Politics

Latest news about politics

ACLU sues Trump administration for civil rights violations at Illinois ICE center

Oct. 31 (UPI) — The American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois sued the Trump administration Friday for allegedly violating the civil rights of those detained in the Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Broadview, Ill.

The suit, which includes lawyers for the MacArthur Justice Center, the ACLU of Illinois and the Chicago law office of Eimer Stahl, was filed in federal court in Chicago, a press release said.

The suit demands that Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, the Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, and ICE “stop flouting the law inside Broadview.” The press release said the agencies “must obey the Constitution and provide the people they detain with ready access to counsel and humane conditions of confinement.”

Since the beginning of Operation Midway Blitz on Sept. 8, in which federal agents increased actions against undocumented immigrants in and around Chicago, protests and legal battles have ensued. On Tuesday, a judge issued a temporary restraining order on Gregory Bovino, a U.S. border patrol commander, after video footage showed Bovino throwing tear gas into a crowd during public demonstrations in Chicago and outside of the Broadview detention center. Clergy members, media groups and protesters had filed a suit alleging a “pattern of extreme brutality” intended to “silence the press” and American citizens.

Judge Sara Ellis ordered all agents to wear body cameras. She also ordered Bovino to check in with her daily, but an appeals court overturned that requirement.

“Everyone, no matter their legal status, has the right to access counsel and to not be subject to horrific and inhumane conditions,” said Alexa Van Brunt, director of the MacArthur Justice Center’s Illinois office and lead counsel on the suit, in a statement. “Community members are being kidnapped off the streets, packed in hold cells, denied food, medical care, and basic necessities, and forced to sign away their legal rights. This is a vicious abuse of power and gross violation of basic human rights by ICE and the Department of Homeland Security. It must end now.”

The press release said that agents at Broadview “have treated detainees abhorrently, depriving them of sleep, privacy, menstrual products, and the ability to shower.” Agents have repeatedly denied entry for attorneys, members of Congress, and religious and faith leaders, it said.

DHS has not responded to the suit or its allegations.

“This lawsuit is necessary because the Trump administration has attempted to evade accountability for turning the processing center at Broadview into a de facto detention center,” said Kevin Fee, legal director for the ACLU of Illinois, in a statement. “DHS personnel have denied access to counsel, legislators and journalists so that the harsh and deteriorating conditions at the facility can be shielded from public view. These conditions are unconstitutional and threaten to coerce people into sacrificing their rights without the benefit of legal advice and a full airing of their legal defenses.”

Lawyer Nate Eimer emphasized the importance of access to a lawyer.

“Access to counsel is not a privilege. It is a right,” Eimer, partner at Eimer Stahl and co-counsel in the lawsuit, said in a statement. “We can debate immigration policy but there is no debating the denial of legal rights and holding those detained in conditions that are not only unlawful but inhumane. Justice and compassion demand that our clients’ rights be upheld.”

An activist uses a bullhorn to shout at police near the ICE detention center as she protests in the Broadview neighborhood near Chicago on October 24, 2025. Photo by Tannen Maury/UPI | License Photo

Source link

Ohio approves redistricting map that might add more GOP seats

Oct. 31 (UPI) — Ohio’s representatives approved a bi-partisan redistricting map that might help Republicans gain more seats, but Democrats OK’d the plan because the others offered were worse for them.

The Ohio Redistricting Commission approved the measure unanimously Friday.

“Coming to an agreement that is in the best interest of the state, not just the most vocal elements of either party, I think is some of the toughest things that we can do as elected leaders in 2025,” said state Rep. Brian Stewart, R-Ashville, the Columbus Dispatch reported.

But Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio said it was the best option among bad ones.

“Facing this impossible challenge with no certain path to preserve a fair map, we worked toward compromise,” said Antonio, D-Lakewood.

Democrats faced a Friday deadline because the Ohio constitution allows Republicans to create a map without Democrats in November. They were also concerned about a case before the U.S. Supreme Court on the Voting Rights Act.

Democratic Rep. Emilia Sykes of Akron will get a slightly more favorable northeast Ohio district, but it will still be very competitive, Punchbowl News reported.

Toledo Rep. Marcy Kaptur‘s district will be more difficult to win, but not impossible. She’s the longest-serving representative in the United States, and she won a close race in 2024. Her district chose President Donald Trump by seven points.

“Let the Columbus politicians make their self-serving maps and play musical chairs, I will fight on for the people and ask the voters for their support next year,” she wrote on X.

Cincinnati Rep. Greg Landsman also saw his chances at re-election diminished.

Ohio House Minority Leader Dani Isaacsohn, D-Cincinnati, said all of Ohio’s Democratic congresspeople could still win.

“This is a district Greg Landsman can and will win in, and that’s what the people of Cincinnati deserve,” Isaacsohn said.

Ohio had a failed ballot measure in 2024 that would have put residents in charge of making district maps.

“There’s a lot of anger and frustration in this room, and it’s not just the result of this most recent betrayal. The anger and frustration has been years in the making,” said Mia Lewis, associate director at Common Cause Ohio, the Dispatch reported.

“You have shown all of us, all of Ohio, that politicians cannot be involved in drawing district lines.”

Jen Miller, executive director of the League of Women Voters of Ohio, said the people were denied being part of the process. “Republican and Democratic voters feel like their parties sold them out — and they’re both right.”

Source link

Judge says Trump can’t require citizenship proof on federal voting form

President Trump’s request to add a documentary proof of citizenship requirement to the federal voter registration form cannot be enforced, a federal judge ruled Friday.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly in Washington, D.C., sided with Democratic and civil rights groups that sued the Trump administration over his executive order to overhaul U.S. elections.

She ruled that the proof-of-citizenship directive is an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers, dealing a blow to the administration and its allies who have argued that such a mandate is necessary to restore public confidence that only Americans are voting in U.S. elections.

“Because our Constitution assigns responsibility for election regulation to the States and to Congress, this Court holds that the President lacks the authority to direct such changes,” Kollar-Kotelly wrote in her opinion.

She further emphasized that on matters related to setting qualifications for voting and regulating federal election procedures “the Constitution assigns no direct role to the President in either domain.”

Kollar-Kotelly echoed comments she made when she granted a preliminary injunction over the issue.

The ruling grants the plaintiffs a partial summary judgment that prohibits the proof-of-citizenship requirement from going into effect. It says the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, which has been considering adding the requirement to the federal voter form, is permanently barred from taking action to do so.

A message seeking comment from the White House was not immediately returned.

The lawsuit brought by the DNC and various civil rights groups will continue to play out to allow the judge to consider other challenges to Trump’s order. That includes a requirement that all mailed ballots be received, rather than just postmarked, by Election Day.

Other lawsuits against Trump’s election executive order are ongoing.

In early April, 19 Democratic state attorneys general asked a separate federal court to reject Trump’s executive order. Washington and Oregon, where virtually all voting is done with mailed ballots, followed with their own lawsuit against the order.

Swenson and Riccardi write for the Associated Press.

Source link

Republicans push back against Trump’s call to end the Senate filibuster | Donald Trump News

President Donald Trump has thrown himself into the ongoing debate over the United States government shutdown, calling on the Senate to scrap the filibuster and reopen the government.

But that idea was swiftly rejected on Friday by Republican leaders who have long opposed such a move.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

The filibuster refers to a Senate rule that requires 60 votes to overcome objections. Currently, that rule gives the minority Democrats a check on Republican power in the Senate.

In the chamber that’s currently split 53 to 47, Democrats have had enough votes to keep the government closed while they demand an extension of healthcare subsidies. Yet, neither party has seriously wanted to nuke the rule.

“THE CHOICE IS CLEAR – INITIATE THE ‘NUCLEAR OPTION,’ GET RID OF THE FILIBUSTER,” Trump said in a late-night social media post Thursday.

Trump’s sudden decision to assert himself in the now 31-day-long shutdown – with his highly charged demand to end the filibuster – is certain to set the Senate on edge. It could spur senators towards their own compromise or send the chamber spiralling towards a new sense of crisis. Or, it might be ignored.

Republican leaders responded quickly, and unequivocally, setting themselves at odds with Trump, a president few have dared to publicly counter.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune has repeatedly said he is not considering changing the rules to end the shutdown, arguing that it is vital to the institution of the Senate and has allowed Republicans to halt Democratic policies when they are in the minority.

The leader’s “position on the importance of the legislative filibuster is unchanged”, Thune spokesman Ryan Wrasse said Friday.

A spokeswoman for Wyoming Senator John Barrasso, the number-two Republican, said his position opposing a filibuster change also remains unchanged.

And former Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who firmly opposed Trump’s filibuster pleas in his first term, remains in the Senate.

House Speaker Mike Johnson also defended the filibuster Friday, while conceding “it’s not my call” from his chamber across the Capitol.

“The safeguard in the Senate has always been the filibuster,” Johnson said, adding that Trump’s comments are a reflection of “the president’s anger at the situation”.

Even if Thune wanted to change the filibuster, he would not currently have the votes to do so in the divided Senate.

“The filibuster forces us to find common ground in the Senate,” Republican Senator John Curtis of Utah posted on the social media platform X on Friday morning, responding to Trump’s comments. “Power changes hands, but principles shouldn’t. I’m a firm no on eliminating it.”

Debate has swirled around the legislative filibuster for years. Many Democrats pushed to eliminate it when they had full power in Washington, as the Republicans do now, four years ago.

But ultimately, enough Democratic senators opposed the move, predicting such an action would come back to haunt them.

Trump’s demand comes as he has declined to engage with Democratic leaders on ways to end the shutdown, on track to become the longest in history.

He said in his post that he gave a “great deal” of thought to his choice on his flight home from Asia, and that one question that kept coming up during his trip was why “powerful Republicans allow” the Democrats to shut down parts of the government.

But later Friday, he did not mention the filibuster again as he spoke to reporters departing Washington and arriving in Florida for a weekend at his Mar-a-Lago home.

While quiet talks are under way, particularly among bipartisan senators, Trump has not been seriously involved.

Democrats refuse to vote to reopen the government until Republicans negotiate an extension to the healthcare subsidies. The Republicans say they won’t negotiate until the government is reopened.

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said on CNN that Trump needs to start negotiating with Democrats, arguing the president has spent more time with global leaders than dealing with the shutdown back home.

From coast to coast, fallout from the dysfunction of the shuttered federal government is hitting home. SNAP food aid is scheduled to shut off. Flights are being delayed. Workers are going without paychecks.

And Americans are getting a first glimpse of the skyrocketing healthcare insurance costs that are at the centre of the deadlock.

“People are stressing,” said Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, as food options in her state grow scarce. “We are well past time to have this behind us.”

Source link

Trump places Nigeria on watch list over claims of anti-Christian violence | Donald Trump News

United States President Donald Trump has announced that Nigeria will be placed on a watchlist for religious freedom, based on vague claims that Christians in the country are being “slaughtered” by Muslims.

In a social media post on Friday, Trump explained that the African nation would be added to a Department of State list of “Countries of Particular Concern”.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“Christianity is facing an existential threat in Nigeria,” Trump wrote. “Thousands of Christians are being killed. Radical Islamists are responsible for this mass slaughter. I am hereby making Nigeria a ‘COUNTRY OF PARTICULAR CONCERN’.”

The Nigerian government has denied such allegations in the past. But critics warn that designating Nigeria a “country of particular concern” could pave the way for future sanctions.

Trump also appears to have bypassed the normal procedure for such matters.

The 1998 International Religious Freedom Act created the category of “country of particular concern” in order to help monitor religious persecution and advocate for its end.

But that label is usually assigned at the recommendation of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom – a bipartisan group established by Congress – and specialists in the State Department.

 

In Friday’s post, Trump explained that he had asked the House Appropriations Committee and two congressmen, Representatives Riley Moore and Tom Cole, to “immediately look into this matter”. Both are Republican.

Trump’s claims appear to mirror language pushed by right-wing lawmakers, which frames fractious and sometimes violent disputes in Nigeria as a case of radical Islamists attacking Christians.

Experts, however, have called that framing largely inaccurate, explaining that strife in the country is not explained simply by religious differences.

Nigeria is divided between a majority-Muslim north and a largely Christian south. The country has struggled with violent attacks from the group Boko Haram, which has created turmoil and displacement for more than a decade.

Disputes over resources such as water have also exacerbated tensions and sometimes led to violent clashes between largely Christian farmers and largely Muslim shepherds. Nigeria has denied, however, that such clashes are primarily motivated by religious affiliation.

Still, Representative Moore echoed Trump’s assessment in a statement after Friday’s announcement.

“I have been calling for this designation since my first floor speech in April, where I highlighted the plight of Christians in Muslim majority countries,” Moore said.

He added that he planned to “ensure that Nigeria receives the international attention, pressure, and accountability it urgently needs”.

Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, another Republican, also applauded Trump’s decision. “I am deeply gratified to President Trump for making this determination,” he said in a news release. “I have fought for years to counter the slaughter and persecution of Christians in Nigeria.”

Since returning to office for a second term in January, Trump has sought to bolster his base among the Christian right in the US.

At a prayer breakfast in February, he announced his administration was establishing a task force to root out anti-Christian bias in the federal government.

Later, in July, his administration issued a memo allowing federal employees to evangelise in their workplaces.

While Trump denounced alleged anti-Christian violence in Friday’s post, his administration has also been recently criticised for its policy towards refugees: people fleeing persecution or violence in their homelands.

On Wednesday, Trump announced the lowest-ever cap on refugee admissions in the US, limiting entry to just 7,500 people for all of fiscal year 2026.

In a notice posted to the Federal Register’s website, he explained that most of those spots would “primarily be allocated among Afrikaners from South Africa” and “other victims of illegal or unjust discrimination”.

Critics were quick to point out that refugee status is awarded for fear of systematic persecution, not discrimination.

Still, Trump has continued to ratchet up diplomatic tensions with South Africa, falsely claiming that white Afrikaners are subjected to a “genocide”, an allegation frequently pushed by figures on the far right.

Source link

Trump touts remodeling of White House, Kennedy Center amid criticism

Oct. 31 (UPI) — The White House is taking heat for construction and remodeling projects initiated by President Donald Trump as it opens up for tours again, and the president was touting the work being done in social media posts Friday.

Trump showed off images of the Lincoln Bedroom’s newly remodeled bathroom, which was lined from floor to ceiling with what he said was “black and white polished Statuary marble.”

He claimed the bathroom was “very appropriate for the time of Abraham Lincoln and, in fact, could be the marble that was originally there!” Trump made seven Truth Social posts about the bathroom renovations with multiple photos.

The bathroom has gold fixtures and a large chandelier.

Critics were quick to point out that while people are losing health insurance and food benefits, Trump was busy remodeling.

“Donald Trump actually cares more about his toilet than he does about fixing your healthcare,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said on X.

“Millions of people are being kicked off of food assistance and millions can’t afford health care anymore. But don’t worry everyone! Trump got a new bathroom,” commentator Harry Sisson said on X. “So tone deaf, out of touch, and disgusting.”

Visitors might get a glimpse soon as first lady Melania Trump announced Friday that tours will reopen at the White House on Dec. 2, “with an updated route offering guests the opportunity to experience the history and beauty of the People’s House,” a press release said.

“The decorations in each room will be thoughtfully designed and curated under the direction of first lady Melania Trump,” the release said. “Visitors will have the opportunity to enjoy the beloved annual tradition that transforms the White House into a festive reflection of the spirit, warmth, faith and hope of the holiday season.”

Trump’s critics are also making life difficult for construction companies that have government contracts to work on the new ballroom where the East Wing once stood.

Many of the contractors have taken down their websites, saying the sites are undergoing maintenance as people make posts and send e-mails shaming them for their work, the New York Daily News reported.

“How dare you destroy the people’s house!!!! You are a traitor and should be driven out of business. … You suck!” said one review left on a company’s Yelp page Thursday.

“Backstabbers who hate America and worship the AntiChrist. Took money from Trump and did work without a valid permit. These people are scum,” another said.

Demolition began on the East Wing to build the $300 million ballroom Oct. 20, sparking anger because of the speed of the demolition and lack of proper permits and notice.

Trump also announced on Truth Social Friday that he had inspected construction on the Kennedy Center. Earlier, The Washington Post reported that ticket sales for the center had dropped appreciably since Trump took over the performing arts venue and purged its board.

“It is really looking good!” he wrote. “The exterior columns, which were in serious danger of corrosion if something weren’t done, are completed, and look magnificent in White Enamel — Like a different place!

“Marble is being done, stages are being renovated, new seats, new chairs and new fabrics will soon be installed, and magnificent high-end carpeting throughout the building,” Trump wrote.

Source link

Ohio panel and Virginia lawmakers move forward with congressional redistricting plans

An Ohio panel adopted new U.S. House districts on Friday that could boost the GOP’s chances of winning two additional seats in next year’s elections and aid President Trump’s efforts to hold on to a slim congressional majority.

The action by the Ohio Redistricting Commission came as Virginia’s Democratic-led General Assembly advanced a proposed constitutional amendment that could pave the way for redistricting in the state ahead of the 2026 congressional elections. That measure still needs another round of legislative approval early next year before it can go to voters.

Trump has been urging Republican-led states to reshape their U.S. House districts in an attempt to win more seats. But unlike in other states, Ohio’s redistricting was required by the state constitution because the current districts were adopted after the 2020 census without bipartisan support.

Ohio joins Texas, Missouri and North Carolina, where Republican lawmakers already have revised their congressional districts.

Democrats have been pushing back. California voters are deciding Tuesday on a redistricting plan passed by the Democratic-led Legislature.

The political parties are in an intense battle, because Democrats need to gain just three seats in next year’s election to win control of the House and gain the power to impede Trump’s agenda.

In a rare bit of bipartisanship, Ohio’s new map won support from all five Republicans and both Democrats on the redistricting panel. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee praised the Ohio Democrats “for negotiating to prevent an even more egregious gerrymander” benefiting Republicans.

Republicans already hold 10 of Ohio’s 15 congressional seats. The new map could boost their chances in already competitive districts currently held by Democratic Reps. Greg Landsman in Cincinnati and Marcy Kaptur near Toledo. Kaptur won a 22nd term last year by about 2,400 votes, or less than 1 percentage point, in a district carried by Trump. Landsman was reelected with more than 54% of the vote.

National Democrats said they expect to hold both targeted seats and compete to flip three other districts where Republicans have won by narrow margins.

Ohio residents criticize new map

Ohio’s commission had faced a Friday deadline to adopt a new map, or else the task would have fallen to the GOP-led Legislature, which could have crafted districts even more favorable to Republicans. But any redistricting bill passed by the Legislature could have been subject to an initiative petition campaign from opponents seeking to force a public referendum on the new map.

The uncertainty of that legislative process provided commissioners of both parties with some incentive for compromise.

But Ohio residents who testified to commissioners Friday denounced the new districts. Julia Cattaneo, who wore a shirt saying “gerrymandering is cheating,” said the new map is gerrymandered more for Republicans than the one it is replacing and is not the sort of compromise needed.

“Yes, you are compromising — your integrity, honor, duty and to represent Ohioans,” she said.

Added resident Scott Sibley: “This map is an affront to democracy, and you should all — every one of you — be ashamed.”

Republican state Auditor Keith Farber, a member of the commission, defended the map during a testy exchange with one opponent. Because many Democrats live in cities and many Republicans in rural areas, he said there was no way to draw a map creating eight Republican and seven Democratic districts — as some had urged — without splitting cities, counties and townships.

Virginia Democrats point at Trump to defend redistricting

Virginia is represented in the U.S. House by six Democrats and five Republicans. Democratic lawmakers haven’t unveiled their planned new map, nor how many seats they are trying to gain, but said their moves are necessary to respond to the Trump-inspired gerrymandering in Republican-led states.

“Our voters are asking to have that voice. They’re asking that we protect democracy, that we not allow gerrymandering to happen throughout the country, and we sit back,” Democratic Sen. Barbara Favola said.

The proposed constitutional amendment would let lawmakers temporarily bypass a bipartisan commission and redraw congressional districts to their advantage. The Senate’s approval Friday followed House approval Wednesday.

The developments come as Virginia holds statewide elections Tuesday, where all 100 seats in the House of Delegates are on the ballot. Democrats would need to keep their slim majority in the lower chamber to advance the constitutional amendment again next year. It then would go to a statewide referendum.

Republican Sen. Mark Obenshain said Democrats were ignoring the will of voters who had overwhelmingly approved a bipartisan redistricting commission.

“Heaven forbid that we actually link arms and work together on something,” Obenshain said. “What the voters of Virginia said is, ‘We expect redistricting to be an issue that we work across the aisle on, that we link arms on.’”

But Democratic Sen. Schuyler VanValkenburg, who has long championed the bipartisan redistricting commission, noted the panel still would be in charge of redistricting after the 2030 census.

“We’re not trying to end the practice of fair maps,” he said. “We are asking the voters if, in this one limited case, they want to ensure that a constitutional-norm-busting president can’t break the entire national election by twisting the arms of a few state legislatures.”

Indiana and Kansas could be next

Republican Indiana Gov. Mike Braun called a special session to begin Monday to redraw congressional districts, currently held by seven Republicans and two Democrats. But lawmakers don’t plan to begin work on that day. Although it’s unclear exactly when lawmakers will convene, state law gives the Legislature 40 days to complete a special session.

In Kansas, Republican lawmakers are trying to collect enough signatures from colleagues to call themselves into a special session on redistricting to begin Nov. 7. Senate President Ty Masterson says he has the necessary two-thirds vote in the Senate, but House Republicans have at least a few holdouts. The petition drive is necessary because Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly isn’t likely to call a session to redraw the current map that has sent three Republicans and one Democrat to the House.

Lieb, Diaz and Scolforo write for the Associated Press. Lieb reported from Jefferson City, Mo.; Scolforo from Harrisburg, Pa.; and Diaz from Richmond, Va. John Hanna in Topeka, Kan., and Isabella Volmert in Lansing, Mich., contributed to this report.

Source link

Judges order USDA to restart SNAP funding, but hungry families won’t get immediate relief

Two federal judges told the U.S. Department of Agriculture in separate rulings Friday that it must begin using billions of dollars in contingency funding to provide federal food assistance to poor American families despite the federal shutdown, but gave the agency until Monday to decide how to do so.

Both Obama-appointed judges rejected Trump administration arguments that more than $5 billion in USDA contingency funds could not legally be tapped to continue Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits for nearly 42 million Americans while the federal government remains closed. But both also left unclear how exactly the relief should be provided, or when it will arrive for millions of families set to lose benefits starting Saturday.

The two rulings came almost simultaneously Friday.

In Massachusetts, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani stopped short of granting California and a coalition of 24 other Democrat-led states a temporary restraining order they had requested. But she ruled that the states were likely to succeed in their arguments that the USDA’s total shutoff of SNAP benefits — despite having billions in emergency contingency funds on hand — was unlawful.

Talwani gave USDA until Monday to tell her whether they would authorize “only reduced SNAP benefits” using the contingency funding — which would not cover the total $8.5 billion to $9 billion needed for all November benefits, according to the USDA — or would authorize “full SNAP benefits using both the Contingency Funds and additional available funds.”

Separately, in Rhode Island, U.S. District Judge John McConnell granted a temporary restraining order requested by nonprofit organizations, ruling from the bench that SNAP must be funded with at least the contingency funds, and requesting an update on progress by Monday.

The White House referred questions about the ruling to the Office of Management and Budget, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment. It was not immediately clear if the administration would appeal the rulings.

The Massachusetts order was a win for California and the other Democrat-led states, which sued over the interruption to SNAP benefits — which were previously known as food stamps — as Republicans and Democrats continue to squabble over reopening the government in Washington.

However, it will not mean that all of the nation’s SNAP recipients — including 5.5 million Californians — will be spared a lapse in their food aid, state officials stressed, as state and local food banks continued scrambling to prepare for a deluge of need starting Saturday.

Asked Thursday if a ruling in the states’ favor would mean SNAP funds would be immediately loaded onto CalFresh and other benefits cards, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta — whose office helped bring the states’ lawsuit — said “the answer is no, unfortunately.”

“Our best estimates are that [SNAP benefit] cards could be loaded and used in about a week,” he said, calling that lag “problematic.”

“There could be about a week where people are hungry and need food,” he said. For new applicants to the program, he said, it could take even longer.

The rulings came as the now monthlong shutdown continued Friday with no immediate end in sight. The Senate adjourned Thursday with no plans to meet again until Monday.

It also came after President Trump called Thursday for the Senate to end the shutdown by first ending the filibuster, a longstanding rule that requires 60 votes to overcome objections to legislation. The rule has traditionally been favored by lawmakers as a means of blocking particularly partisan measures, and is currently being used by Democrats to resist the will of the current 53-seat Republican majority.

“It is now time for the Republicans to play their ‘TRUMP CARD,’ and go for what is called the Nuclear Option — Get rid of the Filibuster, and get rid of it, NOW!” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.

Los Angeles Regional Food Bank Chief Executive Michael Flood, standing alongside Bonta as members of the California National Guard worked behind them stuffing food boxes, said his organization was preparing for massive lines come Saturday, the first of the month.

He said he expected long lines of families in need of food appearing outside food distribution locations throughout the region, just as they did during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“This is a disaster type of situation for us here in Los Angeles County, throughout the state of California and throughout the country,” Flood said.

“5.5 million Californians, 1.5 million children and adults in L.A. County alone, will be left high and dry — illegally so, unnecessarily so, in a way that is morally bankrupt,” Bonta said.

Bonta blamed the shutdown on Trump and his administration, and said the USDA has billions of dollars in contingency funds designed to ensure SNAP benefits continue during emergencies and broke the law by not tapping those funds in the current situation.

Bonta said SNAP benefits have never been disrupted during previous federal government shutdowns, and should never have been disrupted during this shutdown, either.

“That was avoidable,” he said. “Trump created this problem.”

The Trump administration has blamed the shutdown and the looming disruption to SNAP benefits entirely on Democrats in Congress, who have blocked short-term spending measures to restart the government and fund SNAP. Democrats are holding out to pressure Republicans into rescinding massive cuts to subsidies that help millions of Americans afford health insurance.

Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson, previously told The Times that Democrats should be the ones getting asked “when the shutdown will end,” because “they are the ones who have decided to shut down the government so they can use working Americans and SNAP benefits as ‘leverage’ to pursue their radical left wing agenda.”

“Americans are suffering because of Democrats,” Jackson said.

In their opposition to the states’ request for a temporary restraining order requiring the disbursement of funds, attorneys for the USDA argued that using emergency funds to cover November SNAP benefits would deplete funds meant to provide “critical support in the event of natural disasters and other uncontrollable catastrophes,” and could actually cause more disruption to benefits down the line.

They wrote that SNAP requires between $8.5 billion and $9 billion each month, and the USDA’s contingency fund has only about $5.25 billion, meaning it could not fully fund November benefits even if it did release contingency funding. Meanwhile, “a partial payment has never been made — and for good reason,” because it would force every state to recalculate benefits for recipients and then recalibrate their systems to provide the new amounts, they wrote.

That “would take weeks, if it can be done at all,” and would then have to be undone in order to issue December benefits at normal levels, assuming the shutdown would have lifted by then, they wrote. “The disruption this would entail, with each State required to repeatedly reprogram its systems, would lead to chaos and uncertainty for the following months, even after a lapse concludes,” they wrote.

Simply pausing the benefits to immediately be reissued whenever the shutdown ends is the smarter and less disruptive course of action, they argued.

During a Thursday hearing in the states’ case, Talwani had suggested that existing rules required action by the government to prevent the sort of suffering that a total disruption to food assistance would cause, regardless of whatever political showdown is occurring between the parties in Washington.

“If you don’t have money, you tighten your belt,” she said in court. “You are not going to make everyone drop dead because it’s a political game someplace.”

In addition to suing the administration, California and its leaders have been rushing to ensure that hungry families have something to eat in coming days. Gov. Gavin Newsom directed $80 million to food banks to stock up on provisions, and activated the National Guard to help package food for those who need it.

Counties have also been working to offset the need, including by directing additional funding to food banks and other resource centers and asking partners in the private sector to assist.

Dozens of organizations in California have written to Newsom calling on him to use state funds to fully cover the missing federal benefits, in order to prevent “a crisis of unthinkable magnitude,” but Newsom has suggested that is not possible given the scale of funding withheld.

According to the USDA, about 41.7 million Americans were served through SNAP per month in fiscal 2024, at an annual cost of nearly $100 billion. Of the 5.5 million Californian recipients, children and older people account for more than 63%.

This article includes reporting by the Associated Press.

Source link

2 federal judges order continuation of SNAP benefits

A member of the California Army National Guard packs bell peppers for distribution at the Los Angeles Regional Food Bank in Los Angeles on Thursday. California Gov. Gavin Newsom deployed National Guard troops to food banks across the state to help prepare emergency food supplies for people who were expecting to lose Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits amid the ongoing federal government shutdown. Photo by Allison Dinner/EPA

Oct. 31 (UPI) — Those who receive Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program shoudl continue to do so in November and possibly beyond after two federal court rulings ordered program funding.

Federal judges in Rhode Island and Massachusetts on Friday ordered the Trump administration to continue providing SNAP benefits amid the ongoing federal government shutdown.

U.S. District Court of Massachusetts Judge Indira Talwani told the Trump administration to access available funds to continue providing SNAP benefits while the federal government shutdown continues on its 31st day, according to CNN.

Talwani cited a contingency fund containing $5.2 billion that Congress had appropriated to help fund SNAP benefits when needed, but acknowledged the program’s monthly cost is $9 billion.

“This court has now clarified that defendants are required to use those contingency funds as necessary for the SNAP program,” Talwani said in her 15-page ruling.

“While these contingency funds reportedly are insufficient to cover the entire cost of SNAP for November, defendants also may supplement the contingency funds by authorizing a transfer of additional funds,” she said.

Talwani on Thursday heard oral arguments from the Justice Department and attorneys representing 25 states that sued the Trump administration to continue SNAP benefits.

Shortly after Talwani submitted her ruling on Friday, U.S. District Court Judge John McConnell Jr. in Rhode Island issued an oral ruling blocking the Trump administration from not funding SNAP benefits that provide food support for 42 million recipients across the United States, CNBC reported.

The benefits lack funding as Senate Democrats, during 13 votes, overwhelmingly have voted against a funding resolution that would keep the federal government funded and open, including the SNAP benefits, through Nov. 21.

Because there is no funding available for the SNAP program, Justice Department attorney Tyler Becker said the program does not exist.

“There is no SNAP program and, as a result, the government cannot just provide SNAP benefits,” Becker argued.

McConnell rejected the argument and, like Talwani, said the Trump administration must use congressionally appropriated contingency funds to continue providing at least some of the benefits that are due starting on Saturday.

While the Trump administration has been ordered to fund SNAP benefits via the U.S. Department of Agriculture, many will experience delays in getting them due as the USDA and respective states need time to access and distribute the benefits.

President Donald Trump on Friday told reporters the government could fund SNAP benefits past Saturday.

He said it would be easier if Senate Democrats voted in favor of the continuing resolution to fund the government while negotiating policy differences in the eventual 2026 fiscal year budget.

The fiscal year started Oct. 1, but so did the shutdown after the Senate failed to muster the 60 votes needed to approve it and keep the government open.

The shutdown will last at least through Monday after the Senate adjourned for the weekend Thursday.

Source link

Debate over energy costs fuels clear divide in New Jersey and Virginia governor’s races

If there’s agreement on anything in the two states with governor’s races this year, it’s that utility bills are a growing concern among voters.

One Virginia voter, Kim Wilson, lamented at a town hall recently that her electricity bill seems to go up every month, no matter how much she tries to mitigate the costs. She was drawn to the event in part by its title: “The energy bills are too damn high.”

“It’s way too high,” Wilson readily agreed.

In New Jersey, Herb Michitsch of Kenilworth said his electric bill has climbed to nearly $400 a month, or more than four times what it was when he and his wife moved into their home half a century ago.

“Something really has to be done,” Michitsch said.

That something must be done is pretty much where the agreement ends. It’s what must be done that splits politicians back into rival camps.

Democratic candidates in the two states are far more likely to embrace clean energy options like wind and solar than their Republican opponents. The two states’ Republican nominees are more closely aligned with the policies of President Trump, who has called climate change a “con job” and promotes more traditional energy sources like gas and coal. New Jersey Republican nominee Jack Ciattarelli has acknowledged that human-caused climate change is occurring, but he says Democrats have driven up costs with their clean energy push.

Which side voters land on in the off-year elections will give both parties plenty to consider in what feels destined to be an emerging economic issue heading into next year’s midterm elections.

At a recent rally in New Jersey, Democratic state Sen. Vin Gopal made clear that he stood with Democratic nominee Mikie Sherrill in support of her plans to lower costs. But Gopal acknowledged that the outcome could signal whether voters are ready to embrace the president’s approach or have simply grown weary of national politics.

“The whole country is watching what happens,” he said.

Technology drives up costs

The debate comes as people in the two states grapple with double-digit percentage increases in monthly electricity bills. The exploding costs are driven by soaring demand, particularly from data centers, and by the rapid onset of energy-intensive artificial intelligence technology. Virginia’s largest energy utility also has linked potential future rate increases to inflation and other costs.

In Virginia’s open race to succeed a term-limited GOP incumbent, Democrat Abigail Spanberger and Republican Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears are at odds over the development of renewable energy sources.

Spanberger has laid out a plan to expand solar and wind production in underused locations, praising a wind project off the coast of Virginia Beach. In a debate against her opponent, she also said she would “ensure that data centers pay their fair share” as costs rise. The state is home to the world’s largest data center market,

Republican Winsome Earle-Sears wasn’t having it.

“That’s all she wants, is solar and wind,” Earle-Sears said of Spanberger at the debate. “Well, if you look outside, the sun isn’t shining and the breeze isn’t blowing, and then what, Abigail, what will you do?”

In New Jersey, where Ciattarelli’s endorsement by Trump included recent social media posts praising his energy affordability plans, the GOP nominee blames rising costs on eight years of Democratic control of state government.

Ciattarelli says he would pull New Jersey out of a regional greenhouse gas trading bloc, which Democratic incumbent Gov. Phil Murphy reentered when he first took office in 2018.

“It’s been a failure,” Ciattarelli said at the final debate of the campaign. “Electricity is at an all-time high.”

He’s also come out as a strident opponent of wind energy off the state’s coast, an effort Democrats spearheaded under Murphy. A major offshore wind project ground to a halt when the Danish company overseeing it scrapped projects, citing supply chain problems and high interest rates.

At the center of Sherrill’s campaign promise on the issue is an executive order to freeze rates and build cheaper and cleaner power generation.

“I know my opponent laughs at it,” Sherrill said recently.

A growing concern among voters

The candidates’ focus on affordability and utility rates reflects an unease among voters. A recent Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found electricity bills are a “major” source of stress for 36% of U.S. adults, at a time when data center development for AI could further strain the power grid.

Perhaps that’s why the statewide races have become something of an energy proxy battle in Virginia. Clean Virginia, a clean energy advocacy group that targets utility corruption, has backed all three Democratic candidates for statewide office in Virginia — a first for the organization. GOP statewide candidates, meanwhile, have accepted money from Dominion Energy, the largest electric utility in Virginia.

To further complicate an already complex issue: Virginia has passed the Virginia Clean Economy Act, which calls for utilities to sunset carbon energy production methods by 2045.

Republican House Minority Leader Terry Kilgore, who represents the southwest edge of Virginia, had failed to alter part of the state’s Clean Economy Act earlier this year. Kilgore, whose top donor is Dominion Energy, said in February: “If their bills go any higher, there are folks in my region that are not able to pay them now, they’re definitely not going to be able to pay them in the future.”

Evan Vaughn, executive director of MAREC Action, a group of Mid-Atlantic renewable energy developers, said candidates from both parties are in a tough spot because bringing down prices quickly will be difficult given broader market dynamics.

“Voters should look to which candidate they think can do the best to stabilize prices by bringing more generation online,” he said. “That’s really going to be the key to affordability.”

Michitsch, who’s backing Sherrill in the governor’s race and said he would campaign for her, said her proposal shows she’s willing to do something to address spiraling costs.

“We need to change,” he said. “And I think she is here to change things.”

Diaz and Catalini write for the Associated Press.

Source link

South African government criticizes Trump’s refugee policy prioritizing white Afrikaner minority

South Africa’s government on Friday criticized the U.S. refugee policy shift that gives priority to Afrikaners, the country’s white minority group of Dutch descent.

The Trump administration on Thursday announced a ceiling of 7,500 refugees to be admitted to the United States, a sharp decrease from the previous 125,000 spots and said Afrikaners would be given preference over other groups.

U.S. President Trump has claimed that there is a “genocide” against Afrikaners in South Africa and that they are facing persecution and discrimination because of the country’s redress policies and the levels of crime in the country.

It’s one of the contentious issues that has seen diplomatic relations between South Africa and U.S. hit an all-time low, with Trump suspending all financial aid to South Africa and setting one of the highest tariffs for the country’s exports to the U.S.

The South African government’s international relations department said Friday that the latest move was concerning as it “still appears to rest on a premise that is factually inaccurate.”

“The claim of a ‘white genocide’ in South Africa is widely discredited and unsupported by reliable evidence,” spokesman Chrispin Phiri said.

Phiri said that a program designed to facilitate the immigration and resettlement of Afrikaners as refugees was deeply flawed and disregarded the country’s constitutional processes.

“The limited uptake of this offer by South Africans is a telling indicator of this reality,” Phiri said.

The U.S. notice, which signifies a huge policy shift toward refugees, mentioned only Afrikaners as a specific group and said the admission of the 7,500 refugees during the 2026 budget year “justified by humanitarian concerns or is otherwise in the national interest.”

Trump’s asylum offer for Afrikaners has sparked divisive debate in South Africa, but has been largely rejected even by many in the Afrikaner community.

This week, a group of prominent Afrikaners including politicians, activists, writers and businesspeople penned an open letter rejecting the notion that Afrikaners needed to emigrate from South Africa.

“The idea that white South Africans deserve special asylum status because of their race undermines the very principles of the refugee program. Vulnerability — not race — should guide humanitarian policy,” they wrote in the widely publicized letter.

However, some Afrikaner groups continue to be very critical of the South African government’s handling of crime and redress policies even though they reject the “white genocide” claim.

An Afrikaner lobbyist group, Afriforum, on Thursday said that it doesn’t call the murder of white farmers a genocide, but raised concerns about white people’s safety in South Africa.

“This does not mean AfriForum rejects or scoffs at Trump’s refugee status offer — there will be Afrikaners that apply and they should have the option, especially those who have been victims of horrific farm attacks or the South African government’s many racially discriminatory policies,” AfriForum spokesman Ernst van Zyl said.

While it’s unclear how many white South Africans have applied for refugee status in the U.S., a group of 59 white South Africans were granted asylum and were received with much fanfare in May.

Magome writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Trump declines to clarify if the U.S. will conduct tests of its nuclear weapons

President Trump declined to say Friday whether he plans to resume underground nuclear detonation tests, as he had seemed to suggest in a social media post this week that raised concerns the U.S. would begin testing nuclear weapons for the first time in three decades.

The president told reporters “You’ll find out very soon,” without elaborating when asked if he means to resume underground nuclear detonation tests.

Trump, who spoke to reporters aboard Air Force One as he headed to Florida for a weekend stay, said, “We’re going to do some testing” and “Other countries do it. If they’re going to do it, we’re going to” but then refused to offer more details.

His comments on nuclear testing have drawn confusion inside and outside the government when the president seemed to suggest in a brief post that the U.S. would resume nuclear warhead tests on an “equal basis” with Russia and China, whose last known tests were in the 1990s. Some of Trump’s comments seemed to refer to testing missiles that would deliver a warhead, rather than the warhead itself. There has been no indication that the U.S. would start detonating warheads.

The U.S. military already regularly tests its missiles that are capable of delivering a nuclear warhead, but it has not detonated the weapons since 1992. The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, which the U.S. signed but did not ratify, has been observed since its adoption by all countries possessing nuclear weapons, North Korea being the only exception.

The Pentagon has not responded to questions. The Energy Department, which oversees the U.S. nuclear stockpile, declined to comment Friday.

Trump’s post on nuclear tests came as Russia this week announced it had tested a new atomic-powered and nuclear-capable underwater drone and a new nuclear-powered cruise missile.

Russia responded to Trump’s post by underscoring that it did not test its nuclear weapons and has abided by a global ban on nuclear testing. The Kremlin warned though, that if the U.S. resumes testing its weapons, Russia will as well — an intensification that would restart Cold War-era tensions.

Vice Adm. Richard Correll, Trump’s nominee to lead the military command in charge of the nation’s nuclear arsenal, struggled to interpret the president’s comments when he testified before senators during a Capitol Hill hearing Thursday, telling them, “I’m not reading anything into it or reading anything out of it.”

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

Source link

Canada’s Carney and China’s Xi Jinping take step towards mending ties | Trade War News

Relations nosedived in 2018 after Canada arrested a senior Huawei executive and have remained rocky ever since.

The leaders of China and Canada have taken a step towards mending the long-fractured ties between their countries with a meeting in South Korea during the Asia-Pacific Economic Summit.

Chinese President Xi Jinping and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney met on Friday and called for improving ties in a pragmatic and constructive manner, according to both sides.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

“The leaders agreed that their meeting marked a turning point in the bilateral relationship,” a Canadian statement said.

Xi was quoted as saying that relations are showing signs of recovery, thanks to the joint efforts of both sides.

“We are willing to work together with Canada to take this meeting as an opportunity to promote the return of bilateral relations to a healthy, stable and sustainable track as soon as possible,” Xi said, according to an official report distributed by China’s state media.

Carney, who became prime minister in March, accepted an invitation from Xi to visit China, the Canadian statement said, without specifying any date.

Carney also later told reporters he was “very pleased” with the outcome.

“We now have a turning point in the relationship, a turning point that creates opportunities for Canadian families, for Canadian businesses and Canadian workers, and also creates a path to address current issues,” he said.

“The meeting signals a change in tone and an openness to relations at the highest levels, but this is not a return to strategic partnership,” said Vina Nadjibulla, vice president of the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada. “Canada needs to proceed with caution because there’s nothing to suggest the Chinese Communist Party’s actions have changed since the prime minister named China as a foreign security threat.”

She said Carney should keep talking with Chinese leaders but stay mindful of China’s threats to Canada’s security interests, including its efforts to play a greater role in Arctic affairs.

Shaky relations

Relations took a nosedive in late 2018 after Canadian authorities arrested a senior executive of Chinese tech giant Huawei as part of its extradition agreement with the United States. China then arrested two Canadian citizens and charged them with espionage.

Ties did not improve much even after the 2021 release of the two Canadians, Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, and the Chinese executive, Meng Wanzhou, who is the daughter of Huawei’s founder.

More recently, relations have been shaken by Canada’s decision to levy a 100 percent tariff on electric vehicles (EVs) from China in 2024 and a 25 percent tariff on steel and aluminium. China retaliated with its own steep tariffs on canola, seafood and pork, and has offered to remove some of those import taxes if Canada drops the EV tariff.

Canada made the move last in tandem with the US.

The Canadian statement said that both leaders directed their officials to move quickly to resolve trade issues and irritants and discussed solutions for specific products such as EVs, canola and seafood.

Xi called for expanding “pragmatic” cooperation in areas such as the economy, trade and energy. Both Canada and China have been hit by tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump.

The attempt at rapprochement comes as Carney looks to diversify Canada’s trade away from the US and as Trump says he plans to raise tariffs on imports of Canadian goods by an extra 10 percent. Canada’s free trade agreement with the US is up for review.

Earlier on Friday, Carney told a business event that the world of rules-based liberalised trade and investment had passed, adding that Canada aimed to double its non-US exports over the next decade.

Nadjibulla said China should not be viewed as the solution to Canada’s issues with the US, however.

“We should not diversify away from the US and go deeper into China,” she said. “Canada’s overdependence on both the US and China has been shown to be a vulnerability we cannot afford.”

Source link

Californians enrolled in Obamacare plans will see soaring premiums.

Californians renewing their public health plans or who plan to sign up for the first time will be in for sticker shock when open enrollment begins on Saturday. Monthly premiums for federally subsidized plans available on the Covered California exchange — often referred to as Obamacare — will soar by 97% on average for 2026.

The skyrocketing premiums come as a result of a conflict at the center of the current federal government shutdown, which began on Oct. 1: a budgetary impasse between the Republican majority and Democrats over whether to preserve enhanced, Biden-era tax credits that expanded healthcare eligibility to millions more Americans and kept monthly insurance costs affordable for existing policyholders. About 1.7 million of the 1.9 million Californians currently on a Covered California plan benefit from the tax credits.

Open enrollment for the coming year runs from Nov. 1 until Jan. 31. It’s traditionally the period when members compare options and make changes to existing plans and when new members opt in.

Only this time, the government shutdown has stirred uncertainty about the fate of the subsidies, first introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic and which have been keeping policy costs low, but will expire at the end of the year if lawmakers in Washington don’t act to extend them.

Californians window shopping on the exchange’s consumer homepage will have to make some tough decisions, said Covered California Executive Director Jessica Altman. The loss of the tax credits to subsidize premiums only adds to what can already be a complicated, time-consuming and frustrating process.

Even if the subsidies remained intact, premiums for plans offered by Covered California were set to rise by roughly 10% for 2026, due to spikes in drug prices and other medical services, Altman said.

Most Covered California plans will increase 11% in 2026

Without the subsidies, Covered California said its members who receive financial assistance will see their monthly premiums jump by an additional $125 a month, on average, for 2026.

The organization projects that the cost increases will lead many Californians to simply go without coverage.

“Californians are going to be facing a double whammy: premiums going up and tax credits going away,” Altman said. “We estimate that as many as 400,000 of our current enrollees will disenroll and effectively be priced out of the health insurance that they have today. That is a devastating outcome.”

Indeed, the premium spike threatens to lock out the very Americans that the 2010 Affordable Care Act — President Obama’s signature domestic policy win — was intended to help, said Altman. That includes people who earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but who either make too little to afford a private plan or don’t work for an employer that pays a portion of the premiums.

That’s a broad swath of Californians — including many bartenders and hairdressers, small business owners and their employees, farmers and farm workers, freelancers, ride-share drivers, and those working multiple part-time gigs to make ends meet. The policy change will also affect Californians who use the healthcare system more frequently because they have ongoing conditions that are costly to treat.

By raising the tax-credit eligibility threshold to include Americans earning more than 400% of the federal poverty level, the Biden-era subsidies at the heart of the budget stalemate have brought an estimated 160,000 additional middle-income Californians into the system, Covered California said. The enhanced subsidies save members about $2.5 billion a year overall in out-of-pocket premium expenses, according to the exchange.

California lawmakers have tried to provide some relief from rising Covered California premiums by recently allocating an additional $190 million in state-level tax credits in next year’s budget for individuals who earn up to 150% of the federal poverty level. That would keep monthly premiums consistent with 2025 levels for a person making up to $23,475 a year, or a family of four bringing in $48,225 a year, and provide partial relief for individuals and households making slightly more.

Altman said the state tax credits will help. But it may not be enough. Forecasts from the Urban Institute, a nonprofit research group and think tank, also show a significant drop-off of roughly 400,000 enrolled members in Covered California.

The national outlook is even worse. The Congressional Budget Office warned Congress nearly a year ago that if the enhanced premium subsidies were allowed to expire, the ranks of the uninsured would swell by 2.2 million nationwide in 2026 alone — and by an average of 3.8 million Americans each year from 2026 to 2034.

Organizations that provide affordable Obamacare plans are preparing for Californians to get squeezed out of the system if the expanded subsidies disappear.

L.A. Care, the county’s largest publicly operated health plan, offers Covered California policies for 230,000 mostly lower-income people. About 90% of the Covered California consumers they work with receive subsidies to offset their out-of-pocket healthcare insurance costs, said Martha Santana-Chin, L.A. Care’s CEO. “Unless something drastic happens … a lot of those people are going to fall off of their coverage,” Santana-Chin said.

That outcome would ripple far and wide, she said — thanks to two factors: human behavior and basic economics.

If more and more people choose to go uninsured, more and more people will resort to visiting hospital emergency rooms for non-emergency care, disrupting and overwhelming the healthcare system.

Healthcare providers will be forced to address the cost of treating rising numbers of uninsured people by raising the prices they bill to insurers for patients who have private plans. That means Californians who are not Covered California members and don’t receive other federal healthcare aid will eventually see their premiums spike too, as private insurers pass any added costs down to their customers.

But right now, with the subsidies set to end soon and recent changes to Medicaid eligibility requirements threatening to knock some of the lowest-income Californians off of that system, both Altman and Santana-Chin said their main concern is for those who don’t have alternatives.

In particular, they are concerned about people of color, who are disproportionately represented among low-income Californians, according to the Public Policy Institute of California. Any hike in out-of-pocket insurance costs next year could blow the budget of a family barely getting by.

“$100, $150, $200 — that’s meaningful to people living on fixed incomes,” Altman said. “Where is that money coming from when you’re living paycheck to paycheck?”

Source link

Trump says Senate should scrap the filibuster to end the shutdown, an idea opposed by Republicans

Back from a week abroad, President Trump is calling on the Senate to scrap the filibuster and reopen the government after a monthlong shutdown, breaking with majority Republicans who have long opposed such a move.

Trump said in a post on his social media site Thursday that “THE CHOICE IS CLEAR — INITIATE THE ‘NUCLEAR OPTION,’ GET RID OF THE FILIBUSTER.”

Trump’s sudden decision to assert himself into the shutdown debate — bringing the highly charged demand to end the filibuster — is certain to set the Senate on edge. It could spur senators toward their own compromise or send the chamber spiraling toward a new sense of crisis.

Trump has long called for Republicans to get rid of the Senate rule that requires 60 votes to overcome objections, dating all the way back to his first term in office. The rule gives Democrats a check on the 53-seat Republican majority and enough votes to keep the government closed while they demand an extension of health care subsidies.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune and most members of his Republican conference have strongly opposed changing the filibuster, arguing that it is vital to the institution of the Senate and has allowed them to halt Democratic policies when they are in the minority.

Thune has repeatedly said he is not considering changing the rules to end the shutdown, and his spokesman, Ryan Wrasse, said in a statement Friday that the leader’s “position on the importance of the legislative filibuster is unchanged.”

Broad GOP support for filibuster

Even if Thune wanted to change the filibuster, he would not currently have the votes to do so.

“The filibuster forces us to find common ground in the Senate,” Republican Sen. John Curtis of Utah posted on X Friday morning, responding to Trump’s comments and echoing the sentiments of many of his Senate Republican colleagues. “Power changes hands, but principles shouldn’t. I’m a firm no on eliminating it.”

Debate has swirled around the legislative filibuster for years. Many Democrats pushed to eliminate it when they had full power in Washington, as the Republicans do now, four years ago. But they ultimately didn’t have the votes after enough Democratic senators opposed the move, predicting such an action would come back to haunt them.

Speaker Mike Johnson also defended the filibuster Friday, while conceding “it’s not my call.” He criticized Democrats for pushing to get rid of it when they had power.

“The safeguard in the Senate has always been the filibuster,” Johnson said, adding that Trump’s comments are “the president’s anger at the situation.”

Little progress on shutdown

Trump’s call comes as the two parties have made little progress toward resolving the shutdown standoff while he was away for a week in Asia. He said in his post that he gave a “great deal” of thought to his choice on his flight home and that one question that kept coming up during his trip was why “powerful Republicans allow” the Democrats to shut down parts of the government.

While quiet talks are underway, particularly among bipartisan senators, the shutdown is not expected to end before next week, as both the House and Senate are out of session. Democrats say they won’t vote to reopen the government until Republicans negotiate an extension to the health care subsidies while Republicans say they won’t negotiate until the government is reopened.

As the shutdown drags on, from coast to coast, fallout from the dysfunction of the shuttered federal government is hitting home: Alaskans are stockpiling moose, caribou and fish for winter, even before SNAP food aid is scheduled to shut off. Mainers are filling up their home-heating oil tanks, but waiting on the federal subsidies that are nowhere in sight.

Flights are being delayed with holiday travel around the corner. Workers are going without paychecks. And Americans are getting a first glimpse of the skyrocketing health care insurance costs that are at the center of the stalemate on Capitol Hill. Money for food aid — the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP — will start to run out this weekend.

“People are stressing,” said Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, as food options in her state grow scarce.

“We are well past time to have this behind us.”

Money for military, but not food aid

The White House has moved money around to ensure the military is paid, but refuses to tap funds for food aid. In fact, Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” signed into law this summer, delivered the most substantial cut ever to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, projected to result in some 2.4 million people off the program.

At the same time, many Americans who purchase their own health insurance through the federal and state marketplaces, with open enrollment also beginning Saturday, are experiencing sticker shock as premium prices jump.

“We are holding food over the heads of poor people so that we can take away their health care,” said Rev. Ryan Stoess during a prayer with religious leaders at the U.S. Capitol.

“God help us,” he said, “when the cruelty is the point.”

Deadlines shift to next week

The House remains closed down under Johnson for the past month and senators departed for the long weekend on Thursday.

That means the shutdown, in its 30th day, appears likely to stretch into another week if the filibuster remains. If the shutdown continues, it could become the longest in history, surpassing the 35-day lapse that ended in 2019, during Trump’s first term, over his demands to build the U.S.-Mexico border wall.

The next inflection point comes after Tuesday’s off-year elections — the New York City mayor’s race, as well as elections in Virginia and New Jersey that will determine those states’ governors. Many expect that once those winners and losers are declared, and the Democrats and Republicans assess their political standing with the voters, they might be ready to hunker down for a deal.

“I hope that it frees people up to move forward with opening the government,” Thune said.

Mascaro writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Mary Clare Jalonick, Matt Brown and Josh Boak in Tokyo contributed to this report.

Source link

With fragile Gaza ceasefire holding, Trump wants to make headway on Indonesia-Israel normalization

President Trump made sure during his visit to Asia this week to praise regional allies who have backed his push to bring about a permanent end to the Israel-Hamas war.

As he handed out plaudits, Trump appeared to go out of his way to name-check one leader in particular — Indonesia’s Prabowo Subianto — for his help in Gaza.

“I want to thank Malaysia and Brunei as well as my friend, President Prabowo of Indonesia, for their incredible support of these efforts to secure the new day for the Middle East,” Trump told leaders at the Assn. of Southeast Nations summit in Malaysia, using only the Indonesian president’s first name. “It really is a new day.”

In the weeks since Israel and Hamas agreed to a fragile ceasefire and hostage deal, Indonesia, which boasts the biggest Muslim population in the world, has emerged as an intriguing partner to a White House keen on making peace in the Middle East a defining legacy of his presidency.

Trump has said that a priority tied to that plan, if the fragile ceasefire can hold, is building on his first-term Abraham Accords effort that forged diplomatic and commercial ties between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco.

White House officials believe that a permanent peace agreement in Gaza could pave the way for Indonesia as well as Saudi Arabia — the largest Arab economy and the birthplace of Islam — to normalize ties with Israel, according to a senior administration official who briefed reporters on the condition of anonymity.

For his part, Subianto has shown eagerness to build a relationship with Trump and expand his nation’s global influence.

Earlier in October, at a gathering in Egypt to mark the ceasefire, Subianto was caught on a hot mic talking to the U.S. leader about a Trump family business venture. He appeared to ask Trump to set up a meeting with the president’s son Eric, the executive vice president of the Trump Organization, which has two real estate projects underway in Indonesia.

But Indonesia, much like Saudi Arabia, has publicly maintained it can’t move forward on normalizing relations with Israel until there’s a clear pathway set for a Palestinian state.

“Any vision related to Israel must begin with the recognition of Palestinian independence and sovereignty,” said Indonesian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Yvonne Mewengkang.

Could Trump’s dealmaking pave the way?

There may be a reason for the administration to be hopeful that the ceasefire deal has created an opening for Indonesia to soften its position. The White House might also have some cards it could play as it pitches Subianto.

Jakarta badly wants to join the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development and Trump’s backing would be pivotal. Indonesia views joining the 38-member OECD as an opportunity to raise Indonesia’s international profile, access new markets, and attract investment from other organization members.

Greater U.S. investment in Indonesia’s rare earths industry could also be inviting to Jakarta, which boasts a top-20 world economy.

Indonesia has set its sights on dominating the global nickel market, and is already responsible for about half of the metal used around the world. Demand has skyrocketed as automakers need it for electric vehicle batteries and clean electricity projects that require larger batteries.

“Trump’s transactional dealmaking opens up possibilities that otherwise might not exist,” said Daniel Shapiro, a former top State Department official who worked on Israel-Indonesia normalization efforts during the Biden administration. “If the Indonesians have something they’re seeking from the United States — whether it’s in the realm of tariff relief, other types of trade arrangements, or security arrangements — this could represent an opportunity.”

Indonesia pledged troops and helped with Trump’s 20-point plan

Indonesian officials were among a small group of leaders from Muslim and Arab nations whom the White House used as a sounding board to help the administration fine-tune Trump’s 20-point ceasefire and hostage proposal. And Trump at this week’s summit in Malaysia again conferred with Subianto and other leaders about U.S.-led efforts to maintain the ceasefire in Gaza, according to a White House official who was not authorized to comment publicly about the private leaders’ conversation.

And Subianto, at the annual gathering of world leaders at the U.N. General Assembly days before the ceasefire agreement was reached, pledged 20,000 Indonesian troops for a prospective U.N. peacekeeping mission in Gaza. In the remarks, Subianto reiterated his country’s call for “an independent Palestine” but underscored the need to “recognize and guarantee the safety and security of Israel.”

Rabbi Marc Schneier, a president for the interfaith group Foundation for Ethnic Understanding and an advocate of the Abraham Accords effort, said Subianto’s pledge for troops and his rhetoric about Israel suggest that the Indonesian leader could be primed to make the leap.

“Yes, he’s talking about a Palestinian state, but he’s also being clear that he wants a Palestinian state that does not come at the expense of a Jewish state,” Schneier said. “That’s what gives me hope.”

Indonesia’s historic backing of Palestinian state

Trump met with Subianto and other leaders soon after the U.N. remarks, and seemed as impressed with the Indonesian president’s style as he was with the pledge to a peacekeeping mission. Trump said he particularly enjoyed watching Subianto “banging on that table” in his U.N. speech.

But Subianto is likely to face deep skepticism from the Indonesian public on Israel normalization efforts.

Indonesian leaders, dating to the Republic’s first president, Sukarno, have sought to burnish an image of “a country that leads the fight against world colonialism,” said Dina Sulaeman, a scholar at Padjadjaran University in Bandung, Indonesia. The country had a protracted struggle for independence, freeing itself from Dutch colonial rule in its late 1940s revolution.

Indonesian leaders’ historical support for Palestinian statehood is also at odds with the current government in Israel, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, which remains adamantly opposed to a two-state solution.

“So, if Indonesia suddenly wants to join the Abraham Accords and normalize Israel’s occupation of Palestine, the good image that the Indonesian government has built … over decades will collapse,” Sulaeman said.

The Trump administration had talks with the Indonesians about joining the Abraham Accords in its first term. The Biden administration, which tried to pick up on the normalization effort, also had “serious talks” with the Indonesians, Shapiro said.

Shapiro said he was directly involved in talks between the Biden administration and senior Indonesian officials about using a November 2023 state visit by then Indonesian President Joko Widodo to offer preliminary announcements “about moving forward” on a normalization effort. But the Hamas Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel scuttled the effort.

“My judgment is there is good possibility, assuming the ceasefire holds,” Shapiro said of Trump’s chances of getting Jakarta to sign the accords. “How and when that deal can begin to take shape — that remains to be seen.”

Madhani and Tarigan write for the Associated Press. Tarigan reported from Jakarta.

Source link

Plan to kill 450K owls pushes past major obstacle with Republicans both for and against

A controversial plan to kill one owl species to save another cleared a major hurdle.

The full Senate on Wednesday struck down a GOP effort to prevent the cull of up to 450,000 barred owls in the Pacific Northwest over three decades, ending a saga that created strange political bedfellows.

It’s a major win for environmentalists and federal wildlife officials who want to protect northern spotted owls that have been crowded out by their larger, more aggressive cousins. In recent weeks they got an unlikely ally in loggers who said scuttling the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service plan could hinder timber sales.

But it’s a blow to an equally unusual alliance that includes right-wing politicians and animal rights advocates who argue the cull is too expensive and inhumane. The Trump administration leaned on Republican lawmakers to get out of the way, scrambling partisan lines.

Sen. John Kennedy, a conservative from Louisiana, sought to nix the owl-killing plan via the Congressional Review Act, which can be used to overturn recent rules by federal agencies.

Kennedy said Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, whose portfolio includes timber production, recently called him and told him to abandon the resolution. This month logging advocates said that stopping the cull would jeopardize timber production goals set by the Trump administration.

But Kennedy was not persuaded.

“The secretary needed to call somebody who cared what he thought, because I think he’s wrong,” Kennedy said on the Senate floor. “I think he and the other members of the administrative state at the Department of the Interior decided to play God.”

Flanked by pictures of owls and bumbling cartoon hunter Elmer Fudd, Kennedy praised barred owls for their “soulful eyes” and “incredibly soft” feathers. But he acknowledged they’re better hunters than spotted owls. Barred owls, which moved over from eastern North America, are outcompeting spotted owls for food and shelter in their native territory.

Sen. John N. Kennedy, R-La.

Louisiana Senator John Kennedy spearheaded a resolution to overturn the Biden-era plan to cull barred owls, even after he said the Trump administration told him to back down.

(Senate Banking Committee)

Ultimately the resolution failed 72 to 25, with three lawmakers not voting. Nearly all those who voted in favor of the resolution were Republican, but even more Republicans voted against it. The Fish and Wildlife Service approved the barred owl cull last year under the Biden Administration.

“I feel a lot of relief because this was one of the most major threats to the long-term, continued existence of the northern spotted owl in many years,” said Tom Wheeler, executive director of the Environmental Protection Information Center. “We’ve passed this hurdle, which isn’t to say there aren’t other hurdles or road bumps up ahead, but this feels good.”

Wheeler described the failed effort as a “nuclear threat” — if the resolution had passed, the Fish and Wildlife Service would have been blocked from pursuing any similar rule, unless explicitly authorized by Congress.

Now Wheeler said he and his allies will continue to push for the owl cull to be carried out, and for federal funding to support it.

Animal welfare advocates like Wayne Pacelle, president of Animal Wellness Action and Center for a Humane Economy, are dismayed.

“What this means is that not only are barred owls at extreme risk of large-scale shooting, but spotted owls and old-growth forests are at risk from chainsaws,” Pacelle said of the failed resolution.

Pacelle’s camp vowed to continue the fight. A lawsuit challenging the hunt they filed against the federal government last fall is moving forward. And they’ll try to ensure money doesn’t flow to the program.

In May, federal officials canceled three related grants in California totaling more than $1.1 million, including one study that would have included lethally removing barred owls from more than 192,000 acres in Mendocino and Sonoma counties.

However, there are other projects to kill barred owls in the Golden State, according to Peter Tira, a spokesperson for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

One $4.3-million grant issued by the state agency will support barred owl removal in the northwestern part of the state, along with other research. Another grant issued by NASA to a university involves killing barred owls in California as well as creating a tool to prioritize areas where the raptors need to be managed.

It’s not clear how or if the government shutdown, now stretching into its 31st day, is affecting the projects, Tira said in an email.

Source link

Who is Curtis Sliwa, the Republican in New York City’s 2025 mayoral race? | Politics News

The New York City mayoral election is dominated by Democrats, a reflection of the US metropolis’s deeply liberal bent. But a Republican could make the difference in the race.

Candidate Curtis Sliwa has remained defiant ahead of the November 4 election, shrugging off appeals from some top conservatives to drop out and boost the chances of former Governor Andrew Cuomo, who is running as an independent after being routed in June’s Democratic primary.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

Some political observers see Sliwa’s exit as the only way for Cuomo to have a shot at defeating frontrunner Zohran Mamdani, who has surged to the top of voter polls on a Democratic Socialist platform.

“New Yorkers are tired of Andrew Cuomo, but Andrew Cuomo doesn’t seem to understand when ‘no’ means ‘no’,” said Rusat Ramgopal, Sliwa’s deputy campaign manager, with a pointed reference to the sexual misconduct allegations that forced Cuomo from his post as New York State’s governor in 2021.

Curtis Sliwa
Curtis Sliwa supporters gather in midtown Manhattan ahead of the first mayoral debate on October 17 [Joseph Stepansky/Al Jazeera]

Sliwa has also doled out blows to both of his opponents.

“Zohran, your resume could fit on a cocktail napkin, and Andrew, your failures could fill a public school library in New York City,” he said during the final mayoral debate on October 22.

Sliwa has also dipped into the same Islamophobic tropes perpetuated by Mamdani’s critics, falsely claiming during the final debate that the leading candidate supports “global jihad”.

Local showman or subway hero?

So who is Curtis Sliwa? It is a question that has dogged Sliwa since he rose to prominence as the leader of the Guardian Angels, a volunteer crime-fighting group that became famous for its patrols of the New York City subway system.

Supporters have identified with the do-it-yourself ethos of the group, which Sliwa started in 1979, when he was a 24-year-old night manager at a McDonald’s restaurant in the Bronx. Many continue to hail him as an emblem of New Yorkers stepping up when city administration fails.

“When people see that red beret, they think about subway safety, public safety. They remember what he’s done for the city,” Ramgopal said.

“He is a larger-than-life figure who’s been integral to New York life for so many decades at this point.”

Guardian Angels
A member of the Guardian Angels is seen on the subway in Brooklyn in 2021 [David Boe/The Associated Press]

Others have accused the Guardian Angels, who do not carry weapons, of perpetuating a dangerous brand of vigilantism. The group has also faced criticism for alleged racial profiling, demonising immigrants, and wrongfully accusing individuals of committing crimes.

On the campaign trail, Sliwa has regularly condemned “migrant” crime.

The authenticity of the group’s exploits have been scrutinised, with Sliwa admitting in 1992 that he faked some crimes to boost publicity.

In recent years, Sliwa has been a candidate in local politics, a radio host and a media personality.

What are his platforms?

Unsurprisingly, Sliwa has made public safety, particularly in the transit system, the focus of his campaign. Even as crime dropped, Sliwa maintained the city is “facing a crisis of crime, lawlessness and failed leadership”.

He has vowed to hire 7,000 new New York Police Department (NYPD) officers, re-up controversial police units, and — as his website puts it — “enhance proactive and intrusive policing strategies to target illegal firearm carriers, repeat offenders, and violent criminals before crimes occur”.

Critics have said those strategies have historically led to increased racial profiling, the over-policing of minority communities, and intrusions on civil liberties.

He has also pushed affordability, an issue that has been dominant this campaign season, pledging to overhaul the system the city currently uses to coordinate with affordable housing programmes.

In addition, Sliwa, who owns several cats, has made animal protection a key plank of his campaign.

What do supporters see in him?

As the only right-wing candidate in the race, Sliwa has strong support among registered Republicans, who comprise 11 percent of New York’s 4.7 million registered voters.

Despite rising to prominence decades ago, he continues to rally new supporters.

“His work with the Guardian Angels has resonated with me a lot,” Shan Singh, a 30-year-old cab driver from Richmond Hill, Queens, told Al Jazeera.

Singh had previously been a Democrat but switched his support to US President Donald Trump and the Republican Party in the 2024 presidential election. He perceives the recent protests that have swept the city as dangerous.

FILE PHOTO: Democratic candidate Zohran Mamdani speaks during a mayoral debate with Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa and independent candidate former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, in New York, U.S., October 16, 2025. Angelina Katsanis/Pool via REUTERS/File Photo
Democratic candidate Zohran Mamdani speaks during a mayoral debate with Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa and independent candidate former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo [Reuters]

The fact that Sliwa is trailing in the polls, he added, is not enough to lose his vote.

“Regardless of the numbers, Curtis is the person who seems most real to me,” he said.

Russell, a 28-year-old from Brooklyn who asked that his last name be withheld, came out to show support for Sliwa ahead of the first mayoral debate in midtown Manhattan.

He said both Cuomo and Mamdani were too soft on crime, and he took particular issue with their support for bail reform programmes, designed to eliminate cash bail for low-level offences and avoid mass incarceration.

“It emboldens criminals to keep committing crimes, because there are no repercussions for it,” Russell said.

Does he have any chance at winning?

Short of a miracle, Sliwa has no real path to victory. The latest Quinnipiac University poll found he had the support of 14 percent of likely voters. That paled in comparison to Mamdani’s 43 percent and Cuomo’s 33 percent support.

That’s why Cuomo has pushed so hard for him to exit the race. The former governor made repeated overtures to conservative voters, saying a vote for Sliwa is, in essence, a vote for Mamdani.

Cuomo has even left the door open to giving Sliwa a role in his administration if he were to drop out.

As of yet, the appeals have been to no avail. It also remains unclear how many of Sliwa’s staunchest supporters would be willing to cross party lines.

“If Sliwa leaves the race, I wouldn’t vote for either [Cuomo or Mamdani],” Russell told Al Jazeera.

Source link

Austin Beutner assails L.A. Mayor Karen Bass over rising city fees

Los Angeles mayoral candidate Austin Beutner took aim at the rising cost of basic city services Thursday, saying Mayor Karen Bass and her administration have contributed to an affordability crisis that is “crushing families.”

Beutner, appearing outside Van Nuys City Hall, pointed to the City Council’s recent decision to increase trash collection fees to nearly $56 per month, up from $36.32 for single-family homes and duplexes and $24.33 for three- and four-unit apartment buildings.

Since Bass took office in December 2022, the city also hiked sewer service fees, which are on track to double over a four-year period. In addition, Beutner said, the Department of Water and Power pushed up the cost of water and electrical service by 52% and 19%, respectively.

“I’m talking about the cost-of-living crisis that’s crushing families,” he said. “L.A. is a very, very special place, but every day it’s becoming less affordable.”

Beutner, speaking before a group of reporters, would not commit to rolling back any of those increases. Instead, he urged Bass to call a special session of the City Council to explain the decisions that led to the increases.

“Tell me the cost of those choices, and then we can have an informed conversation as to whether it was a good choice or a bad choice — or whether I’d make the same choice,” said Beutner, who has worked as superintendent of L.A. schools and as a high-level deputy mayor.

When the City Council took up the sewer rates last year, sanitation officials argued the increase was needed to cover rising construction and labor costs — and ramp up the repair and replacement of aging pipes.

This year sanitation officials also pushed for a package of trash fee hikes, saying the rates had not increased in 17 years. They argued that the city’s budget has been subsidizing the cost of residential trash pickup for customers in single-family homes and small apartments.

Doug Herman, spokesperson for the Bass reelection campaign, defended the trash and sewer service fee increases, saying both were long overdue. Bass took action, he said, because previous city leaders failed to make the hard choices necessary to balance the budget and fix deteriorating sewer pipes.

“Nobody was willing to face the music and request the rate hikes to do that necessary work,” he said.

DWP spokesperson Michelle Figueroa acknowledged that electrical rates have gone up. However, she said in an email, the DWP’s residential rates remain lower than other utilities, including Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric.

By focusing on cost-of-living concerns, Beutner’s campaign has been emphasizing an issue that is at the forefront of next week’s election for New York City mayor. In that contest, State Assembly member Zohran Mamdani has promised to lower consumer costs, in part by freezing the rent for rent-stabilized apartments and making rides on city buses free.

Since announcing his candidacy this month, Beutner has offered few cost-of-living policy prescriptions, other than to say he supports “in concept” Senate Bill 79, a newly signed state law that allows taller, denser buildings to be approved near public transit stops. Instead, he mostly has derided a wide array of increases, including a recent hike in parking rates.

Beutner contends that the city’s various increases will add more than $1,200 per year to the average household customer’s bill from the Department of Water and Power, which includes the cost not just of utilities but also trash removal and sewer service.

Herman pushed back on that estimate, saying it relies on “flawed assumptions,” incorporating fees that apply to only a portion of ratepayers.

In a new campaign video, Beutner warned that city leaders also are laying plans to more than double what property owners pay in street lighting assessments. He also accused the DWP of relying increasingly on “adjustment factors” to increase the amount customers pay for water and electricity, instead of hiking the base rate.

The DWP needs to be more transparent about those increases and why they were needed, Beutner said.

Source link

Prop. 50 is part of a historically uncertain moment in American democracy

Is President Trump going to restart nuclear weapons testing? When will this federal shutdown end? Will Californians pass Proposition 50, scramble the state’s congressional maps and shake up next year’s midterm elections?

Amid a swirl of high-stakes standoffs and unprecedented posturing by Trump, Gov. Gavin Newsom and other leaders in Washington and Sacramento, the future of U.S. politics, and California’s role therein, has felt wildly uncertain of late.

Political debate — around things such as sending military troops into American cities, cutting off food aid for the poor or questioning constitutional guarantees such as birthright citizenship — has become so untethered to longstanding norms that everything feels novel.

The pathways for taking political power — as with Trump’s teasing a potential third term, installing federal prosecutors without Senate confirmation, slashing federal budgets without congressional input and pressuring red states to redistrict in his favor before a midterm election — have been so sharply altered that many Americans, and some historians and political experts, have lost confidence in U.S. democracy.

“It’s completely unprecedented, completely anomalous — representative, I think, of a major transformation of our normal political life,” said Jack Rakove, a Stanford University emeritus professor of history and political science.

“You can’t compare it to any other episode, any other period, any other set of events in American history. It is unique and radically novel in distressing ways,” Rakove said. “As soon as Trump was reelected, we entered into a constitutional crisis. Why? Because Trump has no respect for constitutional structures.”

Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson, said in a statement that “President Trump’s unorthodox approach is why he has been so successful and why he has received massive support from the American public.”

Jackson said Trump has “achieved more than any President has in modern history,” including in “securing the border, getting dangerous criminals off American streets, brokering historic peace deals [and] bringing new investments to the U.S.,” and that the Supreme Court has repeatedly backed his approach as legal.

“So-called experts can pontificate all they want, but President Trump’s actions have been consistently upheld by the Supreme Court despite a record number of challenges from liberal activists and unlawful rulings from liberal lower court judges,” Jackson said.

There are many examples of Trump flouting or suggesting he will flout the Constitution or other laws directly, and in ways that make people unsure and concerned about what will come next for the country politically, Rakove and other political experts said. His constant flirting with the idea of a third term in office does that, as does his legal challenge to birthright citizenship and his military’s penchant for blasting alleged drug vessels out of international waters.

On Wednesday, Trump raised the prospect of further breaching international law and norms by appearing to suggest on social media that, for the first time in three decades, the U.S. would resume testing nuclear weapons.

“Because of other countries testing programs, I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis,” Trump wrote — leaving it unclear whether he meant detonating warheads or simply testing the missiles that deliver them.

There are also many examples, the experts said, of American political norms being tossed aside — and the nation’s political future tossed in the air — by others around Trump, both allies and enemies, who are trying to either please or push back against the unorthodox commander in chief with their own abnormal political maneuvers.

One example is House Speaker Mike Johnson (R.-La.) refusing to swear in Adelita Grijalva, despite her being elected in September to represent parts of Arizona in Congress. Johnson has cited the shutdown, but others — including Arizona’s attorney general in a lawsuit — have suggested Johnson is trying to prevent a House vote on releasing records about the late Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced billionaire sex offender whom Trump was friends with before a reported falling out years ago.

Uncertainty about whether those records would implicate Trump or any other powerful people in any wrongdoing has swirled in Washington throughout Trump’s term — showing more staying power than perhaps any other issue, despite Trump’s insistence that he’s done nothing wrong and the issue is a distraction.

The mid-decade redistricting battle — in which California’s Proposition 50 looms large — is another prime example, the experts said.

Normally, redistricting occurs each decade, after federal census data comes out. But at Trump’s urging, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott agreed to redraw his state’s congressional lines this year to help ensure Republicans maintain control of the House in the midterms. In response, Newsom and California Democrats introduced Proposition 50, asking California voters to amend the state Constitution to allow Democrats to redraw lines in their favor.

As a result, Californians — millions of whom have already voted — have been getting bombarded by messages both for and against Proposition 50, many of which are hyper-focused on the uncertain implications for American democracy.

“Let’s fight back and democracy can be defended,” a Proposition 50 backer wrote on a postcard to one voter. “It is against democracy and rips away the power to draw congressional seats from the people,” opponents of the measure wrote to others.

H.W. Brands, a U.S. history professor at the University of Texas at Austin, said, “Americans who are worried about democracy are right to be concerned,” because Trump “has broken or threatened many of the guardrails of democracy.”

But he also noted — partly as a reflection of the dangerous moment the country is in — that Trump has long rejected a particularly “sacred” part of American democracy by refusing to accept his loss to President Biden in 2020, and Americans reelected him in 2024 anyway.

“Americans have always been divided politically. This is the first time (with the exception of 1860) that the division goes down to the fundamentals of democracy,” Brands wrote in an email — referencing the year the U.S. Confederacy seceded from the Union.

High stakes

The uncertainty has festered in an era of rampant political disinformation and under a president who has a penchant for challenging reality outright on a near-daily basis — who on a trip through Asia this week not only said he’d “love” a third term, which is precluded by the Constitution, but claimed, falsely, that he is experiencing his best polling numbers ever.

The uncertainty has also been compounded by Democrats, who have wielded the only levers of power they have left by refusing to concede to Republicans in the raging shutdown battle in Washington and by putting Proposition 50 to California voters.

The shutdown has major, immediate implications. Not only are federal employees around the country, including in California, furloughed or without pay checks, but billions in additional federal funding is at risk.

Democrats have resisted funding the government in an effort to force Republicans to back down from massive cuts to healthcare subsidies that help millions of Californians and many more Americans afford health coverage. The shutdown means Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits could be cut off for more than 40 million people — nearly 1 in 8 Americans — this weekend.

California and other Democrat-led states have sued the Trump administration, asking a federal court to issue an emergency order requiring the USDA to use existing contingency funds to distribute SNAP funding.

Jackson, the White House spokesperson, said Democrats should be asked when the shutdown will end, because “they are the ones who have decided to shut down the government so they can use working Americans and SNAP benefits as ‘leverage’ to pursue their radical left wing agenda.”

The redistricting battle could have even bigger impact.

If Democrats retook the House next year, it would give them a real source of oversight power to confront Trump and block his MAGA agenda. If Republicans retain control, they will help facilitate Trump’s agenda — just as they have since he took office.

But even if Proposition 50 passes, as polling suggests it will, it’s not clear that Democrats would win all the races lined up for them in the state, or that those seats would be enough to win Democrats the chamber given efforts to pick up Republican seats in Texas and elsewhere.

The uncertainty around the midterms is, by extension, producing more uncertainty around the second half of Trump’s term.

What will Trump do, particularly if Republicans stay in power? Is he stationing troops in American cities as part of some broader play for retaining power, as some Democrats have suggested? Is he setting the groundwork to challenge the integrity of U.S. elections by citing his baseless claims about fraud in 2020 and putting fellow election deniers in charge of reviewing the system?

Is he really gearing up to contest the constitutional limits on his tenure in the White House? He said he’d “love” to stay in office this week, but then he said it’s “too bad” he’s not allowed to.

Fire with fire?

According to David Greenberg, a history professor at Rutgers University, it is Trump’s unorthodox policies and tactics but also his brash demeanor that “make this a more unsettled moment than we are used to feeling.”

“Sometimes when he’s doing things that other presidents have done, he does it in such an outlandish way that it feels unprecedented,” or is “stylistically” but not substantively unprecedented, Greenberg said. “Self-aggrandizing claims, often untrue. The brazenness with which he insults people. The way he changes his mind on something. That all is highly unusual and unique to Trump.”

In other instances, Greenberg said, Trump has pushed the boundaries of the law or busted political norms that previous presidents felt bound by.

“One thing that Trump showed us is just how much of our functioning system depends not just on the letter of the law but on norms,” Greenberg said. “What can the president do? What kind of power can he exert over the Justice Department and who it prosecutes? Well, it turns out he probably can do a lot more than should be permissible.”

However, the appropriate response is not the one seemingly gaining steam among Democrats — to “be more like Trump” themselves or “fight fire with fire” — but to look for ways to strengthen the political norms and boundaries Trump is ignoring, Greenberg said.

“The more the public, citizens in general, feel that it’s OK to disregard long-standing ways of doing things that have stood the test of time until now, the more likely we are to enter into a more chaotic world — a world in which there will be less justice, less democracy,” Greenberg said. “It will be more subject to the whims or preferences of whoever is in power — and in a liberal democracy, that is what you are striving to fight against.”

Source link