state

Germany’s AfD wins in key state: Is far-right on cusp of national rule? | Elections News

For the first time since World War II, a far-right party is within reach of power at state level in Germany, after coming first in Saxony-Anhalt on Sunday.

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) won 44 percent of the vote, stopping short of an overall majority but making clear its wide political significance.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

On election night, AfD’s leader in the state called on other political groups to cooperate. “As a democrat, I will reach out to all those who wish to work with us to bring about a fundamental political turnaround,” Ulrich Siegmund said.

Yet, forming a government will prove difficult. The AfD has been classified as “far-right extremist” by the domestic intelligence agency and other political groups remain wary of striking an alliance.

The AfD has dismissed accusations of extremism and mainstream parties have been unable to halt its surge in the polls over recent months. Latest polling indicates the party, which stands for strong restrictions on immigration, restoring ties with Russia, cutting support to Ukraine and quitting the euro, is Germany’s most popular at national level.

The Saxony-Anhalt election could be a harbinger of a historic return of the far-right in the 2029 national election, when forecasts say the AfD stands a realistic chance of finishing first.

What happened in Saxony-Anhalt?

Siegmund, the charismatic 35-year-old who attracted thousands to his campaign rallies, said AfD “made history”.

“The people have made it absolutely clear that they finally want political change and, above all, they have shown that they want it with ⁠us,” he told supporters.

The AfD achieved its best-ever election result in Saxony-Anhalt with 44 percent of the vote, leaving all other parties far behind. The incumbent centre-right Christian Democrats (CDU), led by Chancellor Friedrich Merz, scored less than half of that share with 17 percent.

The AfD is projected to gain 39 of the 83 seats in the state parliament in Magdeburg, leaving it three short of the 42 needed for an absolute majority.

That means the party must find allies, but all other mainstream parties refuse to work with the far-right, a strategy of non-cooperation known as the “firewall”. The AfD has so far never participated in a governing coalition in Germany’s 16 states nor in its federal government.

While he now appears willing to strike deals with other parties to come to power, previously Siegmund signalled unwillingness to find middle ground with other political groups. Leading up to the vote, he stated that he was only interested in governing alone to bring about fundamental political change in Germany.

How did AfD fare in recent elections?

The election takes the AfD one step closer to advancing its agenda, while also reflecting the growing unpopularity of Germany’s ruling coalition.

In Saxony-Anhalt, the party more than doubled its vote share — from 21 percent in the last election. By contrast, the CDU’s vote halved from 37 percent to 17 percent, its worst result ever in the east-central German state.

Federal elections last year similarly resulted in a landmark performance by the AfD, which emerged as the largest opposition faction in the Bundestag, the German federal parliament in Berlin. The party came second with 21 percent of the vote, securing its highest-ever showing.

In state elections in Baden-Wurttemberg and Rhineland-Palatinate earlier this year too, the AfD more than doubled its seats — though it still finished third. In 2024, the AfD emerged victorious in the Thuringia state election and second in the Brandenburg state election — both were firsts for the party.

The AfD’s electoral gains in Saxony-Anhalt mirror growing dissatisfaction among voters — especially in the former East Germany — about the stagnant economy, high unemployment and domestic security, which the party largely pins on immigration.

What challenges lie ahead for AfD?

Since its formation in 2013, the AfD has been embroiled in various scandals and has faced major controversies, including alleged foreign espionage links, secret deportation plans and internal nepotism.

The party went from a fringe Eurosceptic group to the country’s most powerful opposition force in little more than a decade, becoming too extreme even for the European Parliament’s far-right Identity & Democracy group. It kicked the party out in May 2024 after lead AfD candidate Maximilian Krah stated that not everyone in the SS – Adolf Hitler’s infamous Nazi paramilitary organisation – was a criminal.

Krah has also been under investigation by German prosecutors for alleged illegal payments, bribery and money laundering linked to China and Russia. The German parliament last year decided to lift the far-right legislator’s immunity to help investigators.

AfD politicians have also come under fire for employing family members, including in Saxony-Anhalt, where several parliamentarians are reported to have employed relatives.

Bundestag President, Julia Klockner, banned seven AfD employees from entering the German parliament over security concerns, after they failed internal background reliability checks due to their ties to right-wing extremist networks and past criminal convictions.

Senior AfD figures also faced a backlash for attending a secretive meeting to discuss mass deportation plans for people with a migration background.

What are the AfD’s prospects for the national election in 2029?

Pollsters are unanimous in forecasting the AfD as the largest party in Germany in the next national election in 2029, with around 28 percent of the vote.

That would mark a major transformation in the German political landscape from 2025, when the CDU and its ally the Christian Social Union together won 28.5 percent of the vote.

Yet even that outcome would not necessarily give AfD the ability to govern. If other parties maintain a “firewall” policy, that could prevent the far-right party from forming a coalition government.

Still, the Saxony-Anhalt election has been received by some politicians as a call for change. “Politics begins with considering reality,” Cem Ozdemir, head of government in the southwestern state of Baden-Wurttemberg and a member of the Green Party, wrote on X.

“That means the AfD is the election winner in Saxony-Anhalt. And that must mean for all democratic forces that nothing can remain as it is, and we must fundamentally reconsider our politics and our political style.”

Source link

China injects over €45 billion into state banks and insurers as growth slows

Beijing has reached for its chequebook.


ADVERTISEMENT


ADVERTISEMENT

The Chinese finance ministry is advancing a 360 billion yuan (€46.1bn) package to businesses, announced on Sunday through statements from the companies involved and reported by state news agency Xinhua, making it one of the larger interventions in China’s financial system this year as growth slows.

The Chinese banks take the bulk of it, roughly 290 billion yuan (€37.2bn), intended to preserve their capacity to keep lending as Beijing presses them to increase support for economic activity.

Xinhua reported the injection would strengthen the institutions’ “sound operating capabilities, risk resistance capabilities and ability to serve the real economy.”

The Agricultural Bank of China is pursuing a private placement of A-shares worth up to 160 billion yuan (€20.5bn) and the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China up to 100 billion yuan (€12.8bn), with the finance ministry among the investors.

Unusually, so is the China National Tobacco Corporation, which operates the state tobacco monopoly and the Export-Import Bank of China which will receive 30 billion yuan (€3.85bn).

Insurers account for the remaining 70 billion yuan (€9bn).

China Life Insurance Group, the country’s largest life insurer, gets 35 billion yuan (€4.5bn) and China Taiping Insurance Group 7 billion yuan (€900mn).

The People’s Insurance Company of China plans to raise up to 15 billion yuan (€1.9bn) through a private placement to the ministry, China Export and Credit Insurance Corporation receives 10 billion yuan (€1.28bn), and China Reinsurance Group is raising 3 billion yuan (€385mn).

Insurers have been squeezed from two directions as years of low interest rates have eroded investment returns, while the government has directed them to put money into Chinese equities.

The currency has been moving in the same direction.

The Chinese yuan reached its strongest level against the US dollar since January 2023 on Monday, trading at around $0.149, a firmer exchange rate that also happens to blunt a long-standing American complaint about Chinese currency management, weeks before talks in Washington.

Beijing’s busy month

The capital injection is not the only move Beijing is making this month.

Chinese President Xi Jinping is reportedly preparing to bring a large delegation of business executives to his Washington visit on 24 September, according to sources cited by news agencies.

It would be a notable departure from customary practice.

Xi rarely travels with corporate leaders, many of whom lost standing after the regulatory crackdowns on technology, education and property that began in 2020, and the last comparable delegation accompanied him to the US more than a decade ago, in 2015.

Washington’s response has also been curious.

“The White House is not tracking a Chinese CEO delegation,” a US official said, without explaining what tracking meant in this context, leaving the statement short of either confirmation or denial.

The gesture would be reciprocal in any case.

When US President Donald Trump visited Beijing in May, he brought a roster of American CEOs including Elon Musk, Tim Cook and Jensen Huang. Bringing Chinese counterparts to Washington would signal a willingness to invest and trade with the US, while handing the White House potential economic wins before November’s midterm elections.

Expectations for the summit itself remain modest, with the two sides still divided over which products should count as non-sensitive under trade arrangements.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng are due to meet in early September to work on deliverables.

Source link

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

Lindsay Whitehurst and Gary Fields

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Whitehurst and Fields write for the Associated Press.

Source link

Turning Point lays groundwork to shape GOP presidential race in 2028

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But others have eagerly welcomed the organization to the state.

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

Early state investments could benefit Vance

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

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

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

“It’s a natural fit,” he said.

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

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

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

Looking to grow the grassroots

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Source link

Backlash over data centers hits California, and the midterms

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Art Center building in Hanford.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Priest Luke Martinez expresses concerns during the community meeting .

Priest Luke Martinez expresses concerns during the community meeting .

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

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

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

Increasing influence

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Political winds

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Source link

Election integrity is on the November ballot in key states

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Let’s hope we don’t find out.

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

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

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

FILE - Tina Peters, former Mesa County, Colo.

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

(Scott Crabtree / Associated Press)

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

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

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

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

Former Nevada Assemblyman Jim Marchant

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

(Ricardo Torres-Cortez / Associated Press)

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

Um…

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

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

That’s all you need to know, Wisconsin.

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

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

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

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

Source link

State Puts New Edge on Immigration Debate : Border: Residents increasingly see illegal influx as a source of California’s woes. Pressure for action grows.

America, the Land of Immigrants, has always been ambivalent about just what that mantle should mean, but that ambivalence has taken on an edge. The middle ground has shifted, decidedly to the right.

And California, characteristically, is ahead of the trend.

Now, when liberal Sen. Barbara Boxer suggests that National Guard troops be stationed along the southern border, only immigrant-rights activists are publicly aghast. When Gov. Pete Wilson says the Constitution should be changed to deny citizenship to U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants, a Field poll shows that half of all Californians like the idea.

“This is a state of siege in California,” says an observer from Washington, immigration expert Demetrios Papademetriou of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

“There is an enormous bombardment out there. There is always something new about immigration. One’s senses get bombarded every day, which is the worst possible moment for trying to make fundamental decisions regarding immigration. I am delighted that they will be made in Washington, rather than California.”

Yet California is where the Immigration and Naturalization Service estimates 52% of all illegal immigrants live, where dueling studies constantly argue the benefits and costs of the immigrant mix, and where, increasingly, many see an immigration apocalypse born of neglect.

Even the membership of the Sierra Club is in the midst of an emotional debate about whether to take a public stand on the hot button topic of the day.

“It’s not as simple as clean air, or like pollution, where less is better,” said Executive Director Carl Pope.

But millions of other Americans seem to have made up their minds. The polls say most Americans believe illegal immigration is out of control, that the country has too many immigrants, illegal or otherwise, and that this is very bad news for the economy and for our national quality of life.

Every day, Americans are clamoring that something should be done. So everyone from the President of the United States to the president of the local homeowners association is offering suggestions.

Hire more Border Patrol agents and get them equipment that works. Issue tamper-proof identity cards. End taxpayer-funded medical care and schooling for anyone in the country illegally. Seize the assets of employers who hire illegal immigrants. And get serious, finally, about welfare fraud. The list goes on.

“Under bold, centrist political leadership, California could have been avoided,” said Dan Stein, executive director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, the grandfather of a growing family of groups calling for a moratorium on immigration.

“What is happening in California is the direct result of the isolated and removed nature of immigration policy decisions in Washington.”

Many call this brouhaha a backlash against immigrants, scapegoating during an economic recession and a shortsighted repudiation of the principles that made America great.

Others call it unadorned common sense.

“If you set your table for five people in your home and then 15 people show up unexpectedly, you aren’t prepared, and you’ve got problems,” said Fred Vines, a retired state policeman who lives with his wife, a teacher, on Los Angeles’ Westside.

“We’re billions in the hole,” he said. “This has never happened before. It’s got to be overpopulation. You’ve got people coming here who shouldn’t be here.

“Put up a Berlin Wall!” cried Vines, an African-American who denies that racism has anything to do with his get-tough stand. He says that any fool can see it: Immigration is bringing this country down.

*

The organizers of this night meeting of Citizens for Action Now, an 18-month-old immigration reform group in Orange County, have called for more folding chairs to accommodate an overflow crowd of about 60 mostly middle-aged, mostly white citizens or legal immigrants.

Barbara Coe, a police records clerk and co-director of the group, has made a point of emphasizing the legal immigrant component to the newcomers in the room.

It is not immigrants the group is against, she says, but illegal immigrants. She stressed that racism has no place here.

“We decided that the only way we are literally going to save our heritage is to put the focus on the illegal alien problem,” she said.

Early arrivals at the meeting talk among themselves. A middle-aged woman tells of the “marauders” who take over the streets at night. A man who lives and works in Santa Ana, the county seat that is now 70% Latino, says of the city: “It’s gone! It’s gone!”

Before everyone stands to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, sheets of blue cards are passed around. Citizens for Action Now, part of the 15-member California Coalition for Immigration Reform, asks its members to carry the cards with them and leave them in businesses such as restaurants, “where it seems fairly apparent” that illegal immigrants are employed.

“Stop the Invasion! Close our Borders NOW! Deny benefits to ILLEGAL ALIENS NOW! Defeat GATT/NAFTA NOW!” read the cards, which leave a space for the sender’s name and address.

The evening’s guest speaker, William E. Dannemeyer, the former Orange County congressman considering another U.S. Senate bid, arrives to detail his controversial, and unsuccessful, legislative efforts to stem the immigrant flow.

But during the question and answer session after his remarks, members of Citizens for Action Now intimate that Dannemeyer, who was one of the most conservative lawmakers on Capitol Hill, hadn’t been tough enough.

One woman told Dannemeyer: “I feel desperate that the battle is lost.” Another man detailed his inspection of Israel’s border defense system, praising that country’s swift actions to thwart enemy incursions.

“If we can go to the moon, are you going to tell me we don’t have the technology to do what this little country Israel can? That’s baloney!”

The room erupts in applause.

*

Immigrant rights groups say they have heard such sentiments before, only they are hardly blase.

They are afraid that the angry, frustrated public mood might translate into laws that will codify discrimination and divert attention from more onerous economic problems in favor of an easy target: the illegal immigrant without a vote. They warn of a rise in hate crimes.

“We in the immigrant rights community are on the defensive right now,” concedes Roberto Lovato, who heads the Central American Refugee Center in Los Angeles. “We are not being sought out for solutions.”

At a recent news conference in Downtown Los Angeles, Latino community leaders displayed enlarged copies of stories that appeared in the Los Angeles Times from the 1930s to the present. The idea was to trigger a public deja vu .

“Ousting of Aliens Will Be Speeded,” read a headline from 1931. “Government Maps War on Wetbacks,” said another from 1954, and in 1971: “Illegal Alien Growing Peril to U.S. Worker.”

The last offering, “Wilson Urges Stiff Penalties to Deter Illegal Immigrants,” was from the week before.

“We know well in our community that this is a historical cycle,” says Arturo Vargas, vice president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

Indeed, during the 19th Century, the state Legislature imposed special taxes on Mexican miners, and the state’s Workingmen’s Party rallied around the slogan, “The Chinese Must Go.” During the Great Depression, and again in 1954, hundreds of thousands of Mexicans were sent home.

Yet, cyclical or not, the country’s anti-immigrant mood seems unlikely to cool on its own. Based on a mix of fact, myth and fear, feelings run deep. Ambivalence–and contradictions–thread through it all.

The restaurant busboy might be admired for his willingness to work hard for little pay. But the faceless mass of illegal immigrants is threatening our way of life.

Although it is true that, as a percentage of the population, immigration levels today are a third of what they were during the peak years of 1900-20, the numbers are about the same. And those numbers–about 10 million legal and 3 million to 5 million illegal immigrants over the past decade–seem huge.

This is especially true during economic hard times, or perhaps, as immigrant rights group suggest, when people consider who the new immigrants are. Unlike the immigration boom at the turn of the century, more than 90% of the latest immigrant tide comes from the Third World.

Bottom line: The United States takes in more immigrants than the rest of the world combined. And people here are wondering out loud if America has not done enough.

Consider this reaction from homemaker and mother Ellie Kiefer, who recently moved from her Burbank home of 11 years to Simi Valley: “They are just letting them come in. If it was something very positive, starting nice businesses, or really trying or something, that might be different.

“But the crime is getting worse, there are more gangs. The killings. It’s ridiculous. That’s one of the reasons I’m so sick of it.”

Or this from a middle-aged African-American woman who works as a teaching assistant in the Los Angeles Unified School District: “We have to go back to school to speak their language. That’s not fair. And I have to pay for it out of my own pocket. If you are born here in the United States, and you speak English, you have to adjust to them. I don’t think that’s fair.”

Lucy Bermudez, a Philippine-born nurse who just left heavily immigrant Panorama City for Ventura County, says: “I waited for 15 years to become a citizen. It’s unfair of the illegal ones. They are just popping in.”

For Spanish-speaking shopkeeper Maria Elba Miranda, who emigrated illegally from El Salvador 13 years ago, the burning issue is security, and fear. “I’ve noticed a change in the type of people coming, even from my own country,” she said.

“There are just too many people here. . . . I remember when I came, I was really scared, timid, just looking for work, but now they come here looking for trouble.”

On the same Los Angeles street where Miranda lives and works, immigrants openly hawk fake green cards for $50. If you want a phony Social Security card, they can arrange that too. And to the untrained eye, all the documents look good.

“What we do is help people work, not like those guys, they’re the ones who should be deported,” says a 17-year-old nicknamed Orejas, or Ears, who arrived illegally from Mexico six months ago.

Orejas points across the street at the “bad immigrants” to distinguish himself and his friends from their ilk. Go to them, he says, if you want to buy drugs.

*

The INS estimates, conservatively, that about 3.2 million illegal immigrants now live in the United States. Most of these migrants–up to 70% of them from Mexico–arrived after the estimated 3.7 million others who have taken advantage of the amnesty provision of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act.

Although that law is widely acknowledged to have ended life in the shadows for many immigrants, it has failed to stop the illegal flow. To wit: the control part of the act has become a joke:

Thousands of mandated Border Patrol jobs remain unfilled. Employer sanctions are rarely enforced. And states such as California complain bitterly that Washington does not reimburse them for services to illegal immigrants whose entry the federal government should have blocked.

Such a situation has led many to believe that no sooner do illegal immigrants cross the border than they end up on the dole. In fact, undocumented immigrants are legally ineligible for almost all public benefits other than maternity and emergency medical care under Medi-Cal or Medicaid, and some prenatal care.

But because of the thriving market in counterfeit documents, fraud appears to be widespread.

Moreover, U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants are also entitled to all citizenship benefits, such as the fast-growing Aid to Families With Dependent Children program, and like foreign-born children, free education through the 12th grade.

And beyond the costs vs. revenue debate that is the subject of academic debate, residents of areas with large immigrant populations say they feel the impact of the newcomers in more personal ways.

An African-American police officer married to a Mexican immigrant says the couple’s two children are enrolled in a Los Angeles public school that is 90% Latino, “so my kids have a hard time.”

“The teachers are spending all this time on the Spanish,” he said. “So it slows down my kids. So I’m moving mine to a private school.”

Puerto Rican Miguel Rodriguez, 35, of Carson recently recovered from a car accident and went back to reclaim his welding job.

“They told me they didn’t have anything,” he said. “They hired a couple of guys, Latinos who don’t speak any English, who will take less. They’re making $8 an hour. I was making $13. . . . It kind of pisses me off.”

And from Lanie Wong, 65, a mother of five grown children and a daughter of Chinese immigrants, there is this: “It bothers me that the illegals think they can outsmart our system. They brag. It doesn’t affect me, personally. But it’s the principle.”

*

Felix Martinez, a 43-year-old father of four, and his friend, Milton Monterosa, 41, a father of two, have arrived hours early for an appointment at a Los Angeles office of the state Economic Development Department. They have gone months without work and are hoping for a lead on a job.

Like hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of others, Martinez, of Mexico City, and Monterosa, from San Salvador, overstayed their entry visas and slipped unnoticed into the underground economy that traditionally welcomed illegal immigrants with abundant, low-paying jobs.

Under the amnesty granted to illegal immigrants residing in the country before 1982, both men legalized their status, but the American dream escapes them still.

“My friend and I were just talking,” Martinez says. “Los Angeles has fallen down so much. Before, there used to be a lot of work. Things were good. Now the situation is desperate. There is no work. There is nothing.”

Monterosa just nods.

“On the one hand, I think it’s good that immigrants come to this country,” Martinez goes on. “But, you know, I’m in this position. I can’t condone more people coming. I tell my brothers, everybody. They say, ‘Oh, the streets are paved with gold there. There is a lot of work. I’m coming.’ I tell them: ‘There is no work. Why should you come to suffer? Don’t come.’ ”

Inside the unemployment office, Los Angeles-born Lawrence Cush, 31, is also waiting for a lead. He says he has prepared himself for a good job with a college education and experience as a PBX operator at the Ambassador Hotel.

But he has been out of work since 1985.

“I feel in competition with the immigrants,” he says. “Everyone should speak English, but they don’t. . . . I applied for a job at Continental Cable and they told me that I had all the qualifications but that I didn’t get hired because I didn’t speak Spanish.”

Cush is on welfare. He is looking for a job that pays at least $8 an hour “so that I could make $17,000-$20,000 a year, and that’s not that much. That way I could do my part to support my family.

“I’m not going to take the minimum wage,” he said.

Outside, Martinez speaks in Spanish: “I have these desperate nights where I hug my knees together in bed and pray to God for a miracle, to send me a job, any job, a gardener, a cook, whatever. I’m not talking about some fancy job in an office, a secretary.

“I’ll take anything.”

Source link

No. 14 USC dominates in blowout victory over Fresno State

The sun hadn’t even set yet over the Coliseum, and already Trent Mosley had broken free, with nary a defender within 15 yards on either side.

It was the start of the second quarter on Friday night, when USC quarterback Jayden Maiava spotted his budding star freshman soaring on a slot post through the wide-open center of the field. And a split-second later the crowd saw it, too — their quiet rumbles rising to a thrilling roar, as if they knew what was coming next.

One ankle-twisting stutter-step is all it took for the true freshman to take off, once again. And it didn’t take much after that for USC to stick a fork in Fresno State.

But while Mosley captivated once again and Maiava came alive, it was Gary Patterson and the Trojans’ defense that really twisted the knife in a dominant 39-0 win for USC.

A week ago, it was Patterson who took the Trojans’ poor finish the hardest after they gave up 23 points in the fourth quarter to San José State. But a week spent looking in the mirror seemed to make a major difference as USC (2-0) managed its first shutout since Week 2 of the 2024 season.

“He loves shutouts,” sophomore defensive back Alex Graham said of the Trojans’ defensive coordinator. “He thinks shutouts are the best thing in the world.”

Patterson must have felt particularly thrilled Friday, considering how thoroughly USC’s defense dismantled Fresno State. The Bulldogs had just 56 yards heading into their final drive, 52 of which they accumulated in the first quarter.

“I told you guys,” USC coach Lincoln Riley said, “he makes it challenging on the other side.”

That was an understatement, given what happened after Mosley’s tide-turning touchdown. With the Bulldogs backed up against their goal line, Patterson dialed up a nickel blitz — and Fresno State didn’t account for it. So defensive back Kennedy Urlacher came flying into the backfield and collided into Bulldogs quarterback Jayden Mandal, who fell out of the back of the end zone for a safety.

“That’s just great coaching,” Urlacher said. “Coach knows what to call in certain situations.”

USC coach Lincoln Riley, center, celebrates during the Trojans' 39-0 win over Fresno State at the Coliseum.

USC coach Lincoln Riley, center, celebrates during the Trojans’ 39-0 win over Fresno State at the Coliseum on Friday night.

(Mark J. Terrill / Associated Press)

Patterson had no problem pouring it on, as it didn’t get any less demoralizing for Fresno State (0-1) after that. USC’s defense didn’t give up a single yard or a first down in the second and third quarters. And over that stretch, the Trojans gave up just one completed pass.

USC’s defense actually tallied more safeties (two) during that same stretch.

The second, from defensive back Alex Graham, came a quarter later, and it looked quite familiar. This time, Graham came screaming out of the slot on the same blitz and leveled Mandal in the end zone. It was one of three sacks that USC registered off the nickel blitz — and one of four overall.

The combination of an all-around dominant defensive effort, with the Trojans’ usual offensive mastery, offered a glimpse of what USC hopes it can be this season. The question is whether it can actually do it again moving forward.

Maiava might have a hard time staying quite this perfect. The USC quarterback had one of the most precise performances of his Trojans tenure, completing 23 of 25 passes for 349 yards and three touchdowns. Through two games, just six of his 54 passes have ended up incomplete.

“It’s more than perfect,” wideout Corey Simms said. “It’s amazing playing with a quarterback like Jayden Maiava.”

It certainly doesn’t hurt to have Mosley, who notched his second consecutive 100-yard game, tallying all of his 104 yards and two touchdowns in the second quarter. Or what about Kayden Dixon-Wyatt, his freshman counterpart? He had 102 yards on six catches.

USC was all but unstoppable through the air. But on a night where there was little to nitpick, the Trojans weren’t exactly efficient on the ground. Their ballcarriers averaged under four yards per carry, and Waymond Jordan, USC’s leading rusher with 67 yards, lost a fumble.

But with Maiava doing most of the heavy lifting, USC barely needed its backfield.

Maiava completed 19 of his first 20 passes, picking up where he left off last week when he connected on 25 of 29 in the opener. Faced with an early fourth down, he heaved a pass deep down the sideline for Dixon-Wyatt, who leaped over a defender to reel in a 31-yard reception. Three plays later, he found sophomore wideout Tanook Hines streaking across the end zone, uncovered, and hit him for an opening score.

USC running back Deshonne Redeaux scores a touchdown after Fresno State defensive back Taylor Powell fails to tackle him.

USC running back Deshonne Redeaux scores a touchdown after Fresno State defensive back Taylor Powell, left, fails to tackle him during the second half of the Trojans’ 39-0 win Friday night at the Coliseum.

(Mark J. Terrill / Associated Press)

He didn’t take his foot off the gas. After Jordan fumbled away a screen pass, Maiava later found Mosley for that 68-yard score. Then he didn’t miss a single pass for another two quarters.

By that point, USC’s defense had found another level.

It wasn’t until the final drive that Fresno State managed to move the ball. The Bulldogs tallied more yards on that possession (60) than they had the rest of the game combined, and they managed to march to the Trojans’ eight-yard line.

But that was as far as Fresno State would go. This time, on fourth down, a pack of Trojan defenders descended. They piled on Mandal for a game-ending sack.

On the sideline, players crowded around Patterson, jumping for joy. And in the center of the chaos, the Trojans’ new defensive coordinator cracked a smile.

Source link

Judge again halts USPS mail ballot plan

A federal judge again Friday blocked the U.S. Postal Service from enacting President Trump’s sweeping new mail ballot rules for the November election, finding that the Postal Service lacks such authority over elections and that neither it nor states such as California are capable of implementing the changes without causing chaos and disenfranchising voters.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani noted that election officials from across the country told the court that it is “likely impossible” to comply with the rules, which “makes disenfranchisement more than likely, if not probable” if the Postal Service were to proceed with them.

Talwani’s order — her latest of several halting the plan since this summer — came after a Postal Service whistleblower alleged the agency’s new computer systems for the project are fundamentally flawed; a top Postal Service official acknowledged a key online portal was unfinished; and the Trump administration filed an emergency petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to allow the plans to proceed anyway.

All this unfolded this week as some of the first mail ballots of the election cycle started going out.

The new rules — which Trump required in a March executive order — would require states to submit complete voter lists to the Postal Service and to adopt new ballot envelopes with individualized voter bar codes designed by the Postal Service, and empower the Postal Service to reject any mail ballots that don’t match those lists.

Trump’s executive order also required the Department of Homeland Security to develop its own lists of eligible citizen voters, ostensibly to be compared against the state lists.

Trump has said the changes are necessary to combat widespread voter fraud, including by non-citizens, though independent election experts say there is no evidence that such fraud exists in large numbers.

Leading Democrats and elections officials in California and other states say the new rules constitute an unlawful federal overreach into state-run elections and a thinly veiled effort by the Trump administration to suppress the vote in a midterm election the GOP is poised to lose.

Talwani, an appointee of President Obama, agreed, finding that the states and voting rights groups are likely to succeed in their claims that the U.S. Constitution reserves the right to regulate elections to the states and Congress — not the executive branch.

Talwani issued her order after holding a contentious hearing in federal court in Boston on Thursday, where she questioned the Postal Service and the dozen conservative-led states supporting it on their ability to implement the changes in time for the Nov. 3 elections. She also heard from California, other liberal-led states and voting rights groups that it would be impossible.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, whose office is helping lead the states’ challenge, hailed Talwani’s order as a crucial reprieve.

“We’ve now secured longer-term relief that will keep the USPS changes blocked while our case moves forward,” Bonta said in a statement to The Times. “We will continue to take all steps to stop the Trump Administration from trampling on voting rights and restricting mail voting.”

Bonta’s office also criticized Department of Justice attorneys for rushing to the Supreme Court before Talwani could issue her order or the U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals could weigh in on an appeal the department had already filed on the matter.

Walter Garcia, a Bonta spokesman, said the Justice Department had “flouted standard procedural rules” by approaching the high court before the lower courts had weighed in, despite the fact that the Postal Service acknowledged Thursday that it was not ready to launch its new portal.

“It defies common sense that they would seek emergency relief from the U.S. Supreme Court when USPS is unprepared to implement the rule now,” Garcia said.

State law requires that all registered voters be sent a ballot in the mail, and more than 80% of California voters have used those ballots to vote in recent elections.

In its emergency petition to the Supreme Court, the Trump administration argued that an earlier temporary restraining order by Talwani to halt the new rules from taking effect was “baseless” and would cause “serious irreparable harm” to the federal government, states and voting public.

“To forestall those harms and protect the public interest, this Court should grant an immediate stay, making clear to States that they should begin efforts to comply if they have not done so already,” wrote Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer.

The swirl of litigation has created uncertainty around the Nov. 3 election. It also reflects the Trump administration’s desperate race to get the lower court orders lifted and the new rules implemented in time for that election — the rushed nature of which was a prime focus of the whistleblower.

The unidentified Postal Service employee alleged in a statement released Tuesday by congressional Democrats and submitted in court by Bonta’s office that the agency has been rushing to implement the changes — in defiance of an earlier court order — using “an entirely new and untested set of IT systems” that could cause “catastrophic problems” and disenfranchise millions of voters nationwide.

The Postal Service in a statement Friday said that while its system was developed on an “accelerated schedule,” quality and security standards “were not compromised,” and the agency stands behind “both the rigor of our process and the resulting system.”

At Thursday’s hearing, Talwani appeared frustrated when a Justice Department attorney was unable to tell her the status of the portal.

In a subsequent declaration hours later, Steven W. Monteith, the Postal Service’s chief customer and marketing officer, said officials were still making “refinements” to the portal, but anticipated being able to make it available “for voluntary use by sometime next week.”

Talwani previously issued an order blocking the Postal Service changes from being implemented in California and more than 20 other suing states in June. The Trump administration appealed that decision to the 1st Circuit, which declined to lift it, and then on an emergency basis to the U.S. Supreme Court. In early August, Talwani issued a second ruling for the League of Women Voters and other voting rights groups, blocking the changes nationwide.

On Aug. 24, the Supreme Court set aside Talwani’s order in the states’ case, finding that the states’ challenge was essentially premature because the Postal Service had yet to formally initiate the changes or require state compliance. However, the court explicitly noted that it was not reaching any conclusions as to the legality of the pending rules themselves. “On that score, time will tell,” it said.

The states and voting rights groups promptly filed new lawsuits challenging the legality of the rules, which the Postal Service formally issued Aug. 21. And it is in those cases that Talwani issued her ruling Friday.

She wrote that the voting rights groups had standing to challenge the Postal Service rules nationwide in part because the “chaos” created by the rules’ stiff deadlines significantly interfered with their mission to provide voters with accurate and reliable information about how to vote — and whether to use mail ballots to do so.

David Becker, executive director of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research, said in remarks prior to Talwani’s Friday order that he was “very, very confident” that the Postal Service changes will be blocked for the upcoming elections, and that “mail voting is going to go forward as conveniently and securely as it always has.”

That’s in part because election officials nationwide are “telling the courts that even if they wanted to, they could not implement it,” he said — including in a legal filing Becker helped nearly 100 local elections officials from red and blue states file in separate litigation challenging the rules.

Source link

Arizona group home provider at center of pay-to-play scandal escapes penalties for boy’s death

The staff caring for Jakob Blodgett said he already had been sneaking candy and refused to take his insulin. An employee at the Arizona group home where the 9-year-old boy was being cared for texted a supervisor about the boy’s elevated blood-glucose reading.

The response? Give him water.

After two missed doses of the long-lasting insulin he needed, he was taken to the hospital. He was diagnosed with brain swelling, put on a ventilator and died in 2022 of complications from Type 1 diabetes.

There were no penalties imposed for Blodgett’s death, and Arizona’s largest group home provider now stands at the center of a political controversy swirling as Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs seeks reelection. Records show Sunshine Residential Homes made political donations beneficial to Hobbs and months later received a rate increase from the state for providing beds for children.

The Arizona attorney general, a fellow Democrat, found no evidence of bribery. But Republican legislators are pushing back with their own questions, and the state auditor general’s office is conducting a separate investigation.

The boy’s death and the pay-to-play allegations highlight questions about Arizona’s congregate-care capacity for children, training for workers who care for them and oversight of providers and other contractors who hold leverage over the state simply due to their size and influence.

Alleged political favors become campaign fodder

Hobbs maintains she wasn’t involved in the decision to increase rates for Sunshine Residential Homes. But Republican challenger, U.S. Rep. Andy Biggs, has made the scandal a centerpiece of his campaign to unseat her.

“That was all handled by the department,” Hobbs said, “and they made the decision based on what was in the best interest of the department and the kids in their care.”

The allegations were first reported by The Arizona Republic and prompted an investigation by Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes. However, Mayes’ office said it couldn’t find evidence to support bribery charges against Hobbs and concluded that Sunshine’s rate increases were the result of its “outsized leverage” as the state’s largest group home provider, not because of politics.

The company had threatened to reduce its bed capacity if it didn’t get an increase, saying it would instead use beds to house unaccompanied immigrant children for the federal government, officials said. Child welfare officials have said a reduction in Sunshine’s beds would significantly affect the state’s ability to place children in homes and would likely lead to siblings in foster care being split up and sent to different homes.

In all, Sunshine made $550,000 in contributions, including $100,000 to Hobbs’ inaugural fund in December 2022 and $150,000 to a legal defense fund for Hobbs between November 2023 and May 2024, according to records.

A separate investigation by the state auditor general’s office and Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell, a Republican, is continuing.

The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office also has interviewed several Sunshine employees as part of an ongoing criminal investigation into Blodgett’s death. No one has been charged.

Blodgett isn’t the only diabetic child to die after a stay at an Arizona group home. In July 2024, a 15-year-old boy staying at a group home in Mesa operated by another company died of diabetic ketoacidosis after staff said the boy refused to take insulin, according to records.

Text messages outline concerns over a diabetic coma

Blodgett was staying at a foster home in metro Phoenix where only the house manager was trained in managing his diabetes.

Staff members said the boy was refusing to take his medicine. The manager advised an employee via text to tell the boy that the manager would be called if he refused to take his medicine.

“We don’t want him to go into a diabetic coma,” the manager texted.

The employee texted back about whether the child should get insulin. The manager didn’t respond.

The next day, the employee texted the boy’s blood glucose reading to the manager and asked what to do. The manager said to give Blodgett water but didn’t give any instructions about insulin, according to lawyers for the state and Blodgett’s family. The day after missing his second dose, Blodgett was taken to a hospital.

Violation nets no penalties

Two weeks before approving a 30% rate increase in May 2023, the Arizona Department of Child Safety issued a licensing violation against Sunshine over Blodgett’s case. The agency declined to specify to The Associated Press which policy was violated.

Robert Pastor, an attorney representing the family in a wrongful death lawsuit, said the violation was for not giving Blodgett the insulin as prescribed. The lawyer said Sunshine’s staff missed the signs of ketoacidosis, a serious complication caused by a lack of insulin, and waited too long to take Blodgett to the hospital. He also disputed claims that the boy had refused medication.

The state didn’t fine Sunshine or suspend or revoke its license as a result of the violation, according to court records. The agency said it detailed the steps Sunshine had to take to come into compliance, but declined to reveal to the AP what those steps were.

Pastor agreed with the attorney general’s conclusion that Sunshine has a lot of leverage over the state due to reliance on the company’s beds.

“That leverage gave Sunshine an increased rate increase,” Pastor said. “We also know that that leverage that Sunshine has over DCS means that when they kill a child, there will be no consequences. There will be no accountability.”

In a statement, Sunshine spokesperson Tommy McKone said the wrongful death lawsuit remains active, but declined to comment on the licensing violation and the company’s policy on responding to children who refuse medications.

“Sunshine Residential followed all policies and procedures for the required care, throughout his stay at our homes, under state law,” McKone said.

In court records, lawyers for Sunshine said the state indicated Blodgett’s medical needs were minimal and didn’t inform the group home provider that Blodgett’s diabetes management was complex.

Boy was hospitalized before heading to group home

Blodgett went into foster care in December 2022 after his father was jailed on a drug charge. His blood glucose levels were high when he was brought to a welcome center operated by the Department of Child Safety, which sought medical help for Blodgett from a children’s hospital where he was treated over several days.

Once discharged, Blodgett went to a Sunshine home.

While he went two days without getting the long-lasting insulin he needed before going to bed, the staff did give him another type of insulin — fast-acting insulin after eating meals — over both days. After the boy missed a long-lasting dose, the house manager contacted the same hospital to talk about how to improve his blood glucose levels.

In a deposition, the house manager testified there was nothing the staff could do if the child refused his medication. Pastor said the claim that the boy refused insulin is a false narrative aimed at blaming the child.

More workers should have been trained

Myriam Villarreal, an official in the Department of Child Safety’s operation that licenses group homes, testified in an April 2025 deposition that Blodgett’s condition wasn’t caught in time because group home workers weren’t trained in spotting the signs of ketoacidosis.

Pressed on why the company didn’t face any penalties, Villarreal testified that the state asked for policy modifications from the company. And she said training should have been provided to the staff members who directly cared for the boy, not just the house manager.

“We didn’t look that every single staff (member) had the appropriate training,” Villarreal testified.

Billeaud writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

California lawmakers move to remake state forests long centered on logging

California lawmakers have voted to shift a state forest system away from commercial logging and pave the way for tribal co-management, delivering a win to a movement rooted in the historic timber wars.

Managed by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, or Cal Fire, the state’s 14 demonstration forests are currently required to produce and sell timber to show — or “demonstrate” — sustainable practices, while considering factors like recreation and wildlife.

AB 2494 eliminates what’s often cast as a logging mandate, instead prioritizing values such as carbon storage, wildfire resilience and biodiversity conservation. There could still be logging, but it would need to support those principles.

It also directs state officials to seek agreements with Native American tribes to integrate their traditional knowledge into managing the land. The bill now heads to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk.

“We don’t need more demonstrations of what clear cutting does to a forest — we have plenty of those,” said Assemblymember Chris Rogers (D-Santa Rosa), who authored the bill. If the forests are being used to show how to boost commercial logging gains, “then that is not how we want to use our public assets.”

At the center of the discussion is Jackson Demonstration State Forest, spanning nearly 50,000 acres in Mendocino County. For decades, loggers and environmentalists have clashed over the fate of its stately redwoods.

About five years ago, tensions reignited when community members caught wind of plans to cut towering trees near the coastal town of Caspar.

Tribes whose historic homelands fall within the forest became leading voices in the effort to halt logging, with the Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians’ Priscilla Hunter emerging as a major force. She has since passed away but her legacy looms large in the movement.

While running for his assembly seat representing the North Coast, Rogers heard from constituents and local politicians who wanted to see the forest run differently. The bill grew in part out of those discussions.

Polly Girvin, Hunter’s former partner and a retired lawyer focused on Native American issues, called AB 2494’s passage by the Legislature “nearly miraculous.”

“We’re at a time right now where scientists are going to have to reach across the table to the Indian voice,” she said. “They feel they have a sacred obligation to manage their forest, not for commercial logging per se. So I think it’s really a meeting of science and the sacred.”

Some backers say the bill offers a new economic path forward for communities behind the so-called redwood curtain. With the decline of logging and cannabis as livelihoods, they see income from tourists attracted by ultramarathons, mushroom foraging and other outdoor activities as a financial savior.

But the push to reshape forest management is fiercely opposed by loggers and mill owners, who say their work is sustainable and provides blue-collar jobs in a region where they’ve dwindled. Already California imports most of its wood from Oregon, Washington and Canada.

The Mendocino County Board of Supervisors has supported the bill, but it’s opposed by the Rural County Representatives of California, an advocacy group representing 40 counties.

Staci Heaton, senior policy advocate for the organization, said they’re concerned that the new management goals are so vague they would expose forest projects — including wildfire research — to costly lawsuits.

“We’ve experienced the majority of the largest wildfires across the state over the last decade, and it is paramount that research and forest management knowledge be fostered in these demonstration state forests so that it can be used statewide,” Heaton said.

Currently, money from logging — roughly $8.5 million a year — pays for management of the demonstration forests. Under the latest iteration of AB 2494, it will remain one source of funding but not the only one, Rogers said.

Cal Fire’s Kevin Conway believes that if the bill becomes law, it will, in practice, limit funding. So they’d likely look to bring in money by charging day-use and other new recreation fees.

Conway, who is the agency’s chief for resource protection and improvement, added that some aspects of their mission wouldn’t change; the land would remain “actively managed.” For instance, he called wood products “a big part of our climate strategy in the built environment” and suggested it would still be prudent to understand how they’re produced in California.

“We don’t think that just locking up your forest and making a tree museum longterm will deliver biodiversity, carbon, recreation — all these things,” he said. Cal Fire has not taken a position on the legislation.

Newsom has until Sept. 30 to sign or veto the bill.

Source link

Trump calls for federal tax incentives to revive U.S. film industry

President Trump on Monday urged Congress to approve federal tax incentives aimed at reviving American film and television productions, saying Hollywood has been hollowed out by productions moving to Canada and other countries.

In a social media post, Trump said he met with actor Jon Voight, whom he has designated as “Hollywood Ambassador,” and concluded there is “no incentive” to work in Hollywood anymore and that it is “hurting California very badly.”

“Jon, and many others in the Industry, are suggesting we do Federal Tax Incentives in order to Make our Movie and Television Production Business GREAT AGAIN, Perhaps GREATER THAN EVER BEFORE!,” Trump said wrote on Truth Social.

Trump said meetings are already being set up to talk to lawmakers from both parties, noting that he wants to the discussions to be bipartisan, “especially since so much money is being lost in California, and other largely Blue States.”

“I am going to suggest that Republicans and Democrats get together, and immediately craft Legislation to save the Movie, Television and Entertainment Business in America,” he said.

There are few details about what these incentives would look like at this time, but Trump said “the amount of money spent” on tax breaks will be made up “tenfold by the money pouring into the Treasury’s coffers.”

Charles Rivkin, chairman and chief executive of the Motion Picture Assn., applauded Trump’s announcement, and, in a statement, added that “for over a century, American studios, casts, and crews have produced the films and series that the world wants to see.”

“A federal incentive,” Rivkin added, “would be a landmark step toward bringing more production to local communities in all 50 states, strengthening our nation’s economy, and making our country a more competitive place to produce, create, and tell great stories.”

Trump’s push comes as production has continued to shift overseas. Last year, 45% of all U.S. films and scripted television shows were shot internationally, up from about 33% in 2022, an issue that has worried California lawmakers such as Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).

California and other states have bolstered their production incentive programs, but Schiff has said in the past that it is not enough. He, too, has made the case for a federal tax credit.

“State programs cannot simply substitute for the kind of global, federal and competitive tax incentives that are needed to bring production back to American soil and stop its offshoring,” Schiff said at an event in March. “The urgency could not be greater.”

Trump has previously floated more aggressive measures, including a threat to impose tariffs on foreign-made films, but that idea did not gain traction.

Source link