowa’s 99 counties to mobilize the conservative grassroots.

“It is important to us to see high voter participation in the caucuses,” said Tyler Bowyer, the organization’s chief operating officer. “That’s your measuring stick.”

In addition to Iowa, Turning Point Action grew its footprint in New Hampshire and Nevada for this year’s midterms, which could also help in 2028.

The likely beneficiary of this initiative would be Vice President JD Vance, who is widely expected to launch a presidential campaign. Turning Point leaders including Erika Kirk, Charlie’s widow, have been clear they’re ready to throw their support behind Vance if he jumps in.

More than a dozen Republican officials, activists, lawmakers and strategists in Iowa said Turning Point’s imprint in the state was visible but still something of a mystery, and some privately question whether the organization’s impact will match the buzz it generates online.

But others have eagerly welcomed the organization to the state.

“A year ago, Iowa was virgin — no Turning Point. And many of us complained,” said Kelley Koch, a former Dallas County Republican chair, to a gathering of MAGA Nation Iowa, the grassroots organization she founded. “Finally, Turning Point Action listened to us.”

Early state investments could benefit Vance

When asked about his 2028 ambitions, Vance demurs and says he’s focused on his current job, but he’s expected to be an immediate Republican front-runner if he decides to seek the presidency. Bowyer said Turning Point Action wants to be supportive without “being pushy.”

“We haven’t officially endorsed as an organization yet because no one’s announced, right? But, you know, depending on who announces and when we endorse — yeah, of course we’ll be out campaigning on behalf of who we endorse,” he said.

Bowyer said Vance can bridge the gap between the Make America Great Again movement, which President Trump launched more than a decade ago, and younger voters who were attracted to Charlie Kirk’s brand of conservatism.

“It’s a natural fit,” he said.

Bowyer acknowledged that Turning Point Action’s growing infrastructure in early primary states could cause some agitation on the right if it is seen as throwing its weight behind one candidate. But, he said, “that’s not why we do it,” describing the goal as boosting turnout in the Iowa caucuses to send a strong signal heading into the general election.

Other potential candidates include Marco Rubio, Trump’s secretary of State. Rubio, however, has said he wouldn’t run against Vance.

Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas has not announced a campaign, but he has already made several visits to Iowa this year and said in a recent podcast hosted by Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick that “it’s no secret that I want to be president.”

Looking to grow the grassroots

Although Iowa has shifted rightward over the last decade, it’s considered a political battleground in this year’s midterm elections because of Trump’s sagging approval ratings, declining access to healthcare and tariff-driven turmoil in the agricultural industry.

Sen. Joni Ernst and Gov. Kim Reynolds, both Republicans, are retiring, and there are fiercely contested races to replace them. Democrat Josh Turek and Republican Ashley Hinson are seeking the Senate seat, while Democrat Rob Sand and Republican Zach Lahn want to be governor. Two battleground congressional districts will help determine control of the House as well.

The spotlight on Iowa this year is an opportunity for Turning Point Action to demonstrate its clout.

The organization said it hired four staffers on the ground last year. After Lahn’s surprise win over Trump-endorsed Rep. Randy Feenstra, Turning Point Action said it would double its staffing in the state before the midterms.

Young activists regularly post on social media from county fairs and Republican committee meetings. They upload selfies on sidewalks or stoops to show days spent knocking on doors.

“We’re newer in Iowa,” a Des Moines-based senior field staffer, Kylie Kloewer, told a visitor who stopped by Turning Point Action’s booth at the state fair.

The booth featured signs declaring that there are only two genders and one that said “men can’t get pregnant,” the kind of confrontational culture war messaging that Charlie Kirk practiced on college campuses. Some people nodded and chuckled, while others raised their eyebrows as they wandered by.

Those who walked up to the table could sign up for social clubs that host events, including barbecues and volleyball games.

“Any involvement is success,” said Kelsey Newberry, who is based in the organization’s Phoenix headquarters and was helping at the Iowa State Fair. “You’re bringing people together as a community. The more you talk to your neighbors, the better.

“And even if they’re not ready to get activated now,” Newberry added, “being around like-minded people might encourage them in the future.”

Fingerhut and Price write for the Associated Press. Price reported from Washington.

Source link

Backlash over data centers hits California, and the midterms

Darian Orduno bounced her baby boy on her chest, looking down at his thick black hair and bright eyes. What might pollution from a data center do, she wondered, to his growing lungs?

That question had brought Orduno, 25, to a community meeting opposing a possible data center here, and her fears, she said, likely would influence her vote in the midterm election too.

“I just had him, and now it’s concerning if he’s going to be able to grow up here,” Orduno said, or “if I’m going to have to relocate.”

As about 100 residents filed into a church for the meeting in late August, under a Central Valley sky hazy with air pollution, many shared the same worries — that a facility pitched for the local fairgrounds could further worsen the area’s air quality and strain its water supply.

Barbara Castle listens to speakers during a town hall meeting on a possible small-scale data center in Hanford.

Barbara Castle listens to speakers during a town hall meeting on a possible small-scale data center in Hanford.

Nationwide, such concerns are fueling a backlash to data centers from both the left and the right as tech companies flood the country with thousands of proposals for the facilities in nearly every state from California to Maine.

Data centers have become an unusually bipartisan flash point in the midterm elections, as candidates race to delineate policy platforms and respond to public opinion. The issue stands to influence swing voters and motivate turnout at the polls.

Here in the 22nd District, home to the state’s most competitive congressional race, how significantly the issue will affect voters’ decisions remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: Anxiety about data centers is mounting.

“It’s a national concern, it’s now a state concern, and now it’s bled into the local concern,” Hanford Mayor Mark Kairis said. “It’s a very emotionally charged issue right now.”

The Art Center building in Hanford.

Residents in Hanford who oppose data centers say they are worried about the region’s air and water quality, concerns echoed by rural communities across the country.

Demand for data centers, which house the computer systems powering artificial intelligence and the internet, has surged as AI use has ballooned. As of April, more than 1,500 new data centers were in development across the United States, according to a Pew Research Center analysis, largely in rural areas.

The centers require intense cooling, which often demands high water and power use and creates the potential to affect the environment and to pass on utility costs to consumers. But they power technology that is becoming increasingly integrated into American business. They also create jobs, though with limitations.

Democrats see the data center uproar as fitting into their affordability messaging, and candidates generally agree data centers should be regulated, though their positions vary on how aggressively. For Republicans, whose party has backed AI innovation, responding to worsening public opinion has been trickier — particularly given President Trump’s championing of AI and data centers.

Vice President JD Vance on Thursday acknowledged negative polling on data centers but framed the issue as a question of American industrial dominance, saying the country can’t shy away from development. Earlier in the week, Trump asserted that the only reason communities should reject data centers is if they want to be “backwards and poor.”

The public may see data centers as a physical manifestation of AI advancement in general, said Camille Crittenden, executive director of the Center for Information Technology Research in the Interest of Society, a University of California research center. Opposing data centers offers people a way to vent their broader concerns about the technology’s increasing dominance.

Priest Luke Martinez expresses concerns during the community meeting .

Priest Luke Martinez expresses concerns during the community meeting .

“This is a very specific focal point for a general anxiety about AI,” she said. “People see these data centers, and they’re thinking, ‘AI’s going to take my job.’”

The backlash from residents in the Central Valley to the possibility of even a small-scale data center demonstrates how acutely the issue has put many Americans on edge.

“It really is terrifying,” said Lucy Gomez, 57, of Hanford, a retired teacher. “I feel like we’re being guinea pigs when we don’t want to be.”

Increasing influence

Community anger about the facilities has prompted close attention from California lawmakers, who passed legislation in Sacramento on Monday to regulate energy use by the data center industry and impose other requirements.

California is home to the third-most data centers of any state, though it has experienced a relatively smaller new boom because of its high electrical prices and other factors. Still, 54 new facilities were in the works for the state as of April, according to Pew.

Hanford Mayor Mark Kairis speaks with coulcilwoman Kimber Regan during a town hall meeting in Hanford.

Hanford Councilwoman Kimber Regan speaks with Mayor Mark Kairis during the meeting. Hanford’s zoning ordinances do not allow data centers, but the city does not have jurisdiction over the county fairgrounds site where Global Stack is evaluating its proposal.

In Georgia and Pennsylvania, New York and Texas, Nevada and Virginia, the issue has become hot-button in elections at all levels. Ads about data centers run on the airwaves in states with key congressional races. Gubernatorial candidates jockey over it; both New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, put temporary moratoriums on new data centers.

A memo from the Republican senatorial campaign arm underscored how critical the question was becoming last month, when it warned AI companies that data centers could be the deciding issue in the close race between Ohio GOP Sen. Jon Husted and former Sen. Sherrod Brown, his Democratic challenger.

Data centers “are the anchor hanging around Husted’s neck,” said the memo, which was first obtained by Axios. “If he loses and data centers get the blame, politicians across the country will take notice — and they will not go near the next one.”

Sixty-one percent of Americans would oppose a data center being built where they live, a late August poll by the Economist and YouGov found.

Though Democrats and independents were more likely to oppose the centers, 47% of Republicans also said they would oppose it, and 52% of people who voted for Trump in 2024 said they believed construction of a new data center would increase their electrical bills.

Data centers encapsulate existing concerns among red and blue voters across the nation and in California about their quality of life and the influence of major tech companies, said Sonoma State University political science professor David McCuan.

“California has a lot of communities that have been struggling and trying to find a way forward, and the data center debate captures those voters’ frustrations,” McCuan said.

Political winds

The historic Bastille and courthouse in Hanford's Civic Center Park.

The historic Bastille, which served as Kings County’s jail and sheriff’s office from 1897 until 1964, stands tall next to the courthouse in Hanford’s Civic Center Park.

The idea for a center on the Kings County fairgrounds is part of a broader pitch by developer Global Stack USA to boost the state’s emergency infrastructure by installing small-scale data centers, helipads and parking garages at fairgrounds around the state.

Global Stack Chief Executive Dan Kang said the goal was strengthening the state’s emergency response capabilities while helping fairgrounds financially. The company’s early materials envisioned operating 70 sites by 2030.

The company has not made any formal proposals, but in Kings and Tulare counties, the issue caught attention after fair officials agreed to allow Global Stack to evaluate their sites. The idea also prompted some residents to voice opposition in Ventura County last month.

The facilities would include what’s known as an edge computing data center, which typically is much smaller than traditional data centers and which Global Stack says would require lower utility use and no municipal water connection.

Concerns about water and energy use by data centers are legitimate, said Shaolei Ren, a UC Riverside engineering professor who studies AI. Centers like the one proposed by Global Stack do not guzzle water the way larger ones do, but they still can use extra power or generate air and noise pollution, Ren said.

In Kings County, the project potentially could benefit the fairgrounds as a long-term revenue source, said Dena Rizzardo, chief executive of the fair board, a state entity that would have final say over any proposal. Because fairgrounds are state property, local and county officials don’t have jurisdiction.

Kang said he is committed to working with local communities to ensure “any path forward reflects local needs and California’s broader resilience priorities.”

In the district’s congressional race, which could help decide control of the House in November, Democratic nominee Randy Villegas said he has been getting questions about data centers from voters. Last month, he released a set of policy points and called for a data center moratorium of at least a year to give Congress time to pass regulations.

Anti-data center crowd during a town hall meeting at the Episcopal Church of the Savior in Hanford.

Democratic congressional candidate Randy Villegas urged meeting attendees to lobby federal lawmakers to pass legislation regulating data centers.

“The advancement of technology … should not be an excuse to throw our communities under the bus,” Villegas said at the Hanford meeting, where he addressed the friendly crowd without identifying himself as a congressional candidate. A College of the Sequoias professor, he is attempting to unseat Republican Rep. David Valadao.

Valadao, in a statement to The Times, said data center construction requires a “responsible approach” that includes local input and ratepayer protections.

“Data centers play an important role in our economy and national security, but Central Valley families are already facing high electric bills and concerns about our water supply,” Valadao said. He did not answer questions about the proposal in Hanford.

Several attendees at the Hanford meeting, who ranged from Gen Z to elderly, said the issue would affect their midterm votes, though most said they already were leaning to the left.

Gomez, the retired teacher, was not happy with either party but planned to vote for Democrats because she viewed them as taking more action to protect public health than Republicans.

a girl stands next to her father sitting in a church pew with others

Ember Gomez listens to speakers while her father, Filiberto, looks on during the meeting. Filiberto Gomez said he was concerned a data center would affect children’s health.

Courtney Hawkins, 40, said the data center issue “absolutely” would carry weight in his votes.

“I believe that AI is good for propelling technology in general,” Hawkins said, “but I don’t believe we should be pursuing it without regulations and at the cost of the environment.”

Source link

U.S. running low on advanced defensive missiles and could be for years

The statistics are sobering — so sobering that Defense Department officials refuse to confirm, deny or discuss them.

From Feb. 28 through July, the first five months of the war with Iraq, U.S. forces burned through almost 60% of the nation’s advanced defensive missiles — the Patriot and THAAD interceptors that protect American troops.

When the war began, the Pentagon had almost 2,800 Patriot and THAAD missiles in its worldwide inventory, according to a study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, an independent think tank. By the end of July, that number had dropped to about 1,100, CSIS reported. Almost two-thirds of the Patriots and almost 40% of the longer-range THAAD were gone.

“This is a generational annihilation of our theater missile defense capability,” said Tom Karako, director of CSIS’s Missile Defense Project. “There’s no way you can look at this and not see it’s a setback.”

The White House and the Pentagon have not challenged the CSIS figures, although they have issued sweeping denials that any shortage exists.

“We have far more munitions than anyone in the world, and far more than we need,” President Trump said in July.

That’s true, but misleading. The U.S. military still holds vast inventories of short-range offensive missiles. But the sophisticated defensive missiles that protect U.S. troops no longer are abundant — as even Trump has acknowledged.

“We have certain types of munitions [of which] we have unlimited, virtual unlimited supply,” he said last month. “We have others where it’s a little bit tighter.”

The result is a squeeze that has prompted U.S. commanders to husband Patriot and THAAD interceptors as scarce assets.

For much of August, when a frayed de facto ceasefire was in effect, U.S. forces did not respond with high-end missiles when Iran attacked oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz.

But when Iran launched rockets against U.S. bases in Jordan last week, Patriots reportedly were used to knock the incoming missiles down. (The Pentagon has declined to confirm or deny those reports.)

The U.S. weapons arsenal “no longer has the capacity to deter a Chinese attack against Taiwan,” the Council on Foreign Relations warned in a report last month. Defense planners share the same concern over a potential Russian assault on the Baltic states.

The conservative Heritage Foundation has forecast that the Pentagon’s inventory of missiles would run out “within the first week of a Taiwan conflict.”

In Europe, a U.S. defense official told the Associated Press last month that the shortfall was “beyond critical.” If Russia attacked a NATO country, the official said, U.S. forces in the area would “take punch after punch in the mouth.”

The core question is whether the United States has so few missiles that it cannot credibly deter China or Russia from attacking their neighbors.

“You’ve got to be strong enough to send a clear message that our enemies should not try anything because we’re a credible force,” said Leon Panetta, President Obama’s former defense secretary. “Now we’re losing a lot of that credibility — and that’s dangerous.”

Knowing that U.S. forces have been left without thousands of weapons needed to deter conflict, Karako said, could in itself be provocative. “It could tempt an aggressor to do something, knowing that we have fewer [missiles] to thwart them.”

The obvious remedy is to build more interceptors — a process Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered even before the war began. But ramping up missile production won’t immediately replenish the stockpile.

Before the Iran war, defense contractors were producing only about 620 Patriots and 96 THAAD each year — fewer than half the number expended during a few weeks this spring.

At current production rates, it will take at least three years to return the Patriot inventory to its prewar level, and at least four years for THAAD, CSIS reported.

Defense experts warn that the stocks need to be even larger than they were before the war to credibly deter China or Russia.

Mark Cancian, a retired Marine colonel and principal author of the CSIS estimates, says most analysts believe it will take years after replenishing the stocks expended in the Persian Gulf to build a credible deterrent against China.

The Pentagon has enough munitions, both offensive and defensive, to continue fighting the campaign against Iran, he added — but some of those less-sophisticated weapons can be used only at shorter ranges, which means placing more troops in harm’s way.

Cancian said the CSIS figures were based on publicly available Pentagon budget and acquisition documents, updated in some cases from recent press reports — but not from leaks of classified information.

The roots of the missile shortage began long before the war with Iran. Trump and Hegseth are not the only ones to blame, although their belief that Iran would quickly capitulate appears to have been a major factor.

Nor did former President Biden cause the shortage, as Trump has claimed Biden gave several hundred Patriots to Ukraine, but the shortfall is far larger than that.

The underlying problem, defense experts say, is that the United States designed its missile defense programs for a world in which only a few major powers like China and Russia posed serious threats.

But the landscape of military technology has changed. Missiles and drones have become cheaper and easier to acquire, and countries like Iran can strike targets at great distances without making a huge investment in weaponry.

That’s a transformational change — and the Pentagon has been behind the curve, argues Michael C. Horowitz, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. “This is the kind of situation in which great-power militaries like the United States struggle,” he said.

So the Trump administration faces several challenges. It needs to replenish its depleted stores of advanced defensive missiles — a process that has only just begun, and which Congress has not yet funded. Meanwhile, Horowitz and others argue, it also needs to build less expensive missile and drone systems to fill the multiyear gap before Patriot and THAAD inventories can be restored.

The Pentagon has begun that process, deploying several relatively inexpensive anti-drone missile systems.

Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year included $7.7 billion for low-cost missile and drone programs, but 13 months later, more than 90% of the money remains unspent, Horowitz said.

Source link

California wants to list Jewish as an ethnicity. Jews are divided over the idea

California is poised to be the first state in the nation to allow people to identify their Jewish heritage on state forms, sparking debate within the community about identity and the merits of being singled out.

Some Jews believe the move would help people understand the community better, particularly on issues such as health and hate crimes. But some are wary about providing too much information given the history of government-sanctioned persecutions against Jewish people.

The state recognizes nearly 50 racial and ethnic identities for data collection, but it considers Jewish identity only as a religion, not an ethnicity.

Senate Bill 1387, which lawmakers passed Aug. 31, seeks to require state agencies to include a box for Jewish ethnicity on all demographic data forms, ranging from public assistance programs to college applications.

The goal is to improve the accuracy of state data to better understand the needs of Jewish communities, according to the bill’s author, state Sen. Henry Stern (D-Los Angeles). The bill, which received broad support in the Assembly and Senate, will head to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk in the coming weeks for a signature or veto.

The proposed law has gone beyond data collection within the Jewish community, prompting discussions and disagreements over whether being Jewish is religious, cultural or a blend of many things. For some, it’s evoked anxiety about the historical dangers of tracking Jews.

Stern doesn’t mind the debate. In fact, he says, it speaks to a core part of Jewish identity.

“I love that the Jewish tradition is us arguing with each other,” he said. “It is such a beautiful part of our heritage to debate these kinds of things and what it means to be Jewish, and I love making space for that.”

California has broadened the list of racial and ethnic categories people can select in recent years. Newsom last year signed a similar bill that created a category for Middle East and North African individuals separate from the “white” designation that had previously encompassed those ethnicities.

California is home to an estimated 1.2 million Jewish people, representing the second-largest Jewish population in the United States after New York. And for most American Jews, Jewish identity is not one size fits all.

“The difficulty here, I think, is that Jewishness doesn’t fit neatly into the categories Americans normally use,” said Jeffrey Kopstein, the chancellor’s professor of political science at UC Irvine. “So, of course, to non-Jews, Jews are often thought of as a religion, but Jewish identity also has historically involved ancestry, culture and peoplehood.

“Many people who are entirely secular nevertheless understand themselves and are understood by others as Jews,” he added.

A Pew Research study published in 2021 found that about 1 in 5 Jews in the United States — roughly 19% of respondents — said that being Jewish is about a combination of religion, ancestry and culture. About 22% said being Jewish is a matter of culture, while 21% said it was a matter of ancestry. About half as many — roughly 11% — said being Jewish is mainly about religion.

The study found that religion is not central to the lives of most Jews living in the United States. Still, identifying as Jewish matters greatly to them, with three-quarters of Jewish Americans saying that “being Jewish” is very important or somewhat important to them, according to Pew.

Jewish California, a Jewish advocacy group that sponsored the bill, wrote in a statement that when Jewish ethnicity is absent from data, disparities in healthcare, education and discrimination are less likely to be identified or addressed. Data collection, it says, “signals to the public how communities are understood.”

“When California recognizes Jews only as a religion, it reinforces a narrow and incomplete understanding of Jewish identity, encouraging the misconception that Jews are defined solely by belief or worship rather than by a rich and distinct culture, history, peoplehood, and shared experience. That misunderstanding leads to generalizations, creating fertile ground for bias and discrimination,” the group wrote in a statement.

But opponents argue that the bill oversimplifies Jewish identity and could potentially make people more of a target for antisemitism, which saw a nationwide surge after the start of the Israel-Hamas war on Oct. 7, 2023.

In 2025, the Anti-Defamation League tallied 6,274 incidents of antisemitism in the United States, down from 9,354 incidents the year prior. Last year’s numbers were still about five times higher than a decade ago, according to the ADL.

Cat Zavis, a rabbi at Beyt Tikkun, told the California Assembly’s Judiciary Committee in June that the bill erases the diversity of Jewish people whose families come from a variety of places including the Middle East, North Africa, South Asia and Europe.

“Jews are not a single ethnicity. Judaism is a religion,” she said. “Many Middle Eastern and North African Jews have spent years working to have their distinct histories recognized. Their stories are not the same as those of Ashkenazi Jews. They have different experiences of displacement, discrimination, privilege and identity. By collapsing all Jews into a single ethnic category, this bill makes those communities invisible.”

Stern says people will still be able to check multiple racial and ethnic identification boxes on forms to encompass all the ways they identify.

Groups have also raised concerns about the government maintaining records on Jews, which is reminiscent for some of the trauma of the Holocaust. In the 1930s, the Nazi government used a variety of forms of public data including tax returns and census records to help identify Jews who would be rounded up and sent to concentration camps where millions were killed.

“History offers a clear warning: when Jewish identity is officially distinguished from that of all other ethnic groups, the results have too often been catastrophic,” the Bay Area chapter of Jewish Voice for Peace, an advocacy organization that bills itself as the largest Jewish group supporting Palestine, wrote in a statement.

Supporters of the bill say identifying as Jewish under the law is strictly voluntary. For Stern, the root of the bill is empowerment.

As a kid growing up in Los Angeles, Stern wasn’t as religious as he is now, but he was still singled out for being Jewish. Other students drew swastikas on his backpack. Antisemitic cartoons appeared in his school newspaper.

“Some stuff happened where I went from being a normal kid blending in to suddenly realizing I had an identity and it was one that was sort of defined by being called out for it,” he said. “Back then, there were no forms on campus, or applying for college, that had an opportunity for me to identify as Jewish, even though I was being identified by other people that way.”

He hopes the proposed law will give people the chance to own their Jewish identity on their terms.

“Maybe this is one place where people who are excellent at disagreeing with each other can all kind of agree that there ought to be a space for us,” he said.

Source link

Election integrity is on the November ballot in key states

Free and fair elections are foundational to our representative democracy. A government intended to reflect and honor the will of the people works only if the people can express their will. That’s why we have elections.

But don’t take the word of your friendly political columnist.

John Lewis, the late Georgia congressman and hero of the civil rights movement, said voting is precious and “the most powerful non-violent tool we have in a democratic society.” Former President Reagan called the right to vote “the crown jewel of American liberties.”

Alas, we have a president who believes his most precious right, apart from lining his silken pockets, is nursing his over-ripened ego. Donald Trump can’t stand the fact he lost the 2020 election — which he most emphatically did — and so he’s built a carapace of lies: about illegal ballots, rigged election machinery, rampant voting by noncitizens, and so on.

Worse than his deceit — which has deeply undermined faith in our elections and the dedicated people who run them — is Trump’s brazen efforts to rig the system by disenfranchising millions of voters, all so he can keep Democrats from winning office.

Reagan, no less than Lewis, probably is turning cartwheels in his grave.

But there’s a chance to push back. In November, voters in 26 states will elect a secretary of state, choosing the officials who will oversee the 2028 presidential race throughout most of the country. What could possibly go wrong?

Let’s hope we don’t find out.

The secretary of state used to be one of those ministerial posts that few outside government knew or much cared about; from a political standpoint, the office and its occupant seemed dull and dry as Melba toast. That changed after 2000, when Republican Katherine Harris placed her weighty thumb on the scale and helped deliver Florida’s 25 electoral votes, and the White House, to George W. Bush.

What really politicized the office of secretary of state, though, was Trump’s obsessive compulsion with his 2020 defeat.

Spurred by his incessant lies about supposed fraud, allies and opportunists set out to hijack the country’s election machinery and do Trump’s dirty work from the inside. In 2022, a group calling itself the America First SOS Coalition endorsed a slate of cranks and quacks who ran for secretary of state in 14 states, including the presidential battlegrounds of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada and Wisconsin.

FILE - Tina Peters, former Mesa County, Colo.

FILE – Tina Peters, former Mesa County, Colo., clerk, listens during her trial, March 3, 2023, in Grand Junction, Colo. (Scott Crabtree/The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel via AP, Pool, File)

(Scott Crabtree / Associated Press)

Thankfully, all of them lost, save for one candidate in Indiana. Among those defeated was Tina Peters, the former county elections chief in Mesa County, Colo., who went on to infamy, and prison, for orchestrating a security breach aimed at “proving” 2020 votes were stolen from Trump. (Never mind that he won the county by nearly 30 percentage points.)

The SOS Coalition apparently is defunct; its website address now leads to an online gambling portal.

But more than two dozen election deniers ran for secretary of state this year, according to States United Democracy Center, a nonpartisan group that works to promote fair and secure elections nationwide. Six of those candidates won their primaries and made it to November’s ballot, including in three states — Arizona, Nevada and Wisconsin — that promise to be key once more to picking the next president.

The stakes in those races are considerable, said Peverill Squire, a University of Missouri expert on state elections. “Who’s going to be administering [election] rules? How they’re going to interpret those rules?” he said, offering examples of the office’s import. “Whether they’re going to try to make it more difficult to vote, or easier to vote. Whether they’re going to try to engage in activities that will further raise doubts in some people’s minds about how fairly the election has been conducted.”

Former Nevada Assemblyman Jim Marchant

Nevada Republican Jim Marchant is among the election deniers running for secretary of state in November. He lost four years ago after promoting Donald Trump’s false claims he beat Joe Biden.

(Ricardo Torres-Cortez / Associated Press)

The contest in Nevada is a rerun of 2022, when Democrat Cisco Aguilar narrowly defeated Republican Jim Marchant. Undeterred, Marchant continues to spout gibberish about sabotaged voting machines and other far-fetched claims of election chicanery. Among the remedies he’s floated, according to the Nevada Independent, is using technology to measure voters’ heartbeat as a way to verify their identity.

Um…

Meanwhile, in Arizona, incumbent Democrat Adrian Fontes faces Republican state Rep. Alexander Kolodin, an attorney who was sanctioned by the State Bar for pursuing baseless claims of 2020 election fraud. One of his Trump-inspired lawsuits was swiftly rejected by a federal judge who noted its conspicuous lack of “relevant or reliable evidence” — thus raising doubts not just about Kolodin’s discernment but also his capacity to cover even the basics.

In Wisconsin, where elections are overseen by a six-member, bipartisan commission, Republican Jay Schroeder is running on a pledge to dismantle that fair-minded system, calling it a “failed experiment.” Had he been secretary of state in 2020, Schroeder told NBC News, he would not have certified Joe Biden’s victory in the state.

That’s all you need to know, Wisconsin.

Great amounts of time, energy and resources are being devoted this election to races for Congress and for statehouses across the country, which makes sense.

Control of both the House and Senate are in play on Nov. 3. There are more than a dozen gubernatorial contests with at least some degree of competition, including close races in Ohio, Georgia and Wisconsin.

But with so much riding on the outcome, it’s also worth paying heed to those down-ballot races for secretary of state.

You can’t keep elections on the straight and narrow if the people running them are crooked.

Source link

Break away from the USA? The effort to cleave California faces its own split

If there’s one thing Jed Wheeler and Marcus Ruiz Evans agree on, it’s that things in California need to change.

The state sends too much money to Washington, they say, and is both politically and culturally out of step with a country that lacks its openness and vitality.

“We can solve our own problems and don’t need to wait on a government 3,000 miles away,” said Wheeler, echoing Evans’ suggestion that Democratic-leaning California would be far better off going it alone as a separate country.

They sharply disagree, though, on the matter of how and precisely when California should seek a divorce from the other 49 states.

Evans is pushing a ballot measure that would put the question of secession before voters in 2018, believing the time has never been so ripe to form a breakaway nation. Wheeler is working to create a pro-secession political party, looking a dozen or more years down the road when its candidates hold office, and fears that a premature vote would undermine the effort.

In short, the effort to cleave California faces a crackup of its own.

At least four proposals are floating about to reshape the state in some fashion, including two that would split up California along different axes. All work at cross-purposes, and the result is varied degrees of hostility among proponents; none of the plans seems likely to reach fruition anytime soon, if ever.

That is something they have in common.

Since 1849, when the state was remade in a rush of greed and ambition, there have been more than 200 efforts to split apart, pull away or otherwise reimagine the vast empire known as California. Not one has succeeded.

The latest, most conspicuous attempt, a proposed ballot initiative fueled by anti-Trump sentiments and titillated national media coverage (those wacky Californians!) seems destined to fall short of qualifying for the ballot, barring a sudden change in fortune.

Supporters of the measure, led by Evans, have until July 25 to collect nearly 600,000 valid signatures to place an independence measure before voters in November 2018. The group, which received the go-ahead to collect signatures at the end of January, has yet to reach a quarter of that number, according to the California secretary of state’s office.

The group has also not reported raising any campaign contributions, according to the secretary’s office, which oversees elections.

Evans, 40, a former government affairs consultant now working full-time on the “Calexit” campaign, insisted a robust signature-gathering process was underway, engaging thousands of volunteers in 82 chapters across the state. However, the precise number collected was unknown, he said, because of the loose structure of his pro-secession group, Yes California.

“Some are mailing them in. Some are holding them. Some are taking them directly to their county registrar of voters,” he said. Asked to assess the odds of making the ballot, Evans responded, “Good. I won’t say great.”

The effort, uphill from the start, has not been helped, he said, by reports linking the Calexit movement to Russia, which Evans called preposterous and unfair. The co-leader of Yes California is Louis Marinelli, a former San Diego-area Assembly candidate now teaching English in Russia, where, among promotional activities, he appeared last fall at a Kremlin-backed pro-secession conference in Moscow.

“It has definitely been damaging to us getting big donors and hurting our ability to bring on new members because of clouding the issue without accurately reporting all the facts,” Evans said, citing the organization’s 44,000 “likes” on Facebook as just one example.

Nor, he said, was it beneficial when Nigel Farage, a leading proponent of Britain’s exit from the European Union and prominent Trump supporter, recently flitted into California to talk up a vague plan to split the state down the middle, creating a coastal “West California” and interior “East California.”

“They’re trying to confuse people,” Evans huffed. “Classic Trump.”

It seems Evans and his pro-secession movement might have found an ally in Wheeler and others working to form a political party dedicated to achieving state independence. Many tenets of the left-leaning California National Party — the state needs to keep more of the money it sends to Washington and establish home-grown policies on issues such as immigration and healthcare — echo those propounded by Yes California.

The nascent party has taken no official position on the 2018 secession drive. But Wheeler, the party’s vice chairman, believes the initiative would lose, damaging the independence movement. Better, he said, to elect sympathetic lawmakers under the National Party banner who could then work to bring about California’s eventual departure.

“We’re trying to be very pragmatic and realistic where we are as a movement,” said Wheeler, 36, who works for a digital media company in San Francisco.

While “the idea of having a ballot initiative is seductive and appeals to a lot of people,” he said, “you can’t harvest the crop without the work of planting the seeds, then tilling the soil and all that stuff first.”

In California’s far north, a determined group of dissenters have done that labor for decades — so far to no avail.

Efforts have been underway since before World War II to break off more than a dozen rural counties and combine them with a chunk of southern Oregon to form Jefferson, the nation’s 51st state.

The impetus is the same that drives backers of secession: the notion of a far-off government (in this case, Sacramento) ignoring local sentiments and a sense of being outnumbered and outvoted by a population whose social and political views are at odds with the prevailing (in this instance, conservative) culture. The proposed flag — a pair of Xs, or double cross — captures the animating sentiment.

“We really don’t have fair representation,” said Terry Rapoza, 67, a leader of the Jefferson movement in Shasta County, where he sells T-shirts and other souvenir clothing in Redding.

He cited recent passage of a 10-year, $52-billion road repair and transportation bill; the hike in gas taxes, he said, will have much less impact in urban California than in rural stretches, where people might drive 20 miles to the grocery store, or a dozen miles to pick up their mail.

But he has little use for secession, which strikes him as bizarre — would the new California nation have its own nuclear arsenal and U.N. representative, he wonders — and fruitless in ending the urban-rural divide he blames for persistently short-changing his part of the state.

There’s something wrong and even vaguely un-American, he suggested, about trying to break the country apart. “We want to add a star to the flag,” Rapoza said. “Not take one off.”

mark.barabak@latimes.com

@markzbarabak on Twitter

ALSO

The cost of California’s public pensions is rising fast. But efforts to fix the problem by ballot measure have fizzled

What Californians need to know about the state’s $52-billion transportation plan

California is sick of being a presidential campaign afterthought. Here’s one lawmaker’s fix



Source link

Elizabeth Dole Got $875,000 Over 4 Years as a Speaker

Elizabeth Hanford Dole, a former Cabinet secretary and the wife of Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, received speaking fees from 1991 through 1994 in excess of $875,000–much of it from groups with a stake in policy matters pending before Congress, records show.

The fees have enhanced substantially the couple’s joint income, which totaled about $600,000 in 1994, according to income-tax returns and annual financial disclosure statements. Mrs. Dole, a national figure in her own right, last fall took a temporary leave as president of the American Red Cross to support her husband’s campaign for the Republican presidential nomination.

Sen. Dole has filed income-disclosure statements with the Senate for the last four years saying that all of Mrs. Dole’s speaking fees were contributed to a Red Cross charity account–except for “taxes, a contribution to a retirement fund and speech-writing expenses.”

However, a Times analysis of the records shows that the Doles have retained a substantial part of Mrs. Dole’s speaking fees:

From 1991 through 1994, the Doles kept $147,663 in cash from Mrs. Dole’s fees–after speech-writing costs and federal income taxes were paid.

An additional $243,830 was placed in Mrs. Dole’s retirement account, as the senator stated in his financial disclosure forms. The couple contributed $405,513, or 46%, of the fees to the Red Cross charity account for troubled youths during 1991 through 1994. But only in 1993 did Mrs. Dole donate all of her speaking fees to the charity–minus taxes, expenses and a contribution to her private retirement fund.

In 1994, the most recent year for which financial records are available, the Doles kept $47,421 in cash from Mrs. Dole’s $184,775 in speaking fees and placed $63,505 into Mrs. Dole’s retirement account.

Dole Comment

Asked for comment, aides to Dole did not dispute The Times’ findings. Reading from a prepared response Thursday night, Dole campaign spokeswoman Christina Martin said:

“We are not aware of a reason to amend the senator’s [financial disclosure] statements at this time. Sen. Dole has filed amendments in the past and would do so again, should a review prove such a step is necessary. The senator is a firm believer in full disclosure, as is demonstrated by his release [last week] of tax returns dating back 29 years.”

The annual disclosure forms signed by Sen. Dole warn that civil and criminal sanctions can be imposed if a senator “knowingly and willfully” makes a false statement.

Nelson Warfield, Dole’s chief spokesman, said the senator is not influenced by Elizabeth Dole’s acceptance of speaking fees from groups with business pending before Congress.

“No one gains Bob Dole’s favor by hiring his wife,” Warfield said. “In the senator’s words, he hasn’t the foggiest idea who she speaks to.”

Clearly, Mrs. Dole’s career in Washington makes her a sought-after guest speaker. Before joining the Red Cross in 1991, she was an appointee of five presidents–serving as a member of the Federal Trade Commission in the 1970s and as secretary of labor and secretary of transportation in the 1980s. Mrs. Dole, a lawyer, has won praise for her leadership of the Red Cross–and she did not accept the $200,000 salary paid by the organization during her first year as president.

Business Dealings

Yet in an election year when the past transactions of First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton continue to loom as a problem for the president, attention also is focusing on the business dealings of the wife of the senator from Kansas, who polls show is the front-runner for the Republican nomination.

Mrs. Dole referred questions posed by The Times to Warfield, the presidential campaign spokesman.

“Mrs. Dole has an extraordinary record of public service which spans over 20 years,” Warfield said. “This is in itself the reason so many people request her as a speaker.”

Mrs. Dole, who married the senator in 1975, typically has accepted speaking engagements for fees ranging from $12,000 to $35,000. Now 59, she employs the services of a booking agency and often speaks on the need for volunteerism or the shape of America’s labor force.

As a member of the executive branch during the ‘70s and ‘80s, Mrs. Dole did not accept speaking fees. She did receive $100,026 of the payments in 1988–when she temporarily left federal office to assist Sen. Dole’s presidential campaign. Sen. Dole, meanwhile, accepted fees totaling $1.4 million from 1981-91. In addition to his Senate compensation, tax records show that Sen. Dole during those years contributed $337,328 to a private pension plan–a nest egg paid for by his speaking fees.

Moreover, although Sen. Dole professes no knowledge of the groups to which his wife has spoken–many of them should be familiar to him.

At least 16 of the groups that retained Mrs. Dole to speak from 1991 through 1994 maintain lobbying offices in or near Washington and have business pending before the federal government. Records also show that four of the groups that paid to hear her earlier had hired Sen. Dole–before congressional rules in 1993 began cracking down on the controversial practice of senators and House members accepting such payments.

One of the biggest groups is the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Assn.–a Washington trade group that represents the largest makers of prescription-brand drugs. The organization lobbies Congress on a range of issues related to drugs and medical devices–and worked to defeat President and Mrs. Clinton’s proposed overhaul of the nation’s health care system.

Both of the Doles have accepted speaking fees from the drug manufacturers’ group. In 1992 the group paid for all travel expenses, including three nights of winter lodging in South Florida, for Sen. and Mrs. Dole. On that trip the senator accepted a $2,000 fee–the maximum then allowed under Senate rules.

In 1993 the drug makers invited Mrs. Dole back to Florida–and paid her a speaking fee of $20,000 plus travel expenses. Her appearance came at the same time the pharmaceutical group was working against parts of the Clintons’ health care proposal.

On the same weekend that Mrs. Dole addressed the group’s board of directors, the executives approved “an immediate, comprehensive mobilization of company employees, retirees, shareholders and suppliers to operate telephone banks” to challenge one aspect of the Clintons’ health care reform proposal, according to an executive summary prepared by the association.

“The effort,” said the summary, “was to encourage people to call or write members of Congress with the message that government price controls on prescription drugs would chill the development of new lifesaving, cost-effective medicines.”

Warfield, the Dole campaign spokesman, declined to comment specifically on Mrs. Dole’s speaking fee from the pharmaceutical association or other groups. Jeffrey C. Warren, spokesman for the pharmaceutical group, said Mrs. Dole “was an attraction on her own, because of her own achievements.” Warren said that the group hired Sen. Dole to speak in 1992 because of his knowledge of politics and “where things are going.”

Representatives of most of the groups that hired Mrs. Dole said that they chose her because of her experience. Some, however, also said that they retained Mrs. Dole because of her connection to one of the most powerful figures in Washington–her husband.

“That certainly makes her a little more interesting, definitely,” said Pat Areno, an executive for the Building Owners & Managers Assn., which paid Mrs. Dole $20,000, plus expenses, to speak at a conference in San Diego in June 1994. “You can’t ignore that it’s a factor. That is certainly part of her draw and her appeal.”

A spokeswoman for the American Health Care Assn., which lobbies Congress on behalf of nursing-home owners, said that the group paid Mrs. Dole $20,000 to speak in 1991, irrespective of Sen. Dole’s status.

“I suppose her connection with the senator helps create a visibility and makes her attractive, in that sense,” said the spokeswoman, Linda Keegan. “It really isn’t what motivated us to bring her in as a speaker.” The association in 1988 paid Sen. Dole $2,000 to speak.

Other Groups’ Fees

Fees from other groups with business before Congress that have retained Mrs. Dole to speak include:

* The National Electrical Contractors Assn.–$20,000, plus all of Mrs. Dole’s expenses for attending the group’s May 1993 event at a coastal Georgia resort. The group is lobbying to loosen worker safety and health requirements and to abolish the Davis-Bacon Act, which forces contractors on public projects to hire more expensive, union labor. Mrs. Dole’s speech “focused more on her Red Cross activities,” according to John M. Grau, chief executive of the contractors group.

* The accounting firm of Ernst & Young–$16,000, plus Mrs. Dole’s expenses for attending a 1991 gathering in Chicago. Ernst & Young at the time was facing congressional scrutiny and criminal investigations related to its auditing of some savings and loans, including Lincoln Savings & Loan, that failed in the 1980s at a cost to taxpayers of millions of dollars. Without admitting wrongdoing, Ernst & Young in 1992 settled charges of inadequate auditing at the S&Ls; by paying the government $400 million.

The firm since 1992 has lobbied for legislation that would limit the liability of accounting firms in their work for corporations and financial institutions. The legislation was enacted recently when the Senate and House overrode a veto by President Clinton. Sen. Dole was among those who supported the legislation, which was part of the congressional Republicans’ “contract with America.”

The Ernst & Young executive who arranged Mrs. Dole’s 1991 appearance has left the firm, according to Patrice Yngracia, a spokeswoman, who would not identify the former employee. Yngracia said that Mrs. Dole spoke to a group of “hospitality” industry executives who were clients of Ernst & Young.

* The American Logistics Assn.–$20,000 in 1993. The Washington-based association represents Fortune 500 companies and smaller firms that sell food and recreation facilities for the U.S. military. “Our goal is to defend this military resale system as it exists,” said Donald E. Ledwig, the group’s president. Ledwig said that Mrs. Dole spoke on the need for volunteerism. Arrangements for her speech, he said, were made before he joined the organization.

Travel Agent Speech

Another example of how the interests of Mrs. Dole’s speaking-fee clients can intersect her husband’s role as a senator involves a dispute between the nation’s major airlines and the travel-agent industry.

In November 1994, the American Society of Travel Agents arranged to have Mrs. Dole address the group’s international conference, in Lisbon, Portugal. The group paid a speaking fee of $35,000 and covered all of Mrs. Dole’s air fare and lodging.

In February 1995, several major airlines struck a blow to the travel-agent industry by announcing that they would strictly cap commissions paid to agents for booking domestic flights. American Society of Travel Agents lobbyists reacted immediately–seeking support in Congress and enforcement of antitrust law by the Justice Department.

On Feb. 22, 1995, Sen. Dole called for the Justice Department to examine the matter.

“There are more than 350,000 travel agents in the United States who will be adversely affected by the airlines’ decision. . . ,” Dole wrote in a letter to Assistant Atty. Gen. Anne K. Bingaman. “It is clear that the timing and substance of the airlines’ decision deserve a careful review by the antitrust division.”

Dole’s letter, obtained by The Times, was co-signed by Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.), chairman of the antitrust subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Gina Talamona, a Justice Department spokeswoman, said that the antitrust division is monitoring the dispute.

A spokesman for the travel agents’ association, Steve Loucks, said that Mrs. Dole spoke for about 20 minutes in Lisbon. He said that her services were “sponsored” by a member of the association, MasterCard.

Loucks said that Mrs. Dole was retained because of her background in federal policy, adding:

“Certainly, being the wife of, at that time, the minority leader of the Senate made her a very attractive property to bring in to Lisbon.”

Source link