Archive by Author

Juan Williams: Ukraine unites Americans like little else

At year’s end, let’s first sweep away the bad news before we get to the good news.

The bad news is that Americans see political extremism as now second only to inflation as the most important issue facing the country, according to FiveThirtyEight/Ipsos polling.

Now the good news. Americans can agree on one thing. 

Most Republicans, Democrats and every other kind of partisan agree the U.S. is right to stand up against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll in October found that 73 percent of Americans — including 81 percent of Democrats and 66 percent of Republicans — favor continued U.S. support for Ukraine against Russia.

This tracks with a poll from the Chicago Council of Foreign Affairs conducted in November. It found 65 percent of Americans support continuing to support Ukraine with arms, 66 percent support continuing economic aid and 75 percent favor continuing sanctions on Russia.

Despite intense political polarization on most issues, Americans are unified on backing Ukraine and for now are willing to make sacrifices.

“One area, however, seems to be far less contentious than the domestic strife we hear so much about, U.S foreign policy,” Jordan Muchnick and Elaine Kamarck wrote for the Brookings Institute website earlier this month.

“While there are of course arguments to be had, the level of vitriol is minuscule by comparison, and polling indicates bipartisan unity on many of the foreign policy issues in the news today.” 

Kamarck and Muchnick also looked beyond Ukraine. On U.S. foreign policy for dealing with China and Iran, they again found relative unity across political lines. 

Support for Ukraine stands as the star guiding us to common ground in this era of polarized U.S. politics. 

Unified support for Ukraine showed signs of fraying in a Wall Street Journal poll released at the start of November, however. 

It found 57 percent of Americans favoring continued funding, but 48 percent of Republicans saying the U.S. is “doing too much.” That was a jump in concern among Republicans from just six percent in a March poll.

When Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky spoke to a joint session of Congress last week, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) left their seats empty in a show of dissent.

But they are fringe players even among Republicans. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), struggling to get far-right backing to become Speaker, declares his support for Ukraine even as he says he wants accountability for American money sent to Kyiv.

“The most important thing going on in the world is to beat the Russians in Ukraine,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told reporters on the evening of Zelensky’s speech . “And also, it’s nice to have something here at the end of the year that we all actually agree on.”

Yes, strong GOP voices agree with President Biden and Democrats on Ukraine.

The result is that since Russia’s February invasion, Congress has directed over $50 billion in aid to the Ukrainians. The end-of-year spending measure passed by Congress last week authorizes another $45 billion.

Some voices on Capitol Hill want to slow further funding. There is concern, too, about debate over sending military “advisers” — a term that stirs fear of Vietnam-style escalation of U.S. involvement.

So far, Biden has held the line on not sending U.S. troops into the conflict. Such a move would threaten domestic political support.

That support extends beyond the U.S. to the impressive international coalition he has formed to stand against Russian aggression. 

The past year of strong public support for Ukraine differs from the critical U.S. public response to the Biden administration’s handling of the withdrawal from Afghanistan.

At around the time of the withdrawal in August of 2021, Pew Research found “about seven-in ten or more said the administration had done an only fair or poor job dealing with the situation there.” 

The criticism was strongly partisan, with Pew finding that 82 percent of Republicans said the Biden administration had done a “poor job” in Afghanistan while 40 percent of Democrats said the administration did an “excellent or good job.”

According to an analysis from FiveThirtyEight, it was the rocky withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan that first sent Biden’s overall job approval rating into negative territory.

Since then, his approval rating, while showing recent signs of improvement, has stayed below 50 percent. 

In my opinion, history will record Biden’s decision to end the nation’s longest war as overdue and right. At the time of the Afghanistan withdrawal, 54 percent agreed it was right, according to the Pew survey.

The flawed execution of the Afghan pull-out came at a political cost for Biden. The president’s success in killing al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri in July this year was a positive afterword. But there is still criticism of the withdrawal. 

In contrast, overall support for U.S. standing with Ukraine has yet to be undone by partisanship. 

While no one is breaking out in choruses of “Kumbaya,” it is good news that Americans can agree on making a difference in Ukraine and setting a red line against aggression by authoritarian regimes such as China.

Nearly a year of public agreement on backing Ukraine stands as a bright star on the Christmas tree of hope in a season of American political polarization.

Happy holidays.

Juan Williams is an author, and a political analyst for Fox News Channel.

Source: TEST FEED1

Gaetz presses Jordan to go after Speaker job

Rep. Matt Gaetz (Fla.) said over the weekend that his Christmas wish is for his Republican colleague, Jim Jordan (Ohio), to run to be the next Speaker of the House.

“All I want for Christmas is @Jim_Jordan to realize he should be Speaker of the House!” Gaetz wrote in a Saturday tweet.

Gaetz, who has repeatedly spoken out against House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) taking up the Speaker’s gavel, followed up that tweet with another on Sunday asking his followers to encourage Jordan to run for top House spot.

The Florida lawmaker has previously supported Jordan for the post, telling Fox News in August that Jordan was the “hardest-working” and the “most talented member” in his more conservative base.

Jordan, who will chair the House Judiciary Committee when the GOP assumes the majority next month, has not announced plans to run for the leadership post.

The Ohio Republican has endorsed McCarthy for House Speaker and expressed concerns this month that Republicans conspiring against the minority leader could work with Democrats to elect a different leader.

McCarthy won a House Republican Conference vote last month but must secure the position on the floor when the next Congress forms in January.

The GOP leader faces a challenge from far-right lawmaker Rep. Andy Biggs (Ariz.), who previously failed to beat McCarthy in the conference vote.

Some far-right Republicans, including members of the House Freedom Caucus, are pushing for more conservative leadership in the House following the party’s underperformance in the midterm elections.

Biggs and Gaetz join three other Republicans — Ralph Norman (S.C.), Matt Rosendale (Mont.) and Bob Good (Va.) — in publicly expressing strong opposition to McCarthy as the next Speaker.

Other Republicans, including Scott Perry (Pa.) and Lauren Boebert (Colo.), have said they will not support McCarthy as Speaker unless there is a mechanism to easily remove him from the top post.

Source: TEST FEED1

Who’s the new No. 4 Democrat? There may be a dispute

As Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) scrambles to shore up enough GOP support to become the next Speaker, House Democrats are grappling with a question swirling around their own leadership hierarchy next year: Who, in fact, is the No. 4 Democrat?

Most in the caucus presume that ranking falls to Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.), who will assume the assistant leader spot in the next Congress. Clyburn is a powerful a 30-year veteran lawmaker — and a senior member of the Congressional Black Caucus — who played an instrumental role in President Biden’s successful White House run. 

Yet Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), the incoming vice chairman of the Democratic Caucus, is subtly questioning that hierarchy.

The vice chair has always been ranked just below the caucus chair, and because the caucus chair in the 118th Congress will be the No. 3 position, why wouldn’t the vice chair be No. 4?

The answer has been complicated by the Democrats’ soon-to-be minority status, which clipped a seat from their leadership roster, and by a confusing reshuffling of the pecking order that followed this year’s midterm elections.

The last time the Democrats were in the minority, the caucus chair seat was the No. 4 position, below minority leader, the Democratic whip and the assistant leader. But that hierarchy was altered following this year’s midterm elections, when the new caucus chair — Rep. Pete Aguilar (Calif.) — jumped up to the No. 3 spot. 

The promotion was designed to keep intact the incoming triumvirate of new leaders — Reps. Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.), Katherine Clark (Mass.) and Aguilar — to replace the longstanding Democratic team of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), Steny Hoyer (Md.) and Clyburn, who have led the party for almost two decades.

While Pelosi and Hoyer have stepped out of leadership altogether, Clyburn ran successfully to keep a spot within the party brass as assistant leader — a position first created by Pelosi the last time Democrats lost their House majority, in 2010. 

Clyburn’s decision caught many Democrats by surprise, and it had a domino effect up and down the leadership ladder. 

Not only did it force Aguilar — who was initially eying the assistant leader spot — to seek the caucus chair position instead, it pushed Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.), who had already declared his candidacy for the caucus chairmanship, to seek a new position atop the Democrats’ messaging arm rather than take on Aguilar. 

In all the reshuffling, it was never explicitly stipulated what the hierarchy beneath Jeffries, Clark and Aguilar would be. Internal rules for the House Democratic caucus list no specific order for the various leadership positions, although it’s been widely held that the rankings of each seat are reflected in the order of the closed-door elections that decide them. 

That informal system was muddled this year, however, because Clyburn was not in Washington on the day that the other top leaders — Jeffries, Clark, Aguilar and Lieu — were elected. Clyburn returned the following day to secure his assistant leader spot uncontested, after Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) withdrew a last-minute challenge. 

The issue is a delicate one, and few members of the leadership team have wanted to touch it. 

Neither Clyburn’s office, nor Aguilar’s, responded to a request for comment on Friday.

Lieu also declined to comment in any detail. But when asked about the leadership hierarchy, he showed a reporter a picture of a press conference earlier this month featuring four members of the incoming leadership team: Jeffries, Clark, Aguilar and himself. 

“Here, see?” said Lieu, a military veteran who will be the highest-ranking Asian American in the next Congress. “Other than that, I have no idea.”

From a practical standpoint, the question of which lawmaker is No. 4 is essentially meaningless.

The duties and titles of neither the vice chair nor the assistant leader would change based upon their numerical ranking. And given the personalities constituting the incoming leadership team, rank-and-file Democrats said they don’t anticipate any internal frictions. 

But the rankings could be significant at some point down the line, some lawmakers said, if a vacancy emerges within the leadership team — or the House flips back to Democratic control — and questions of succession emerge. 

Majority Leader Hoyer, who is stepping out of leadership in the next Congress, said party leaders “ought to resolve” the leadership dispute. But he also made clear that it was a job for the incoming team, not the outgoing one. 

“Now that they are in these exalted positions, they are gonna have to make those decisions,” said a chuckling Hoyer.

Mychael Schnell contributed.

Source: TEST FEED1

How to reduce food waste this holiday season

Story at a glance

• For many Americans, the holiday season means preparing and eating more food.

• There are several steps Americans can take to cut down on food waste in their own households this year. 

• These can include repurposing leftovers, being mindful of portions cooked, and donating untouched items to food banks.

The holiday season is often a time of excess— excess time spent with family, excess shopping for gifts, and excess cooking. 

Americans waste around one-third of all purchased food each year, but whether it’s leftovers from parties or uneaten fruitcake, food waste tends to rise between Thanksgiving and New Year’s. 

Compared with any other time of the year, Americans throw away 25 percent more trash during the Thanksgiving to New Year’s holiday period, amounting to around one million extra tons of garbage per week, according to data from Stanford University’s Waste Reduction, Recycling, Composting and Solid Waste Program. 

Food also accounts for around 24 percent of all municipal solid waste, according to the EPA, while the average family of four loses around $1,500 each year to uneaten food. 

America is changing faster than ever! Add Changing America to your Facebook or Twitter feed to stay on top of the news.

“During the holidays, we eat more [and] we entertain more. So we have new dishes, larger portion sizes for numbers of guests that may or may not arrive. Our whole routine gets upset,” said Brian Roe in an interview with Changing America. Roe is a professor in the department of agricultural, environmental, and development economics at the Ohio State University and an economist who focuses on food waste. 

“We’re more likely to—as we entertain—not want to create too little food and so we’re oftentimes going to over-prepare items,” he continued.

But there are ways Americans can cut down on food waste this holiday season. Doing so will not only reduce methane emissions released when food ends up in landfills, but will also help curtail energy used throughout the food supply chain. That can include energy expended on labor, processors, transportation hubs and retailers, along with chemicals and water used on food.

For Roe, one key way to cut down on food waste is to encourage people to take home leftovers or excess food. “I just encourage people to love their leftovers,” he said. 

“We can also get more creative with our leftovers and kind of take on an experimental mode by thinking of new and exciting things to do with leftover ingredients or just leftovers themselves,” he added. 

Several apps and websites exist that let users plug in ingredients they have on hand and offer up new recipes to use that food. 

“If you can get one more meal a night out of your fridge with these high food prices, that’s a win-win,” Roe said. 

Introducing composting into your routine can also help. By composting organic material into soil, consumers can cut down on landfill waste and create a new resource. But composting doesn’t address the food supply chain energy used prior to consumers buying the product. 

“Composting is by far the better approach than putting things in landfill,” Roe said, “But it doesn’t reduce the amount of waste being created, typically.”

Donating untouched food to food banks, soup kitchens or other charities can also be an option, along with being more mindful about portions prepared and ingredients purchased. This can include taking inventory of what’s already in the refrigerator and cupboard before going shopping. 

Because food can travel around 1,500 miles to get from the farm to your plate, using locally grown food or ingredients in holiday meals can help reduce one’s carbon footprint.

Freezing excess food for consumption down the line is another good alternative to throwing it away, while using recyclable or reusable containers when serving food can help cut down on landfill waste this holiday season. 

In the United States, greenhouse gas emissions from wasted food is equivalent to that of 32.6 million cars. And although the country has pledged to cut food waste in half by 2030, more can be done to raise awareness about the issue, Roe says. 

“I think people forget about the environmental linkage, because they think food is natural. It’ll decompose but they really forget about that decomposition creating methane and causing additional environmental impacts,” he said. 

Source: TEST FEED1

DeSantis-Trump differences come into view

The differences between former President Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) are coming into sharper focus as the two emerge as potential rivals in the 2024 presidential contest.

Trump’s endorsement helped propel DeSantis through a GOP primary in the 2018 Florida governor’s race. But as both men position themselves for a White House run, long-simmering differences on vaccines, pandemic responses and other issues are bubbling to the surface.

Some of DeSantis’s policy positions are in direct conflict with Trump’s. That sets up a contrast for the Florida governor to highlight should he run against Trump for the 2024 GOP nomination.

“We’ll continue to see this cold war get hotter and hotter, and the only thing to watch is when DeSantis starts to openly criticize or respond to Trump,” said Sam Nunberg, a GOP strategist who advised Trump’s 2016 campaign. “He doesn’t have to while he’s governor, but eventually he will as a candidate.”

Trump’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic is increasingly seen as a possible political weak point for the former president among Republican primary voters. Trump oversaw the shuttering of the U.S. economy in the early months of the pandemic at the urging of public health experts. That allowed governors such as DeSantis to win the support of their constituents by allowing businesses in their states to remain open, bucking federal guidelines.

Last week, DeSantis again seemed to move to the right of Trump when he formed a state committee to act as a counterbalance to federal health agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and said he would request a grand jury investigation into COVID-19 vaccines.

Health experts and even some Republicans panned the move, arguing it would sow distrust in medicine and vaccines at a time when the federal government is pushing more Americans to get booster shots protecting them from the virus. It also risks alienating more moderate voters.

The COVID-19 vaccines were developed during the Trump administration, something Trump has repeatedly sought credit for. But the former president has largely refrained from talking about the vaccines since leaving office, and, unlike other top officials, he did not get his shot in public, underscoring the delicate line he is trying to walk with some of his supporters who have questioned its efficacy.

While pandemic policies are one issue where there may be daylight between Trump and DeSantis, the governor’s allies and strategists believe that another key point of difference is in the governor’s legislative record more broadly. 

“I think the overall narrative and differentiation will be that DeSantis gets things done, and he’s not a cult of personality,” said one Florida-based Republican strategist. “While President Trump is running for himself, DeSantis is running for the people and showing he can do effective government.”

“Trump will want to say that everything up until the pandemic was a major success and you should judge him on that,” the strategist added.

Trump has spent the two years since leaving office mostly fixated on the 2020 election, continuing to claim that it was fraudulent or rigged against him despite no evidence of widespread fraud. 

Since announcing his 2024 White House bid in November, Trump has been a magnet for controversy. He dined with a white nationalist Holocaust denier at his Florida club, and he suggested parts of the Constitution should be set aside so he could have a redo of the 2020 election or be put back into power. 

Trump’s lone policy rollout came via a video in which he said he’d ban the federal government from labeling speech as misinformation as part of a broader “free speech” platform. Trump’s criticism of DeSantis thus far has been that he owes his 2018 election victory to the then-president’s endorsement.

DeSantis, meanwhile, has used his post as governor to be at the forefront of culture war issues that matter to conservative voters. 

He backed a law to restrict discussion of gender and sexuality among younger schoolchildren, transported migrants from Texas to the liberal enclave of Martha’s Vineyard, and pushed back against mask requirements in schools. He also signed off on a congressional map that strongly favored Republicans, helping the party pick up additional seats in November’s midterms.

DeSantis is expected to delay any announcement on a 2024 campaign until the late spring or summer, using the upcoming legislative session to rack up more policy victories that could set him apart from Trump and others who are not in office.

“It’s not complicated, @RonDeSantisFL is leading the polls for a reason. Principled, conservative, leadership on issues Floridians (and all Americans) care about,” Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) tweeted.

Source: TEST FEED1

TikTok bans on government devices raise questions about platform's future

TikTok is getting banned from a growing number of federal and state devices, underscoring how political winds are turning against the platform given worries about China and raising questions about its future.  

The latest development is the decision by Republicans and Democrats in Congress to include a measure banning TikTok from devices used by federal employees in the $1.7 trillion year-end omnibus bill setting out federal funding for the next year.  

It follows similar moves by a host of state governments to keep TikTok off devices held by state government workers. 

The decisions appear unlikely to lead to further bans on TikTok, which is owned by Chinese-based company ByteDance, on private devices, despite the introduction of such a ban in Congress last week.

“As far as individual users are concerned, at least for right now and for the time being, I don’t think it’s going to have much of an impact on the accessibility to individual consumers because the direct threat to users has not yet been recognized,” said Cyrus Walker, the founder and managing principal at cybersecurity firm Data Defenders.  

The wildly popular social media platform has made serious inroads in the United States, with more than 85 million users in the U.S. alone, and is widely used across the country — particularly by people under the age of 20. 

Walker, however, said the attention given to the bans on TikTok for devices used by federal and state workers could spark a wider conversation about privacy and security concerns with the app.  

He also said it could lead private companies to tell their employees to keep the app off work phones.  

“As we see this momentum build in the municipal space restricting or banning TikTok altogether, I think you’re going to see corporations, particularly larger ones, follow suit because of the threat of corporate espionage that could take place at a larger level,” he said.  

Lawmakers have become increasingly concerned that by downloading the app, government workers are giving the Chinese government potential access to their devices that it could use to collect data on U.S. citizens.  

Hannah Kelley, a research assistant in the technology and national security program at the Center for a New American Security, said that if the TikTok ban on federal government devices does become law, it would at least make some Americans question the validity of those concerns and ask themselves: “If the government isn’t comfortable with this app existing on federal infrastructure, should I be comfortable with it operating within my own home?” 

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), part of the group of bipartisan lawmakers who introduced legislation that would prohibit the use of TikTok nationwide, argued the possibly security threats of the app do extend to regular citizens.

“The federal government has yet to take a single meaningful action to protect American users from the threat of TikTok,” Rubio said in a statement. 

“This isn’t about creative videos — this is about an app that is collecting data on tens of millions of American children and adults every day,” he added. 

Introducing the bill, Rubio and Reps. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.) and Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.) cited concerns recently raised by the FBI and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that the app is being used to spy on Americans in that way.

FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr said in an interview with Axios last month that Congress banning the app was the only path forward in light of such concerns.

“There simply isn’t a world in which you could come up with sufficient protection on the data that you could have sufficient confidence that it’s not finding its way back into the hands of the [Chinese Communist Party],” Carr said. 

The concerns date back to the Trump administration, which attempted to ban the social media platform in 2020 with an executive order that was later blocked by a federal court.

TikTok, which has pushed back on the concerns, said it was disappointed with states banning the app on government devices.

“We’re disappointed that so many states are jumping on the bandwagon to enact policies based on unfounded, politically charged falsehoods about TikTok,” a spokesperson said. 

The spokesperson also denied that TikTok shares information with the Chinese Communist Party.

Experts are skeptical about that denial, however. They say that since TikTok is owned by a Chinese-based company, it is likely subject to Chinese laws, which require companies to comply with requests from the government for access to data originating from such apps. 

“I mean, basically, you’re giving China an open door into your device and into your network,” Walker said.

“Just that relationship alone is a significant threat and risk to U.S. government assets,” he said, referring to ByteDance’s ownership of TikTok.

Beyond a ban on TikTok, Walker said the potential security threats posed by the platform could also plausibly be reduced if ByteDance were to sell it to an American company and completely divest itself from the app’s ownership. But he thinks such a move is unlikely.

He recommended that regular citizens worried about their privacy should simply delete TikTok from their phones.

Jamil Jaffer, founder and executive director of the National Security Institute at George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia Law School, similarly advised that users practice more caution.

“American consumers should be much more careful with their kids and their families using TikTok because while it may be a very appealing app to use from a social perspective, it is hugely problematic from a data collection and surveillance perspective,” he said.

But he also went a step further than Walker, who thinks regular citizens shouldn’t be forced not to use the app, arguing that it should be banned for all users across the U.S., regardless of whether they work for government or not, to protect the country.

“The problem is they’re collecting data on Americans … and use that data to leverage it against us as a nation,” Jaffer said. “I don’t think the ban should be about the government alone.”

“Clearly government employees shouldn’t have TikTok on their phone, but the app should be banned across the United States,” he added.

Source: TEST FEED1

Democrats outraged over Christmas Eve migrant drop-off at VP's House

Democrats are blasting the busing of migrants to Vice PresidentHarris’ Washington, D.C., residence on Christmas Eve, taking aim at Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R), who they blame for dropping the groups off in below-freezing temperatures on a holiday.

The incident was the latest salvo in a months-long effort by Abbott and other Republican governors to urge the Biden administration to bolster its immigration policy and wasn’t the first time migrants have been sent to the vice president’s home. But it will likely intensify the feud over immigration, especially as Title 42 hangs in the balance.

“Governor Abbott abandoned children on the side of the road in below freezing temperatures on Christmas Eve without coordinating with any Federal or local authorities,” White House assistant press secretary Abdullah Hasan told The Hill in a statement. “This was a cruel, dangerous, and shameful stunt.”

Three busloads of migrants arrived outside the Naval Observatory, the vice president’s official residence, on Saturday, according to ABC 7, when temperatures were in the teens. Video captured by a reporter from the outlet showed groups of migrants wrapped in blankets. One person was wearing shorts.

The Migrant Solidarity Mutual Aid Network, a local aid group, took the migrants to a church to receive assistance, according to ABC 7. The organization said Abbott was behind Saturday’s drop off, and the local outlet said the group learned about the buses a few days earlier.

Abbott has not confirmed his involvement but various news outlets, in addition to the White House and the aid organization, say he was responsible. The Hill reached out to Abbott’s office for comment.

Amy Fischer, a volunteer with the organization, told CNN that the three buses were initially driving to New York but “shifted to DC because of the weather.”

“It really does show the cruelty behind Gov. Abbott in his insistence on continuing to bus people here without care,” Fischer told ABC 7, going on to say that the migrants “don’t have clothes for this kind of weather and they’re freezing.”

Democrats are again criticizing the tactic, especially the timing of the latest episode.

“Worthless @GovAbbott dropping off people with no money and no means on Christmas Eve in 15 degree weather near the VP’s residence,” Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) wrote on Twitter early Sunday morning. “How Christian of you, Greg Abbott. Being a heartless POS isn’t going to make you the next Republican President.”

“Governor Abbott claims to be a “pro-life Christian” yet shows no regard for the lives of children left shivering in the freezing cold on Christmas Eve,” Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) wrote on Twitter. “Dropping off migrants in 18 degree weather is so cruel that it ought to be criminal.”

Abbott and other Republican governors for months have been directing migrants to Democratic-led cities — including New York, Chicago, Philadelphia — drawing widespread criticism from Democrats for what they see as using the immigrants as political pawns.

In one of the most widely-publicized cases, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) flew two planes of migrants from Texas to Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts in September. That same month, two buses of migrants from Texas arrived at the Naval Observatory.

GOP governors have argued the strategy allows them to highlight the difficulties border communities face by forcing northern cities and states to contend with the crisis Republicans say they helped create. 

Biden in September slammed the “political stunts,” labeling them “un-American” and “reckless.”

This week, Abbott called on Biden to “immediately deploy federal assets” to address the situation at the border.

“You and your administration must stop the lie that the border is secure and, instead, immediately deploy federal assets to address the dire problems you have caused,” he wrote in a letter to the president. “You must execute the duties that the U.S. Constitution mandates you perform and secure the southern border before more innocent lives are lost.”

The governor also referenced Title 42, the Trump-era policy that allows border officials to turn away asylum seekers because of concerns over public health. The policy was set to expire on Wednesday, but one day before, Supreme Court Justice John Roberts granted an administrative stay, temporarily halting the roll back.

The Department of Homeland Security warned on Saturday that it is still enforcing Title 42, writing in a statement that “anyone attempting to enter without authorization is subject to expulsion under Title 42.” The agency also cautioned about cold temperatures at the border.

A majority of Republicans and some Democrats have said Title 42 is important to keep in place to control immigration at the border, but immigration advocates and most Democrats contend that it subverts the asylum system.

“With cold temperatures gripping Texas, your inaction to secure the southern border is putting the lives of migrants at risk, particularly in the City of El Paso,” Abbott wrote. “With thousands of men, women, and children illegally crossing into Texas every day, and with the exception that those numbers will only increase if Title 42 expulsions end, the state is overburdened as we respond to this disaster caused by you and your administration.”

“Your policies will leave many people in the bitter, dangerous cold as a polar vortex moves into Texas,” he added.

Hasan, the White House deputy press secretary, said the administration is “willing to work with anyone – Republican or Democrat alike – on real solutions” to address circumstances at the border, but noted that “these political games accomplish nothing and only put lives in danger.”

The chorus of Democrats criticizing the Christmas Eve incident by Abbott is only growing.

“Guess we know how Greg Abbott, a “practicing” Roman Catholic, would have treated Jesus, Mary & Joseph,” Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) wrote on Twitter.

Source: TEST FEED1

Putin says he is ready to negotiate 'with everyone involved' over Ukraine

Russian President Vladimir Putin said that he’s ready to negotiate “with everyone involved” in the war with Ukraine. 

Putin told a Russian news reporter in an interview that aired on Russian media on Sunday that the Kremlin is ready to negotiate but their enemy are the ones refusing to talk.

The comments from the Russian leader follow intense Russian shelling on the Ukrainian city of Kherson on Christmas Eve that killed at least 10 people and injured more than 50 others. 

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky denounced Russia as “absolute evil” on Saturday following the deadly strikes, which he said were for “the sake of intimidation and pleasure.” 

Zelensky and President Biden discussed what a “just peace” would look like when Zelensky visited the United States on Wednesday for his first international trip since the war started in February.

Zelensky has laid out a series of 10 conditions that must be met for peace to be achieved, including total Russian withdrawal from Ukrainian territory. This would also include a Russian withdrawal from the Crimean Peninsula under the Ukrainian demands. 

Russia seized Crimea in 2014 following a Russian-backed referendum that was condemned by most of the international community as illegal. 

Putin has previously called on Ukraine and the international community to recognize Crimea as part of Russia, which they have been unwilling to do. 

Putin said in the interview that Russia is defending its national interests and its citizens in the 10-month conflict, The Associated Press reported. But he said Russia is prepared to negotiate “some acceptable outcomes” with all participants in the conflict. 

Putin called the conflict a war for the first time in a televised news conference on Thursday, saying it is Russia’s goal to end it. He previously only referred to it as a “special military operation.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Six ways students can reduce debt if Biden program is killed by courts

Students who borrowed money to pay for college are hoping for help from President Biden’s debt relief program, which for now is tied up in the courts.

If Biden’s program is killed off by the judiciary, however, it doesn’t leave student borrowers without options to reduce their debt.

Here are some options that student borrowers could consider. 

Income-Driven Repayment Forgiveness

Income-Driven Repayment (IDR) Forgiveness has the advantage of broad availability and lower monthly payments. But that may be offset by how long it takes to get forgiveness.

The plan bases monthly student loan payments off an individual’s income and family size. From there, an individual must make monthly payments over a 20- or 25-year span before the rest of the debt is forgiven. 

This option is popular for reducing the amount owed every month, but not everyone is aware of it. 

“I’ve seen with a lot of customers that I’ve talked to in the past that they’re shocked,” they qualify for an IDR plan, Trent Graham, Program Performance and Quality Assurance Expert at GreenPath Financial Wellness, told The Hill. He added that some clients “only had to make a $5 payment a month.”

Learn more about this option from the Department of Education here. 

Public Service Loan Forgiveness 

One of the most well-known types of loan forgiveness is the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program for government and nonprofit workers.

PSLF has been around since 2007. 

To qualify, a borrower has to be employed by the government or a not-for-profit organization, work full-time for the agency or group, have Direct Loans, repay loans under an IDR plan and make 120 qualifying payments. 

After 10 years of payments toward student loans as a government or not-for-profit employee under an IDR plan, the federal government will forgive the rest of your debt. 

Learn more about this option from the Department of Education here. 

Defer payments

It is unclear when the student loan payment pause will end. The Biden administration said payments will resume, at the latest, 60 days after June 30 or 60 days after the Supreme Court reaches a decision on the legality of Biden’s student debt relief program.

Once payments do resume, there are a number of ways to keep deferring them.

A borrower typically has to submit a request to their loan servicer to defer payments and show proof they meet the deferral requirements.

For certain loan types, the Department of Education will pay the interest that is accrued while payments are deferred. For other types, the borrower is still responsible for the monthly interest. 

“It really comes back to whether they’re a subsidized student loan or an unsubsidized student, so usually with the subsidized student loans, the government will cover the interest during that deferment period,” Graham said. 

Among the reasons loans may be deferred include cancer treatment, economic hardship, graduate school fellowship, military service, parent PLUS borrower, rehabilitation training and unemployment.

Learn more about deferring payments here. 

Student loan forbearance

Forbearance allows eligible individuals to temporarily stop making payments on student loans. 

Reasons for forbearance can be financial difficulties, medical difficulties, a change in employment or another reason the loan servicer finds acceptable. 

The main difference between deferring payments and forbearance is, no matter the type of loan, an individual will have to pay the interest that accrues while the payments are halted in forbearance.

Forbearance requests can last for 12 months; borrowers must reapply after that time. A person can stay in forbearance for three years. 

Learn more about this option from the Department of Education here. 

Bankruptcy

A person may be able to get student loans discharged in bankruptcy, but it is a historically difficult path. 

An individual would have to go to bankruptcy court and prove repaying the loans would cause “undue hardship.”

The criteria for “undue hardship” includes an individual not able to maintain a basic standard of living if they had the loan payments, the hardship will occur for a long time over the repayment period and a person made enough effort to try to repay before filing for bankruptcy. 

The standard is high and difficult to prove, but the Department of Education did make reforms to the process this year to help borrowers. 

The reforms make it so the government may not object to a person discharging their student loan debt in bankruptcy, depending on the circumstances, giving a slightly easier path for debt relief through this option.

Learn more about this option from the Department of Education here. 

Industry-specific relief

It is worth looking into if there are organizations who will help with student loan debt based on field of work. Some of these programs may be through the government, such as the Teacher Loan Forgiveness program for educators. 

Those in the law or medical fields can look into programs through different organizations to help forgive student debt, especially if they work with underserved communities. 

As borrowers face the year ahead with uncertainty of when student loan payments will resume, it is important to prepare to take advantage of other options if needed. 

Graham said it is common the above options are not taken advantage of because people don’t know where to find or look for them. 

“It really comes back to the knowledge of it and where to look for these types of programs. I think more are getting better at it, but there’s still more opportunities out there,” he said.

Source: TEST FEED1