seek

Rep. Julia Brownley, a Democrat who has represented swaths of Ventura and Los Angeles counties for more than a decade, announced Thursday that she would not seek reelection.

“Serving our community and our country has been the honor of my lifetime. Every step of this journey has been shaped by the people I represent, by their resilience, their determination, and their belief that government can and should work for the common good,” Brownley said, touting her efforts to expand access to healthcare, support veterans, fight climate change and other policy priorities, as well as constituent services. “We … never lost sight of the simple truth that public service is about showing up for people when they need help the most.”

Brownley, 73, did not say why she was choosing not to seek reelection, but she joins more than 40 other members of the U.S. House of Representatives who have announced they are not to running for their seats again in November. Other Californians not seeking reelection are Reps. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) and Eric Swalwell (D-Dublin), who is running for governor.

Brownley served on the Malibu-Santa Monica Unified School District board of education and in the state Assembly before successfully running for Congress in 2012. At the time, the district was nearly evenly divided between Democratic and Republican voters. But in years since, the district has grown more liberal.

In 2024, when the 26th Congressional District included Agoura Hills, Calabasas, Camarillo, Fillmore, Moorpark, Port Hueneme, Santa Paula, Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks, Oxnard, Westlake Village and a portion of San Buenaventura, the congresswoman won reelection with 56.6% of the vote over GOP businessman Michael Koslow, who received 43.4% of the ballots cast. At the time, the voter registration in the district was 42.5% Democratic, 29.6% Republican and 20.4% independent.

The district grew more Democratic after the passage of Proposition 50, the redrawing of congressional maps California voters approved in November to counter President Trump’s efforts to boost the number of Republicans elected to Congress from GOP-led states. Simi Valley was excised from the district, while Hidden Hills, parts of Palmdale, Lancaster and nearby high-desert areas were added to the district.

For Republican candidates had already announced plans to challenge Brownley this year, including Koslow. On Thursday, Assemblywoman Jacqui Irwin (D-Thousand Oaks) filed paperwork with the Federal Election Commission to run for Brownley’s seat hours after the congresswoman announced she would not seek reelection.

Jan. 8 (UPI) — President Donald Trump said he would ask Congress to approve a massive $500 billion increase in defense spending to fund his “Dream Military,” taking the Pentagon’s 2027 budget to a record $1.5 trillion.

In a post on his Truth Social platform on Wednesday, Trump said “these very troubled and dangerous times” required the 50% hike for the good of the United States and that he had reached his determination after protracted, thorny debate with his cabinet and lawmakers.

“This will allow us to build the ‘Dream Military’ that we have long been entitled to and, more importantly, that will keep us SAFE and SECURE, regardless of foe. If it weren’t for the tremendous numbers being produced by tariffs from other countries, many of which, in the past, have ‘ripped off’ the United States at levels never seen before, I would stay at the $1 trillion dollar number,” he wrote.

The extra funding would pay for new hardware headed by his “Golden Dome” air defense scheme and a new class of guided-missile battleship — items totally out of reach at current budget levels.

Trump said the income that tariffs generated, unthinkable in the past, meant the United States was easily able to afford the $1.5 trillion, while at the same time producing “an unparalleled Military Force,” paying down debt and granting a “substantial dividend” to moderate-income Americans.

That claim was disputed by the Committee for a Responsible Budget, which said tariffs would only generate around half of the estimated $5.8 trillion the higher defense budget would add to the national debt through 2035.

In a post on X, the watchdog said its preliminary calculations showed the spending increase would boost defense spending by $5 trillion, plus $800 billion in interest, while revenue flowing into the Treasury from higher tariffs over the same period would only run $2.5 trillion, or about $3 trillion with interest.

Tariffs are import levies paid by U.S. companies when they bring in goods and materials from other countries, a cost they either absorb or pass onto to their customers in the form of high prices. Overseas companies may also opt to absorb tariff costs to preserve their market in the United States.

Despite Congress having yet to pass a defense spending bill for the $1 trillion Trump is seeking for FY26, was hailed by some Republican lawmakers and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth who described it as “PEACE through STRENGTH.”

“President Trump is rebuilding our military — larger, stronger and more lethal than ever before,” Hegseth wrote in a post on X.

Raising the budget by such a significant amount will be tough, despite Trump convincing Congress to pass a reconciliation bill topping up this year’s budget by $150 billion, spread over five years, and support from some Republicans pushing for defense spending to rise to 5% of GDP, up from its current 3.5% level.

Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., an advocate of higher defense spending, called it “a good news story.”

“We think we need a permanent 4 % or better. That’s what it’s gonna take to build our Navy, our Air Force, our ICBMs, our bombers, and take care of our troops,” said the retired U.S. Air Force Brigadier-General.

Jan. 2 (Asia Today) — South Korean President Lee Jae-myung will meet Chinese President Xi Jinping on Monday during a four-day visit to China aimed at advancing talks on Korean Peninsula peace, economic cooperation and issues including restrictions on Korean cultural content in China, the presidential office said Friday.

National Security Office Director Wi Sung-lac told a briefing at the Blue House that Lee will travel to China from Sunday through Wednesday at Xi’s invitation, visiting Beijing and Shanghai.

Wi said the summit on Monday will include talks, a signing ceremony for nearly 10 memorandums of understanding and a state banquet. He said the main agenda will center on peace and denuclearization on the Korean Peninsula.

“People’s livelihoods and peace cannot be separated,” Wi said, adding that both countries share an interest in peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in Northeast Asia. He said Seoul plans to strengthen strategic communication with Beijing and urge China to play a constructive role in helping address Korean Peninsula issues.

Wi said the two sides will also seek progress on what South Korea calls China’s restrictions on Korean cultural content. He said China’s official position is that no such ban exists but that South Korea sees it differently and will pursue broader consensus on cultural exchanges.

Wi said Lee’s team will also raise concerns about Chinese structures in the West Sea, also known as the Yellow Sea. He said the issue was discussed during a South Korea-China summit in Gyeongju in November and working-level consultations have continued.

A K-pop concert that had been discussed in connection with the trip is unlikely to take place this time, Wi said.

Lee will attend a South Korea-China business forum on Monday, the presidential office said. On Tuesday, he is scheduled to have lunch with Chinese Premier Li Qiang and meet Zhao Leji, the chairman of China’s national legislature.

On Wednesday, Lee plans to visit the former Shanghai headquarters of the Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea. Wi said the visit will mark the 150th anniversary of independence activist Kim Gu’s birth and the 100th anniversary of the Shanghai provisional government building, and is intended to honor the independence movement and the countries’ shared historical experience.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

SEOUL Dec. 31 (UPI) — Against a backdrop of North Korea’s accelerating nuclear program and a fracturing geopolitical landscape, senior military officials and lawmakers from the United States and South Korea gathered in Seoul earlier this week to seek a fundamental redesign of their decades-old military partnership.

The second annual ROK-U.S. Combined Policy Forum, held at the Royal Park Convention, arrived at what participants described as a historical inflection point. As the security environment shifts from traditional border defense to a complex web of regional threats, the discussion centered on transitioning the alliance into a modern, multi-domain force.

“Korea is not simply responding to threats on the peninsula,” Gen. Xavier T. Brunson, commander of the ROK-U.S. Combined Forces Command, said in a keynote address.

He characterized the current era as a “pivotal moment” and stressed that alliance modernization “should be more than a slogan.”

Brunson noted that South Korea now sits at the crossroads of regional dynamics that shape the balance of power across Northeast Asia.

The forum, attended by influential figures including Rep. Yoo Yong-won of the National Assembly’s Defense Committee, reflected a growing urgency to adapt. While the alliance remains anchored by 28,500 U.S. troops, the conversation shifted toward two pressing themes: the expansion of South Korea’s operational role and the credibility of integrated deterrence.

A primary focus was the modernization of the command framework. Experts proposed integrating South Korean forces more deeply into the combined defense system, reflecting Seoul’s desire for a role that matches its military sophistication. This shift is seen as a response to demands for more visible burden-sharing and strategic autonomy.

The afternoon sessions turned to the reality of North Korea’s nuclear advancements. With Pyongyang officially designating the South as its “primary foe,” speakers underscored the need for closer integration of nuclear consultation mechanisms. The goal is to move beyond abstract promises toward a structural reform that addresses “multi-theater” challenges.

As the forum concluded, the underlying message was clear: While the alliance remains the bedrock of security, the status quo is no longer sufficient. Under the administration of Lee Jae Myung, the partnership is attempting to bridge the gap between a 70-year-old treaty and the high-tech, nuclear-charged reality of the 21st century.

The Bush Administration’s long-heralded gag order–a regulation that prevents federally funded family planning centers from providing abortion counseling–went into effect Thursday, leaving a bureaucratic ball of confusion for California clinics leading a nationwide fight to thwart the rule.

The state’s 220 clinics, which receive $12 million a year in federal family planning funds, have implemented an elaborate bookkeeping plan that takes advantage of state law, which contradicts the federal regulation by mandating that clinics suggest abortion as an option for pregnant women.

Under the plan, staff members whose salaries are paid with state or private money will continue to offer the counseling while those who are paid by the federal government will not.

Barbara Jackson, director of public affairs for Planned Parenthood of Orange and San Bernardino counties, said her organization simply made adjustments to use state money for pregnancy testing and options counseling and to redirect federal money for approved services. “We’re not changing our service one iota,” Jackson said Thursday. “We’re providing the same level of care for our patients that we always have and always will.

“We had made the decision that we could not deny our patients information, and we’ve not renegged on that commitment to our patients. We’ve simply been practical and decided that if we can’t use federal money for that service, we’ll use other money for that service.”

At Planned Parenthood’s five Orange County clinics Thursday, patients found signs explaining that federal money was not sudisidizing pregnancy counseling or testing. Those patients who received those services signed release forms stating that they understood that their care was funded by the state, not the federal government.

“The only thing different is simply making it clear to our patients, to anyone that is concerned about this issue, that these particular services are not funded by federal dollars,” Jackson said.

Last year, Planned Parenthood of Orange and San Bernardino counties received $122,000 in Title 10 federal funds–those that cannot now be used for pregnancy testing and counseling. That is only about 3.7% of the program’s $3.3-million budget, which made it somewhat simple to divert the funds from the prohibited activities, Jackson said. Because California has a state family planning office that funds clinics, the ruling “has a much greater impact in other parts of the country.”

But even in Southern California, some clinic’s found Thursday that while the fund-diversion plan sounded good in theory, it was not easy in practice–and could put the clinics on shaky legal ground.

At the T.H.E. Clinic for Women in Los Angeles’ Crenshaw district–where 2,500 largely poor, mostly minority women come each year for family planning services–nurse practitioners must account for every hour of their time and who is paying for it.

If a woman tests positive for pregnancy in the morning, when the nurses are being paid with state funds, she will receive counseling and pamphlets outlining her options–carrying the baby to term and raising it, placing the child up for adoption or in a foster home, or terminating the pregnancy.

But if a patient visits in the afternoon, when the nurses’ salaries are drawn from federal money, any discussion of abortion will be taboo and the woman will be told euphemistically to come back another time if she wants to talk about further options.

Across the nation, many family planning centers are following California’s lead, said Judith DeSarno, executive director of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Assn., which represents 90% of the nation’s 4,000 federally funded family planning clinics. “Everyone is trying a variation of the California theme,” she said.

The new system was put to the test Thursday morning at T.H.E. Clinic for Women, when nursing director Marilyn Norwood received a visit from a 21-year-old college student who is 10 weeks pregnant and wanted information about abortion. During the session, Norwood told the young woman–who had not heard of the gag order–that she would have been out of luck if she had arrived an hour later. Norwood found the encounter frustrating–and infuriating.

“I am angry,” said the bespectacled, 61-year-old nurse practitioner who has worked at the clinic for 18 years. “Now, (in the afternoons) all of a sudden I have to sit there like I have tape across my mouth?”

To Sylvia Drew Ivie, the clinic’s executive director, the plan is “a real bureaucratic nightmare. . . . We have never before had to account for time spent on what you are permitted to say and what you are not permitted to say.”

But the real hardship, Ivie said, will be on patients, many of whom have to take public transportation to the clinic and have difficulty coming for visits–let alone coming back a second time at a precise hour for counseling that was once available any time.

In rural Tulare County, Family Planning Program Inc. serves 7,000 patients each year in its three clinics. Executive Director Kay Truesdale said the program’s one full-time bookkeeper must design a system for keeping track of which money is spent on what. Truesdale is worried that the clinics will be forced to spend more on administration, which could mean a cutback in other services.

“It’s going to be difficult. We are a very small agency and it’s going to add a burden to our clinic. . . . Each layer of (bureaucracy) adds to the cost of doing business and that takes away from the money that we can use to see patients, no matter how you slice it.”

The gag order, initiated by President Ronald Reagan in 1988, goes into effect amid a flurry of activity in Washington that has opponents hoping the regulation will not remain in effect for long. The Senate on Thursday overrode President Bush’s veto of a bill that would have nullified the regulation, although the House is expected to sustain the veto.

Meanwhile, two legal challenges are pending. A federal judge in Washington may rule today on a request brought by the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Assn. for an injunction to delay implementation of the rule. And an appeals court hearing is scheduled Oct. 14 in another lawsuit, also brought by that group.

In the interim, DeSarno said, her organization is concerned that the government could crack down on California and other states that are using creative maneuvers to get around the rule, particularly because the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has not given explicit approval to their methods. Health and Human Services officials have only said that the California plan is under review.

“There are severe federal penalties if you say you are going to comply with regulations and then you don’t,” DeSarno said. “It’s considered fraud. We now don’t know–are we complying or are we not complying? People are being put at great risk. The California clinics may be put at great risk.”

California clinic administrators have been outspoken opponents of the abortion gag rules. Officials of the California Family Planning Council said more than a year ago that the clinics would forfeit federal assistance rather than deny women full discussion of their options. Instead, the clinics decided to try the new plan–a decision that was encouraged by a favorable court ruling in one of the lawsuits and wavering by the federal government on the precise scope of the regulations.

Sima Michaels, associate director of the council, said the organization has instructed its member clinics to post signs informing clients that federal funds are not being used for pregnancy counseling. In addition, she said, patients are being asked to sign consent forms stating that they understand that federal money is not being used for the services.

“So far,” she said, “we have not heard that our plan is not acceptable. We are complying with the gag rule. We’re just being creative about it.”

Times staff writer Jodi Wilgoren contributed to this story.

DIVISIVE ISSUE: Senate votes to override Bush abortion counseling veto. A27

The PGMOL, the body responsible for refereeing all Premier League matches, has been approached for comment.

Newcastle were 2-1 up at the time, but Chelsea forward Joao Pedro equalised midway through the second half after a slip by Malick Thiaw.

No team have thrown away more points – 13 – from winning positions in the Premier League this season than Newcastle.

They are 11th in the table, have won only once away from home and travel to Manchester United on 26 December.

“My glass is very much half full,” said Howe. “I know everyone else might have a different opinion, but I feel we’re improving.

“We have been moving in the right direction, but we have got lots of work to do to be the team that we ultimately want to be and that’s consistently winning.

“That’s what’s eluded us this season – the ability to put winning runs together, which is the defining thing we need to do.”

Clipper Kris Dunn grabs Laker Maxi Kleber ‘s jersey in front of a ref Saturday at the Intuit Dome.

(Ronald Martinez / Getty Images)

The Lakers have been assessed five technical fouls in the last two games because of conduct with officials as frustration over inconsistent calls is starting to boil over. After Doncic, Jaxson Hayes and Marcus Smart were all given technical fouls in the third quarter of Thursday’s win over Utah, Doncic and Smart were T’ed up again Saturday in the first and third quarters, respectively.

“I think if any coach, any player, what we ask for is consistency,” Redick said. “And that’s not to single any official out or any crew out, it’s not about that. We need to know what it is night to night.”

Smart also drew a technical foul against Utah after attempting to talk to an official at halftime. When Smart walked away frustrated, he raised his middle finger toward the official, a gesture that got him fined $35,000 Saturday, the NBA announced.

“Sometimes you got to take the hit to get your point across,” Smart said Saturday.

Redick expressed additional frustration with the lack of transparency in the replay system and murky communication with officials. He said he has not received any feedback when he requests it and the distinction between plays that can and can’t be challenged appears to change every night.

The lack of communication has been frustrating for players as well, Smart said, who met with referees before the Utah game as a team captain, but still had his questions dismissed.

“The captain should be able to come talk to them,” Smart said. “They still don’t want to hear it. So control what you can control. They don’t want to talk, you know, you try and you move on. But it definitely is frustrating when you pour your heart out to this game and the feedback is literally waving you off, telling you to get out your face, and then giving you a tech because you’re asking a simple question.”

ALBANY, N.Y. — Rep. Elise Stefanik announced Friday that she is suspending her campaign for New York governor and will not seek reelection to Congress, bowing out of the race in a surprise statement that said “it is not an effective use of our time” to stay in what was expected to be a bruising Republican primary.

Stefanik, a Republican ally of President Trump, said in a post on X that she was confident of her chances in the primary against Bruce Blakeman, a Republican county official in New York City’s suburbs. But she said she wanted to spend more time with her young son and family.

“I have thought deeply about this and I know that as a mother, I will feel profound regret if I don’t further focus on my young son’s safety, growth, and happiness — particularly at his tender age,” she said.

Stefanik has been an intense critic of incumbent Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul, who is also seeking reelection but faces a primary challenge from her own lieutenant governor, Antonio Delgado.

The announcement marks an abrupt end, at least for now, for a once-promising career for Stefanik. She was the youngest woman ever elected to Congress when she won her first campaign in 2014 at just 30 years old, representing a new generation of Republicans making inroads in Washington. She ultimately rose to her party’s leadership in the House when she became the chair of the House Republican Conference in 2021.

First viewed as a moderate when she came to Washington, Stefanik became far more conservative as Trump began to dominate the party. Once someone who refused to say Trump’s name, she became one of his top defenders during his first impeachment inquiry. She would go on to vote against certifying the 2020 election results, even after a violent mob stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6.

Stefanik was expected to have a bitter Republican primary against Blakeman, who also counts himself as an ally of Trump. The president had so far seemed keen on avoiding picking a side in the race, telling reporters recently: “He’s great, and she’s great. They’re both great people.”

Stefanik’s decision follows a clash with Speaker Mike Johnson, whom she accused of lying before embarking on a series of media interviews criticizing him. In one with the Wall Street Journal, she called Johnson a “political novice” and said he wouldn’t be reelected speaker if the vote were held today.

The tumultuous early December episode appeared to cool when Johnson said he and Stefanik had a “great talk.”

“I called her and I said, ‘Why wouldn’t you just come to me, you know?’” Johnson said. “So we had some intense fellowship about that.”

Still, Stefanik, the chairwoman of the House Republican leadership, has not fully walked back her criticisms. A Dec. 2 social media post remains online in which, after a provision she championed was omitted from a defense authorization bill, Stefanik accused Johnson of falsely claiming he was unaware of it, calling it “more lies from the Speaker.”

State Republican Chairman Ed Cox said the party respected Stefanik’s decision and thanked her for her efforts.

“Bruce Blakeman has my endorsement and I urge our State Committee and party leaders to join me,” Cox said in a prepared statement. “Bruce is a fighter who has proven he knows how to win in difficult political terrain.”

Izaguirre writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Steven Sloan and Joey Cappelletti contributed from Washington.

Dec. 17 (UPI) — Fears of risks to children’s mental health and development have two U.S. senators sounding an alarm and seeking information on toys that use artificial intelligence.

Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., jointly wrote a letter sent to executives in charge of Mattel, Little Learners Toys, Miko, FoloToy, Curio Interactive and Kayi Robot to obtain information on testing of their respective AI-powered toys, NBC News reported.

“These AI toys — specifically those powered by chatbots embedded in everyday children’s toys like plushies, dolls, and other beloved toys — pose risks to children’s healthy development,” they said in the letter signed on Tuesday.

“While AI has incredible potential to benefit children with learning and accessibility, experts have raised concerns about AI toys and the lack of research that has been conducted to understand the full effect of these products on our kids.”

The senators said many AI toys do not cultivate interactive play and instead expose kids to “inappropriate content, privacy risks and manipulative engagement tactics.”

“These aren’t theoretical worst-case scenarios,” Blackburn and Blumenthal said. “They are documented failures uncovered through real-world testing, and they must be addressed.”

The senators said many of the toys use the same AI systems that are dangerous for older children and teens, but are included in toys that are marketed for children and infants.

Chatbots that simulate human conversations with children are especially problematic, the senators said.

“These chatbots have encouraged children to commit self-harm and suicide, and now your company is pushing them on the youngest children who have the least ability to recognize this danger,” Blumenthal and Blackburn wrote.

By way of an example, they said one teddy bear toy responded to a researcher’s question regarding “kink,” and the toy detailed a variety of sexual situations, including between adults and children.

The same toy also provided instructions on how to light a match when asked, they said.

“It is unconscionable that these products would be marketed to children, and these reports raise serious questions about the lack of child safety research conducted on these toys,” Blackburn and Blumenthal said.

The senators also aired their concerns about the data colleed by AI-powered toys and the potential for using that data to design addictive toys for children.

They likened it to social media addiction among youth and asked the respective toy company executives to explain what, if any, safeguards are used to prevent inappropriate conversations and if independent testing is done by third parties.

Blumenthal and Blackburn also want to know if the toy manufacturers share data collected by AI-powered toys with third parties.

Officials for Curio Interactive said their “top priority” is children’s safety when contacted by The Hill.

“Our guardrails are meticulously designed to protect kids, and our toys can only be used with parent permission,” they responded.

“We encourage parents to monitor conversations, track insights, and choose the controls that work best for their family on the Curio: Interactive Toys app,” they explained.

“We work closely with KidSAFE and maintain strict compliance with COPPA and other child-privacy laws.”