presidential

The Algarve, Portugal – After fierce storms that brought days of torrential rain, the sun is finally out in Portugal’s Algarve.

In the coastal town of Portimao, cafe terraces are busy with people enjoying a respite from the bad weather. In nearby Albufeira, tourists, mostly from northern Europe in search of winter warmth, stroll on the sandy beach. The ocean is gleaming; the cliffs are topped with lush vegetation.

But behind the idyllic scenery is an increasingly disaffected population that may be on the cusp of embracing Portugal’s first right-wing nationalist president since the country’s dictatorship ended half a century ago.

The Algarve has long been a popular destination for holidaymakers, and tourism fuels much of the region’s economy. But it also pushes up housing prices and the cost of living, and attracts a high number of foreign workers. Some residents say they are fed up with the situation. Others will tell you wistfully that the Algarve is not what it once was.

Outside a supermarket in Albufeira, a man tells Al Jazeera he knows people who can barely pay their rent because salaries are so low. Another says that the Algarve and Portugal need change and new leadership.

The sense for many people here is that politicians in Lisbon are disconnected from the struggles of people outside of the capital. It is partly why the Algarve has become a stronghold for Andre Ventura’s far-right Chega party. Its anti-establishment and anti-immigration message resonates with voters here who feel unheard and unseen by mainstream parties.

A former TV football commentator, Ventura founded Chega, which means “Enough”, seven years ago. Since then, Chega’s made large gains in a region that has become a springboard for its leader’s ambitions, including the presidency.

Ventura is in the second round of the presidential run-off vote on February 8.  He is the first populist candidate in Portuguese history to make it that far. Ventura may well believe that momentum is on his side.

In the 2024 parliamentary elections, Chega grew to become the main opposition to the centre-right government of Luis Montenegro. Its rapid rise has shaken a political landscape long dominated by socialists and liberals. It has also rattled opponents and critics who believed Portugal was immune to the far-right surge seen elsewhere in Europe.

In Portimao and Albufeira, Ventura’s campaign billboards tower over roads and roundabouts. He is also a regular on TV shows and prolific on social media, much like Donald Trump, whom Ventura admires. Like the United States president, Ventura rails against immigration and immigrants. He has even been sanctioned by Portuguese courts for discriminatory comments.

Not everyone in the Algarve would welcome a Ventura presidency. At the Timing temporary employment agency in Albufeira, people come looking for work, mainly in the region’s many hotels and restaurants. Most are from outside Portugal.

Al Jazeera spoke with Tariq Ahmed and Saidul Islam Said from Bangladesh, and Gurjeet Singh from India. They work during the holiday season to save money. All say they like Portugal.

When asked whether they worry about Chega’s rhetoric, Saidul says he is aware of it but isn’t concerned for now. He says that every country has its problems and that he stays focused on work, not politics.

The agency has thousands of workers on its books, and about 70 percent come from abroad, says manager Ricardo Mariano. They work hard and are welcome, he says. He insists the Algarve could not function without immigrant labour and says neither could the rest of Portugal.

The country faces worker shortages in several industries. Portugal has a long tradition of emigration, and a lack of affordable housing, jobs and low wages mean young Portuguese people continue to seek opportunities abroad.

Successive socialist and liberal governments are viewed by some as having failed to reverse the trend. Nevertheless, it is a veteran socialist politician who faces Ventura in the presidential race. Antonio Jose Seguro has served as an MP, a junior minister and a member of the European Parliament.

He had retired from politics to teach but returned with a mission, saying he wanted to unite an increasingly divided country and defend Portugal’s institutions. Seguro says voters will have to choose between democracy and radicalism.

Opinion polls suggest Seguro could win, and several politicians from across the political spectrum are urging their supporters to rally behind him and block a Ventura victory. The presidential role is largely ceremonial, but it has the power to dissolve parliament or veto laws.

Back in Portimao, Chega MP Joao Graca is out campaigning for Ventura. He’s come to a food market wearing a suit jacket over a T-shirt printed with Ventura’s portrait.

He weaves through the stalls, chatting to sellers and shoppers. More than a dozen supporters chant behind him, enthusiastically handing out Chega pens and bags. The reception for them is noteworthy in that it is universally warm.

For some Portuguese voters, a Ventura win would be a disaster, widening divisions in society and destroying Portugal’s image as one of Europe’s most tolerant nations, but for Graca, it would be the best thing that could happen to the country. Portugal, he tells Al Jazeera, needs Ventura.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has acknowledged he is eyeing a presidential bid, has incensed both Democrats and Republicans over immigrant healthcare, underscoring the delicate political path ahead.

For a second straight year, the Democrat has asked state lawmakers to roll back coverage for some immigrants in the face of federal Medicaid spending cuts and a roughly $3-billion budget deficit that analysts warn could worsen if the AI bubble bursts. Newsom has proposed that the state not step in when, starting in October, the federal government stops providing health coverage to an estimated 200,000 legal residents — comprising asylees, refugees and others.

Progressive legislators and activists said the cost-saving measures are a departure from Newsom’s “health for all” pledge, and Republicans continue to skewer Newsom for using public funds to cover any noncitizens.

Newsom’s latest move would save an estimated $786 million this fiscal year and $1.1 billion annually in future years in a proposed budget of $349 billion, according to the Department of Finance.

State Sen. Caroline Menjivar, one of two Senate Democrats who voted against Newsom’s immigrant health cuts last year, said she worried the governor’s political ambition could be getting in the way of doing what’s best for Californians.

“You’re clouded by what Arkansas is going to think, or Tennessee is going to think, when what California thinks is something completely different,” said Menjivar, who said previous criticism got her temporarily removed from a key budget subcommittee. “That’s my perspective on what’s happening here.”

Meanwhile, Republican state Sen. Tony Strickland criticized Newsom for glossing over the state’s structural deficit, which state officials say could balloon to $27 billion the following year. And he slammed Newsom for continuing to cover California residents in the U.S. without authorization. “He just wants to reinvent himself,” Strickland said.

It’s a political tightrope that will continue to grow thinner as federal support shrinks amid ever-rising healthcare expenses, said Guian McKee, a co-chair of the Health Care Policy Project at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center of Public Affairs.

“It’s not just threading one needle but threading three or four of them right in a row,” McKee said. Should Newsom run for president, McKee added, the priorities of Democratic primary voters — who largely mirror blue states like California — look very different from those in a far more divided general electorate.

Americans are deeply divided on whether the government should provide health coverage to immigrants without legal status. In a KFF poll last year, a slim majority — 54% — were against a provision that would have penalized states that use their own funds to pay for immigrant healthcare, with wide variation by party. The provision was left out of the final version of the bill passed by Congress and signed by President Trump.

Even in California, support for the idea has waned amid ongoing budget problems. In a May survey by the Public Policy Institute of California, 41% of adults in the state said they supported providing health coverage to immigrants without authorization, a sharp drop from the 55% who supported it in 2023.

Trump, Vice President JD Vance, other administration officials, and congressional Republicans have repeatedly accused California and other Democrat-led states of using taxpayer funds on immigrant healthcare, a red-meat issue for their GOP base. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz has accused California of “gaming the system” to receive more federal funds, freeing up state coffers for its Medicaid program, known as Medi-Cal, which has enrolled roughly 1.6 million immigrants without legal status.

“If you are a taxpayer in Texas or Florida, your tax dollars could’ve been used to fund the care of illegal immigrants in California,” he said in October.

California state officials have denied the charges, noting that only state funds are used to pay for general health services to those without legal status because the law prohibits using federal funds. Instead, Newsom has made it a “point of pride” that California has opened up coverage to immigrants, which his administration has noted keeps people healthier and helps them avoid costly emergency room care often covered at taxpayer expense.

“No administration has done more to expand full coverage under Medicaid than this administration for our diverse communities, documented and undocumented,” Newsom told reporters in January. “People have built careers out of criticizing my advocacy.”

Newsom warns the federal government’s “carnival of chaos” passed Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which he said puts 1.8 million Californians at risk of losing their health coverage with the implementation of work requirements, other eligibility rules, and limits to federal funding to states.

Nationally, 10 million people could lose coverage by 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Health economists have said higher numbers of uninsured patients — particularly those who are relatively healthy — could concentrate coverage among sicker patients, potentially increasing premium costs and hospital prices overall.

Immigrant advocates say it’s especially callous to leave residents who may have fled violence or survived trafficking or abuse without access to healthcare. Federal rules currently require state Medicaid programs to cover “qualified noncitizens” including asylees and refugees, according to Tanya Broder with the National Immigration Law Center. But the Republican tax-and-spending law ends the coverage, affecting an estimated 1.4 million legal immigrants nationwide.

With many state governors yet to release budget proposals, it’s unclear how they might handle the funding gaps, Broder said.

For instance, Colorado state officials estimate roughly 7,000 legal immigrants could lose coverage due to the law’s changes. And Washington state officials estimate 3,000 refugees, asylees, and other lawfully present immigrants will lose Medicaid.

Both states, like California, expanded full coverage to all income-eligible residents regardless of immigration status. Their elected officials are now in the awkward position of explaining why some legal immigrants may lose their healthcare coverage while those without legal status could keep theirs.

Last year, spiraling healthcare costs and state budget constraints prompted the Democratic governors of Illinois and Minnesota, potential presidential contenders JB Pritzker and Tim Walz, to pause or end coverage of immigrants without legal status.

California lawmakers last year voted to eliminate dental coverage and freeze new enrollment for immigrants without legal status and, starting next year, will charge monthly premiums to those who remain. Even so, the state is slated to spend $13.8 billion from its general fund on immigrants not covered by the federal government, according to Department of Finance spokesperson H.D. Palmer.

At a news conference in San Francisco in January, Newsom defended those moves, saying they were necessary for “fiscal prudence.” He sidestepped questions about coverage for asylees and refugees and downplayed the significance of his proposal, saying he could revise it when he gets a chance to update his budget in May.

Kiran Savage-Sangwan, executive director of the California Pan-Ethnic Health Network, pointed out that California passed a law in the 1990s requiring the state to cover Medi-Cal for legal immigrants when federal Medicaid dollars won’t. This includes green-card holders who haven’t yet met the five-year waiting period for enrolling in Medicaid.

Calling the governor’s proposal “arbitrary and cruel,” Savage-Sangwan criticized his choice to prioritize rainy-day fund deposits over maintaining coverage and said blaming the federal government was misleading.

It’s also a major departure from what she had hoped California could achieve on Newsom’s first day in office seven years ago, when he declared his support for single-payer healthcare and proposed extending health insurance subsidies to middle-class Californians.

“I absolutely did have hope, and we celebrated advances that the governor led,” Savage-Sangwan said. “Which makes me all the more disappointed.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling and journalism.

Mérida, February 2, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodríguez met with US Chargé d’Affaires Laura Dogu in Miraflores Presidential Palace on Monday afternoon.

According to Communications Minister Miguel Pérez Pirela, the meeting took place “in the context of the working agenda” between Caracas and Washington. National Assembly President Jorge Rodríguez was likewise present.

Dogu confirmed the high-level audience with Venezuelan leaders via social media, saying that she reiterated Washington’s intended “three-phase plan” for the Caribbean nation.

“Today I met with Delcy Rodríguez and Jorge Rodríguez to reiterate the three phases that Secretary of State Marco Rubio has proposed for Venezuela: stabilization, economic recovery and reconciliation, and transition,” she said.

The US diplomat arrived in Caracas on Saturday, vowing that her team is “ready to work.” US State Department officials had visited the Venezuelan capital previously to assess conditions for the reopening of the US embassy.

Venezuelan Foreign Minister Yván Gil was the first high-ranking official to meet with Dogu, writing that the country’s authorities are looking to work on “issues of bilateral interest” with US counterparts. On Monday, Gil announced that Félix Plasencia will be Venezuela’s diplomatic representative in the US and will travel to Washington in the coming days.

This diplomatic rapprochement follows the January 3 US military strikes that killed dozens, while special operations teams kidnapped President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady and Deputy Cilia Flores.

In the weeks since, the Venezuelan government has emphasized its commitment to reestablish ties with the Trump administration, with Rodríguez pledging that she is not afraid to address “differences” with Washington through diplomatic channels.

For his part, US President Donald Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One that he maintains positive relationships with Venezuelan leaders, including the acting president.

Since the January 3 strikes, the White House has claimed control over Venezuelan crude sales, with proceeds reportedly deposited in US-administered accounts in Qatar before a portion is returned to the South American nation. Last week, the Venezuelan National Assembly approved an oil reform granting expanded benefits for private corporations that drew praise from US officials.

Caracas severed diplomatic ties with Washington in 2019 after the Trump administration recognized the self-proclaimed “interim government” headed by Juan Guaidó as the country’s legitimate authority.

A formal reestablishment of diplomatic relations hinges on the White House formally recognizing the Venezuelan acting government, a move that is also a necessary step before any process of debt renegotiation.

Rodríguez announces Amnesty Law, Helicoide closure

Venezuelan acting authorities have combined the restoration of ties with Washington with a fast-moving domestic legislative agenda.

On Friday, during the Supreme Court’s 2026 opening ceremony, Acting President Rodríguez announced a new “General Amnesty Law,” intended to cover acts of political violence that have occurred in Venezuela from 1999 to the present.

In her speech, Rodríguez explained that the law aims to “heal the wounds” resulting from political confrontation.

“I request the full cooperation of the Venezuelan parliament so that this law may contribute to healing the wounds left by confrontation, violence, and extremism,” she told attendees. “May it serve to redirect justice in our country and restore coexistence among Venezuelans.”

The legislative proposal will reportedly exclude those who have been convicted or are facing charges of homicide, drug trafficking, corruption, and serious human rights violations.

Alongside the new law proposal, Rodríguez announced the closure of the Helicoide detention center in Caracas, with plans to turn it into a recreational center. The facility, run by the SEBIN intelligence agency, has held multiple high-profile opposition figures accused of crimes including treason and terrorism.

Human rights organizations over the years have denounced grave human rights violations against Helicoide prisoners. Dozens of prisoners have been gradually released in recent days. 

Javier Tarazona, director of the NGO Fundaredes, was among those released during the weekend. He had been detained since 2021 on terrorism and treason charges. Luis Istúriz, a leader from the far-right Vente Venezuela party, also exited the Helicoide on Sunday following 18 months behind bars. He had begun a 30-year sentence on charges of terrorism and conspiracy.

Venezuelan Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello affirmed in a Monday press conference that the amnesty law is about promoting “coexistence and peace” and will see authorities review the cases of people who have “undoubtedly committed crimes.”

“Those who benefit from the amnesty will be given an opportunity to return to politics,” he said, adding that the amnesty project was a government initiative that had no influence from “NGOs and foreign governments.”

Edited and with additional reporting by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

DEVELOPING STORYDEVELOPING STORY,

Right-wing candidate from the governing PPSO leads presidential race with 53.01 percent of the vote, early results show.

The right-wing law-and-order candidate, Laura Fernandez, has taken a commanding lead in Costa Rica’s presidential election, according to early results.

With ballots from 31 percent of polling stations counted late on Sunday, Fernandez, of the governing Sovereign People Party (PPSO), had 53.01 percent of the vote, the results showed.

Alvaro Ramos of the centre-left National Liberation Party ‍was in second place ⁠with 30.05 percent, while former First Lady Claudia Dobles was in third place with 3.9 percent.

Fernandez ‌needs at ‌least 40 percent to win the election outright and avoid ‌a run-off on April 5.

The 39-year-old politician is the handpicked successor of incumbent President Rodrigo Chaves, and campaigned on continuing his tough security policies.

The historically peaceful Central American nation’s crime surge in recent years could be a deciding factor for many voters. Some fault Chaves’s presidency for failing to bring the rates down, but many see his confrontational style as the best chance for Costa Rica to tame the violence.

Fernandez was previously Chaves’s minister of national planning and economic policy and, more recently, his minister of the presidency.

Costa Ricans also voted for the 57-seat National Assembly. Chaves’s party is expected to make gains, but perhaps not achieve the supermajority he and Fernandez have called for, which would allow their party to choose Supreme Court magistrates, for example.

Twenty contenders were seeking the presidency, but no candidate other than Fernandez and Ramos reached 5 percent in the preliminary and partial results.

Whoever is nominated from the two Kurdish parties still needs the approval from the Shia and Sunni blocs in the parliament.

Iraq’s parliament has postponed the election for the country’s next president to allow for more consultations between the two Kurdish parties to agree on a candidate.

The Iraqi News Agency (INA) said the parliamentary vote scheduled for Tuesday was delayed at the request of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK).

Iraq follows a sectarian quota system, according to which the post of the prime minister goes to a Shia, the parliament’s speaker is a Sunni, and the largely ceremonial presidency goes to a Kurd.

Usually, in an agreement between the two main Kurdish parties, a PUK member holds the presidency. In contrast, the president and regional leader of the semi-autonomous Kurdish region are selected from the KDP.

However, in this instance, the KDP announced its own candidate, Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein, for the election.

Reporting from the capital, Baghdad, Al Jazeera’s Mahmoud Abdelwahed said whoever is nominated from the two Kurdish parties still needs the approval from the Shia and Sunni blocs in the parliament.

After the election, the new president will have 15 days to appoint a prime minister, who is widely expected to be the former leader, Nouri al-Maliki.

Al-Maliki, 75, has already served as Iraq’s prime minister for two terms from 2006 to 2014 before he quit under pressure from the United States. He is seen as being close to Iran.

On Saturday, the Coordination Framework, an alliance of Shia parties which holds a parliamentary majority, endorsed Maliki. The next day, the US Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned against a pro-Iranian government in Iraq.

An Iraqi source close to the Coordination Framework told the AFP news agency that Washington had conveyed to it that it “holds a negative view of previous governments led by former Prime Minister Maliki”.

In a letter, US representatives said that while the selection of the prime minister is an Iraqi decision, “the United States will make its own sovereign decisions regarding the next government in line with American interests”.

Another Iraqi source confirmed the letter, adding that the Shia alliance had still moved forward with its choice, confident that Maliki could allay Washington’s concerns.

Iraq has long been a proxy battleground between the US and Iran, with successive governments negotiating a delicate balance between the two foes.