Tag Archives : Build House

The high-stakes race in Wisconsin that could impact abortion rights — and 2024

A race for a Supreme Court seat in Wisconsin could determine the future of abortion rights in a state likely to play a crucial role in the 2024 presidential election.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has a 4-3 conservative majority, but conservative Justice Patience Roggensack is opting not to seek another term, evenly splitting the court along ideological lines. Voters will head to the polls for a February primary, which will determine which two justices from a group of two conservative candidates and two liberal candidates will move on to the April general election.

Whoever wins that state Supreme Court seat is likely to weigh in on a consequential lawsuit over a contested 1849 abortion law, which offers no exceptions except for the life of the pregnant person, and the outcome of which could have major implications for one of the country’s few remaining swing states.

Wisconsin-based Democratic strategist Joe Zepecki said that anger following the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade last year is still motivating voters and will play a crucial role in this year’s state judicial race.

“The midterms did not go the way Republicans thought they would, and I really believe that one of the main reasons behind that was the Dobbs decision. Nothing has fundamentally changed in the landscape,” Zepecki said. “That means that all of a sudden the voters who are passionate about abortion in November of last year aren’t gonna go, ‘Oh, well, we did what we could. Oh, well, we’ll just live with this.’”

State Attorney General Josh Kaul (D) filed a lawsuit last year arguing that legislation passed following the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, which allows abortions up until a fetus’s “viability” with limited exceptions afterward, created a conflict with the 1849 abortion law. Depending on how the court rules, it could keep abortion restrictions in place or offer broader exceptions to pregnant people. 

Mark Jefferson, executive director of the Wisconsin GOP, argued the focus on abortion was “a dodge” and said the party is “trying desperately to get away from discussions about other issues in which the liberals are horribly out of touch.” He listed school choice, voting changes and Second Amendment rights as other issues that could likely come up. 

Two liberal judges — Milwaukee County Judge Janet Protasiewicz and Dane County Judge Everett Mitchell — and two conservative judges — Waukesha County Judge Jennifer Dorow and former state Supreme Court Judge Daniel Kelly — are vying for the open state Supreme Court justice seat in the Feb. 21 primary. 

The top two vote-getters will move on to the general election on April 4, meaning two candidates from the same party or one from each could proceed to the final round.

There are other issues besides abortion at play in the race: Democrats see redistricting and the state’s legislative maps as critical issues. And Barry Burden, a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the director of the university’s Elections Research Center, says Republicans are likely hoping several ballot measures they added to the spring election — one on work requirements for welfare recipients and another on bail — will excite their base. 

But most of the candidates have made a point of speaking out on abortion. Groups on either side of the issue have also waded into the race, suggesting that it’s likely to play a major role. 

Mitchell, one of the liberal justices, issued a statement in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision last summer to overturn Roe v. Wade, saying that “the reality of a reproductive right being taken from women, is both heart-wrenching and disappointing” and that “as an ally, I will always use my male privilege to stand with and to stand up for women’s reproductive rights.”

Protasiewicz, the other liberal justice running, issued a 15-minute ad through her campaign in which she said, “I believe in a woman’s freedom to make her own decision on abortion.”

Jim Dick, a campaign spokesperson for Kelly, one of the conservative candidates, gave a statement to The Hill touting endorsements “by all three major pro-life groups in the state.” One of those, Wisconsin Right to Life PAC, has also endorsed the other conservative candidate, Dorow. 

Though some of the candidates have fielded criticism for sharing opinions on the issue, Mitchell and Protasiewicz’s campaigns argued in separate interviews with The Hill that the candidates are allowed to express their own beliefs and have not said how they would rule on a case if it came before them.

“We are judges and we are lawyers, more specifically, so we can have an opinion as to the law that’s already been written and decided on, and both sides can do that,” Mitchell told The Hill, while an official said with Protasiewicz’s campaign said that “there’s nothing that prevents a candidate [from] saying what their beliefs are.”

Meanwhile, outside groups on both sides of the issue have started previewing their involvement in the race. 

Stephen Billy, vice president of state affairs at Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, an anti-abortion group, said that the organization will be making a six-figure investment in the race.

“We’re not going to let the abortion advocates spend money to lie and to fearmonger, and we’re going to fight back against that with a six-figure investment to make sure that the truth about the pro-life laws in Wisconsin are known and that the voters understand the other side is seeking to make sure that abortion on-demand is the permanent law in Wisconsin,” Billy said.

Steven Webb, executive director of Planned Parenthood Advocates of Wisconsin, declined to offer a dollar amount on potential spending in the race but said the organization would be involved.

“We’ve prioritized this election and [are] committed to do the on-the-ground organizing and outreach to inform people about the importance of the race. We will be mobilizing young people, women and people of color to make sure that their voices [are] heard in this election. The investments that we will be making will be around — for education, GOTV campaigns and digital advertisement, direct mail,” he said. 

The stakes of the race are also high because Wisconsin is one of the few remaining battleground states, and Democrats are likely to use the abortion issue as one key turnout mechanism in 2024. Should a more a conservative-leaning state Supreme Court rule in favor of more restrictive abortion rules ahead of the presidential election, Democrats will almost certainly seize on any upswell of anger among voters, just as they did in 2022.

At the same time, the Supreme Court’s decision last year has created a patchwork of state laws that have regulated differently on the medical procedure. While Illinois has abortion protections and Michigan, with its newly Democratic-controlled legislature, will likely pass abortion protections, Wisconsin represents a different reality to patients and medical students.

“Right now, Wisconsin is losing OB-GYN practices. Students who want to become OB-GYN doctors have to leave the state to complete their training because you can’t teach the standard care for cases of ectopic pregnancy or miscarriage without fearing that a reverend prosecutor is going to try to throw you in jail,” said Ben Wikler, chairman of the Wisconsin Democratic Party.

“This situation is totally unacceptable to most Wisconsinites, and the Supreme Court election [on] April 4 is the closest thing Wisconsin will have to Kansas’s abortion referendum,” he added. 

Retired GOP strategist Brandon Scholz, who called the upcoming election “the single most important race for the Supreme Court” that Wisconsin has ever seen, says this much is clear: Money will continue to pour into the race on the Democratic side, and Republicans will need to compete in terms of fundraising if they want to win.

“If this isn’t a $20 million dollar race, I don’t know what it is,” he said.

Source: TEST FEED1

White House blasts McCarthy for comments on strengthening Social Security, Medicare

The White House hit back after Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said he wants to “strengthen” Medicare and Social Security, arguing on Sunday that the House GOP leader and his conference actually want to slash spending on the entitlement programs.

McCarthy said in an interview on CBS’s “Face the Nation” earlier Sunday that he wants to take cuts to Medicare and Social Security off the table in talks with Democrats over the debt ceiling, even though Republicans do want commitments on spending cuts generally. Instead, McCarthy said Republicans were committed to strengthening the programs.

The strengthening of entitlement programs laid out in the Republicans’ “Commitment to America” is vague. One of the legislative recommendations made in the plan is that Congress must “must be prepared to make reforms to extend the solvency of the entitlement programs.”

The White House rebuked the Speaker’s claim, saying on Sunday that Republicans have wanted to cut earned benefits for years.

“For years, congressional Republicans have advocated for slashing earned benefits using Washington code words like ‘strengthen,’ when their policies would privatize Medicare and Social Security, raise the retirement age, or cut benefits,” White House spokesman Andrew Bates said in an emailed statement. “House Republicans refuse to raise revenue from the wealthy, but insist they will ‘strengthen’ earned benefits programs.”

The White House argues that the only option for the GOP to “save” the entitlement programs is to make cuts, as House Republicans have ruled out raising more revenue from tax increases on the wealthy.

But McCarthy was adamant that Social Security and Medicare would be off the table in the conversations around the debt limit. McCarthy is set to meet with President Biden on Wednesday in a much-anticipated get-together between the two leaders.

Source: TEST FEED1

Republicans see education as winning issue in 2024

Prospective GOP candidates for president are leaning heavily into education amid concerns over issues like parental rights and the politicization of school curriculums.

Underscoring how critical an issue it is for Republicans, former President Trump unveiled his education platform on Thursday, calling for cutting federal funds to any education program that involves “critical race theory, gender ideology, or other inappropriate racial, sexual, or political content onto our children.”

The move comes after Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) and Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R), both seen as top potential challengers to Trump for the Republican presidential nomination, have made headlines in recent weeks with a series of education-related actions.

DeSantis sparked controversy most recently by rejecting an Advance Placement African American studies course earlier this month, while Youngkin launched an investigation into multiple northern Virginia schools for not giving students the news that they had qualified for National Merit Scholarships in a timely fashion.

Their actions come as potential GOP candidates search for winning issues after a disappointing midterm election. They also suggest that Republicans will take a page out of Youngkin’s playbook, after he made school issues a winning platform in Virginia’s gubernatorial race in 2021.

“You can look at the way Glenn Youngkin became governor of Virginia,” said Republican strategist Alex Stroman. “I would say it was largely because of out-of-control school districts and kind of the climate that was born out of what was happening with COVID and some of the responses and parents starting to pay attention to education because they were forced to.” 

Youngkin’s gubernatorial campaign had nine different education models to target nine different types of education voters. 

“It was a very sophisticated, deliberate goal to make education the forefront,” said Kristin Davison, a political adviser to Youngkin. “We made a decision very early on in 2021 that we were going to go on offense on education because Republicans always played defense, and it wasn’t an easy decision and all of these people said we were crazy, but it ended up working out.” 

Youngkin notably zeroed in on his opponent, former Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe, for saying that he did not believe parents should be telling schools what they should teach. 

The Virginia governor’s supporters credit him for writing the GOP playbook on education after the party had struggled for years to go on offense on the issue. 

“Gov. Youngkin put education on the map for Republicans,” said one GOP strategist. “He was the first Republican candidate to have education be a central part of his campaign platform and win.” 

“All 2024 potential candidates saw what Glenn did in 2021,” the strategist said. 

Education has also catapulted DeSantis, who is viewed as a potential replacement for Trump, into the spotlight. 

Like Youngkin, DeSantis used his coronavirus response as a way to mold his own policy on education in the Sunshine State. 

“If you look at Ron DeSantis’s meteoric rise among Republican base voters, it’d be the same thing,” Stroman said. “It was COVID policies, but really with a focus on school districts.” 

But DeSantis’s policies related to education have also sparked controversy, drawing condemnation from his critics. 

Last year, the Florida governor signed the Parental Rights in Education Act, which prohibiting instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity in kindergarten through third grade and limited it to “age appropriate” material for grades above third.

More recently, DeSantis made headlines for his defense of his administration’s decision to reject the AP African American studies course, arguing it has “a political agenda and leaves large, ambiguous gaps that can be filled with additional ideological material.”

Many strategists say the backlash will only play into DeSantis’s hands. 

“This is starting to take the form of the media Democratic pile-on that occurred during the alleged ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill,” said Ford O’Connell, a Florida-based Republican strategist. 

“When KJP stands up there and pretends that he’s George Wallace at a school door, the Democrats are jumping the shark,” he added, referring to White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre. “When the dust settles, whether it’s this or Disney or the parental rights bill, he knows that he’s most likely going to prove victorious.” 

The actions also throw red meat to the Republican base.

“It’s flashy newsmaking that appeals here because he knows that that is going to make news in conservative media, whether that’s Fox or Newsmax,” said another GOP strategist. 

While education-related issues will likely play well with the party’s tried-and-true primary voters, it remains to be seen which candidate will be able to successfully message on the issue on the national stage. 

Insiders point out that candidates like DeSantis and Youngkin differ stylistically on the issue, not only because of their different personalities, but because of their states’ unique political landscapes. 

DeSantis has catered toward an increasingly red electorate in the Sunshine State, while Youngkin has had to walk a fine line in Virginia, which is a purple state with an arguably blue lean. 

“I think that right now we’re up against such fierce forces that really will destroy, so you kind of got to answer back just as forcefully as they do. But Glenn Youngkin’s strategy has been really working in Virginia,” said Terry Schilling, president of the conservative American Principles Project. 

“I prefer DeSantis,” noted Schilling. “I think that his very direct style is what’s needed right now in politics, but there is something to say about Glenn Youngkin’s style as well. He’s in a blue state and he’s governing pretty successfully.”

Strategists say that for the governors that decide to jump into the presidential fray, their records on the issue will be put to the test on education in the primary. 

“That’s going to be a key point to see which people just put out a tweet, put out a press release, and give it lip service and which people show up with action to fight the fight,” Davison said

Source: TEST FEED1

‘Bakersfield BS’: Schiff, Swalwell, Omar blast McCarthy over committee removals

Three Democratic House members targeted by Speaker Kevin McCarthy for removal from their committee assignments defended themselves on Sunday from claims that they are unfit to serve on the congressional panels, with one blasting the California Republican’s efforts as “Bakersfield BS.”

“The only real explanation is he needs [Rep.] Marjorie Taylor Greene’s [R-Ga.] vote. He needs [Rep.] Paul Gosar’s [R-Ariz.] vote. He wants to retaliate for their removal from the committee,” Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said on CNN’s “State of the Union,” referring to McCarthy. “And apparently he believes I was very effective in exposing his misconduct, Donald Trump’s misconduct, and that’s what they’re trying to stop.”

Schiff and Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) have been booted from the House Intelligence Committee. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) is under threat of being kicked off the House Foreign Affairs Committee, which, unlike the Intelligence panel, requires a vote by the full chamber.

Republicans have argued that Schiff used his position on the Intelligence Committee to lie about the connections between the campaign of former President Trump and the Russian government despite an investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller that found no such coordination.

Republicans also say Swalwell is unfit for the committee because of allegations that he became involved with a suspected Chinese spy as far back as 2012. He was not accused of any wrongdoing by investigators. He said he cooperated with the FBI in the investigation, but that hasn’t stopped Republicans from saying Swalwell put himself in a compromising position with a foreign agent.

“This is some Bakersfield BS,” Swalwell said on CNN, referring to the city in California where McCarthy is from. “It’s Kevin McCarthy weaponizing his ability to commit this political abuse because he perceives me, just like Mr. Schiff and Ms. Omar, as an effective political opponent.”

Omar, the first Somali American and one of the first two Muslim women in Congress, is accused of using antisemitic tropes in the past when addressing American support for Israel. She has apologized for such rhetoric, saying she was unaware at the time of how her words would be perceived.

“I might’ve used words at the time that I didn’t understand were trafficking in antisemitism,” Omar said on Sunday. “When that was brought to my attention, I apologized.I owned up to it.”

While McCarthy was able to dispatch Schiff and Swalwell unilaterally, he needs a majority vote of the House to boot Omar from her panel. It is unclear if the Speaker would have enough votes to do so.

Source: TEST FEED1

McCarthy: Social Security, Medicare cuts ‘off the table’ 

Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said ahead of a meeting with President Biden this week that cuts to Medicare and Social Security are off the table in talks around raising the debt limit.

McCarthy has said that Republicans want commitments to spending reductions in exchange for raising the debt limit, but has been unclear about what exactly the GOP would be willing to cut. While he said Medicare and Social Security slashes are off the table in his interview on CBS’s “Face The Nation” on Sunday, he essentially said everything else, including defense spending, is under the microscope.

“I want to make sure we’re protected in our defense spending, but I want to make sure it’s effective and efficient,” McCarthy said. “I want to look at every single dollar we are spending, no matter where it is being spent.”

McCarthy came under fire from some in his party for possibly eyeing defense cuts. In order to become Speaker, he made a deal with some Republican holdouts that he would roll back defense spending to 2022 levels. The agreement drew the ire of some conservatives, who said any cut to defense spending would be irresponsible.

“You’re gonna tell me inside defense there’s no waste?” McCarthy asked on Sunday “We shouldn’t just print more money, we should balance our budget.”

The White House has said that it will not negotiate with Republicans on spending cuts, but McCarthy sounded more optimistic on the possibility that Biden would make concessions on spending in a meeting with the Speaker on Wednesday.

“I know his staff tries to say something different, but I think the president is gonna be willing to make an agreement together,” McCarthy said.

The U.S. reached its statutory debt limit of around $31.4 trillion earlier this month, but the Treasury Department is taking measures to be able to pay the government’s bills until sometime in June. Lawmakers must either raise the debt limit or come to an agreement on a short-term extension of the limit.

Source: TEST FEED1

With ChatGPT rising in popularity, what's a parent to do?

Parents have a new platform to contend with in the battle to keep up with the ever-growing technological advances in their children’s lives: ChatGPT. 

The new AI technology has become so popular that some schools have banned it as it makes its way into the lives of K-12 and college students around the U.S. It has made headlines for its humanlike and unique responses to questions, which sparked concern among some educators around cheating and a loss of critical thinking skills.

It is not uncommon for children and young adults to be ahead of the adults in their lives with certain technological advances.

“I would guess that 95 percent of parents have no idea, anything about ChatGPT, haven’t thought about it, or don’t know anything about it. I’m guessing that high school and college kids are starting to figure this out really quickly,” said Matt Albert, former executive director at the Center for Reflective Communities. 

Parents not completely in the know may be quick to catch up as school districts take action against ChatGPT. New York City and Seattle public schools have banned the platform from their servers due to concerns about cheating. 

“Certainly as school districts engage, whether you’re in Seattle or New York and making policies, parent awareness starts to grow, but it’s not hitting the mainstream just yet,” said Shelley Pasnik, senior vice president for the Education Development Center and former director of the Center for Children and Technology. 

Have open conversations with children

There is no stopping the impact AI technology will have going forward, and ChatGPT is likely just the start of this era in education. 

Parents are on the front lines in guiding their children through this transition and ensuring their children are aware of the risks and benefits of the technology.

“Parents need to figure out what their child knows about ChatGPT first, so that way they can correct any misinformation they’ve been given on it,” Shawnte Barnes, an education consultant who previously taught K-12 and has twin sons, said.

“First of all, you want to know if what they heard is based in facts, or if they heard something that’s really outlandish. Then you clarify what they heard,” before you talk about what you know about ChatGPT, she added.

Another way to address ChatGPT is for parents to explore the platform with children and work with a child’s curiosity about the new technology.  

“That overall approach of curiosity and labeling it as a tool that could be used for many different purposes helps set an expectation of learning and exploration rather than if a parent labels something in a negative way or in a positive way, you miss out on that opportunity of exploration and discovering together what the possibilities are,” Pasnik said. 

ChatGPT is similar to other technology, with benefits and concerns that come with it, and parents can largely treat the conversations with their kids in that way. 

“The way that parents should be talking to their kids about ChatGPT, just like they should with everything else, is there are really potentially positive ways to use this technology and there are some, you know, unethical and or dangerous ways that the technology can be used,” Albert said. 

Albert showed his own daughter ChatGPT and how it could type up an essay for school. He then followed it with a conversation about the platform.

“We had a conversation about cheating, about her ethics, about what kind of person she wanted to be, but we also had a conversation about what is learning, do we care about a grade or do we care about the process, do you know why do we go through the process?” Albert said.

Parents’ concerns with ChatGPT

Parents may have concerns about how their kids are using technology and how it will affect them, especially when it comes to new advances that are not yet broadly understood.

In line with concerns from educators and school districts, some parents are concerned about the cheating threat ChatGPT poses. 

“There are a lot of legitimate concerns that parents should have regarding ChatGPT the most obvious is cheating,” said Albert, who is the director at the Teshinsky Family Foundation in California.

OpenAI, the company that created ChatGPT, previously said in a statement it is working with schools to address these concerns. 

Another worry may be how much time children could spend on ChatGPT. 

A survey last year by Common Sense Media found screen time increased 17 percent between 2019 and 2021 among tweens and teens, taking up hours of their day. 

ChatGPT may be another distraction, as children explore what the platform is capable of doing.

“Then there’s the ‘man, you spent the whole hour putting random questions and prompts into ChatGPT and you haven’t cleaned your room, you haven’t come out and said hey,” Barnes said. 

Ultimately, one of the biggest fears could be fear of the unknown, as many are still just getting familiar with AI technology.

“We have no idea where AI will go in terms of ethical and moral questions, so that’s a big concern,” Albert said. “Parents need to be concerned as their children are on the internet, who’s on the other side of a particular conversation that they may be having? At this point, it gets to be a question of, well, is it an AI or is it a person, right?”

Source: TEST FEED1

House Intel members look for ‘reset’ after partisan era of Schiff, Nunes

The House Intelligence Committee will get a facelift this Congress following the booting of its former chairman and the retirement of a prior ranking member — a drastic makeover that’s prompting internal hopes that the panel can move beyond the partisan battles that have practically defined it in recent years.

The committee launched the last Congress with Reps. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) at the helm, two national — and highly polarizing — figures whose epic battles, waged predominantly over issues related to former President Trump, came to symbolize the panel’s shift from a rare bastion of bipartisan cooperation to an arena of partisan warfare. 

This year, there may be a turnaround.

Nunes retired from Congress last January to lead the Trump Media & Technology Group, the former president’s social media company. And this week, Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) blocked Schiff from sitting on the panel, accusing the former chairman of lying to the public about Trump’s ties to Russia. 

Schiff’s eviction drew howls from Democrats, who denied the charges and rushed to his defense. But amid the protests, even some Democrats acknowledged that both Schiff and Nunes had become so radioactive in the eyes of the opposing party that it became a drag on the work of the committee. 

With that in mind, committee members of both parties are hoping the roster reshuffling will turn a page on that combative era and return the panel to its historic image as a largely collaborative body. 

“We’re hoping it’ll be a reset, and we can get past all the infighting … and just focus on national security,” said a source familiar with the committee dynamics.

Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.), who was first seated on the panel in the last Congress, echoed that message, saying the new chairman, Rep. Michael Turner (R-Ohio), is making improved relations a priority as he takes the gavel.

“That’s the goal,” Gallagher said. “I think we’ve got really good, thoughtful members. We’ve got the right leadership in Turner. And we’re trying to get back to that more bipartisan approach.” 

In denying committee seats to Schiff, along with Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), McCarthy claimed their exit would help move the panel in a less partisan direction — something the two Democrats and their allies deny.

“I think what McCarthy is doing is actually quite the opposite,” Schiff said.

“He’s politicizing the committee. No Speaker has ever sought to interfere with who the ranking member on the Intelligence Committee should be. Certainly, [Former] Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi had many differences with Devin Nunes, but she has a reverence for the work of the committee and Kevin McCarthy evidently doesn’t.”

Members of both parties pointed to Nunes’s departure, at the start of last year, as the beginning of improved relations on the panel. 

“We entered a new chapter after Nunes left. It really changed with Turner, a ton. And so I suppose maybe from their side they think that something is going to change on our side without Schiff and Swalwell. Perhaps? But I really thought everything changed for the better once Nunes was gone. We were very collegial,” said one Democratic source familiar with the panel’s innerworkings.

Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah), an eight-year veteran of the Intel Committee, cautioned against pinning the panel’s problems on any one person.

“I don’t want to say, ‘Yeah, the committee is going to work beautifully now because those two are gone,’” he said of Schiff and Swalwell, “because that would be unfair, and it wouldn’t be accurate. So I don’t want to indicate that the committee didn’t work, or was more political, only because of them.”

Still, Stewart also said it was “fair” to say Nunes contributed to the panel’s combative environment —  a dynamic he blamed on the charged atmosphere of the Trump years, which also featured Schiff playing lead manager of Trump’s first impeachment. 

“Devin was associated with those very contentious times just like Adam Schiff was associated with those very contentious times. I don’t think it was necessarily Devin, I think it was the two leaders who had to navigate through those tough times,” he said.

Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), another member, agreed that the impeachment era soured the committee’s dynamic, though he contributed the deterioration largely to the Republicans’ defense of Trump.

“Whatever my own view is, obviously, the committee became enormously polarized, which is pretty unusual. When we moved on [after] Ukraine, it already started to repair itself. You know, Devin Nunes moved on,” Himes said. “Mike Turner, in my opinion, has always been a fair actor.”

Turner declined to talk this week. 

The full roster of the committee remains unclear. While Republicans have named their members — including new additions that include Reps. Dan Crenshaw (Texas), Michael Waltz (Fla.) and French Hill (Ark.) — Democrats are waiting for Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) to make his accompanying selections.

“A lot will depend on that,” said Gallagher. “But I hope that Leader Jeffries looks at who we’ve appointed … and responds in-kind with, not just bomb-throwers, but solutions-oriented types.” 

McCarthy’s refusal to seat Schiff has created a vacuum at the top of the Democrats’ roster — a void that virtually every committee Democrat is hoping to fill. 

Pelosi (D-Calif.), had she remained the leader of the party, was set to appoint Himes to the position, according to several Democrats familiar with her plans. But others are also expressing interest, including Rep. André Carson (D-Ind.).

Jeffries, however, has given no indication either who he’ll pick or when he’ll announce it. 

As the committee comes together, members say they’re not expecting to avoid partisan fights altogether. Gallagher pointed out that the panel will have to tackle a number of prickly topics this Congress — including the reauthorization of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court — which are sure to lead to partisan clashes.

But those are issues-based differences, he emphasized, not collisions of personality. And Gallagher said he’s established a good rapport with some of the newer Democrats on the panel, including Reps. Jason Crow (Colo.) and Raja Krishnamoorthi (Ill.), who has co-sponsored legislation with Gallagher to ban TikTok in the United States.

“Those younger members and I have a really good working relationship,” Gallagher said. “We just hope to build on that.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Classified documents fiasco leaves lawmakers shaking heads: What happened? 

The discovery of classified documents at the homes of three top elected U.S. officials has left many lawmakers and former government workers shaking their heads and wondering how the country has ended up in this situation.

Authorities found dozens of classified materials at former President Trump’s home last year, including some marked “top secret,” that he did not promptly turn over to the National Archives.

Lawyers for President Biden found several classified documents at his Delaware residence in recent weeks, a discovery that prompted lawyers for former Vice President Mike Pence to search his Indiana home. They found a small number of papers with classified markings in the process.

Lawyers for both Biden and Pence alerted the National Archives and Justice Department about the discoveries.

The findings have lawmakers and aides who have dealt with classified documents puzzled over how there could be a breakdown in process in consecutive administrations, and it has triggered discussion over what reforms could prevent such mistakes from happening in the future. It has also left some officials worried that it will further erode trust in government institutions.

“I think it is an embarrassment because at a minimum it’s bad management,” said Daniella Ballou-Aares, who served as a senior adviser in the State Department during the Obama administration and now runs the Leadership Now Project.

“I think the question is how much of a risk does it suggest,” she continued. “Does it suggest behavior that is deliberately seeking to undermine national security? I would like to see the conversation shift to that question, because that’s what we need to know. Has national security been genuinely compromised by these documents, versus information that is relatively benign and was not handed over to a foreign government.”

At the White House, documents that are classified are clearly marked with cover sheets to make them easier to identify. Pence earlier this month explained on Fox News how after receiving a briefing with classified materials, he would put the documents back into the file he received them in. They would frequently go into a “burn bag” and be destroyed by a military aide, he said.

“I think there has been too cavalier an approach to handling classified documents by presidents and senior officials from both parties,” said Brett Bruen, a former diplomat who served as director of global engagement in the Obama administration.

Bruen recalled seeing classified documents tossed onto existing stacks of papers during his time in government, an issue he attributed to political officials who didn’t have the same appreciation “of what it takes to get those secrets and the consequences if they are exposed.”

On the Capitol Hill side, lawmakers and aides have been aghast at the apparent handling of documents within the Executive Branch, especially given the extremely rigorous process members must go through to view classified documents. 

“The rule for us on the committee is you don’t take things out of the room. Period. Full stop,” said Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee who also chairs the Senate Finance Committee. “I can have a lot of things going on and even before I get to the door when I’ve decided I don’t have anything, I do another check to make sure that I don’t.” 

The vast majority of the time, lawmakers must go to a sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF) to read documents. However, on rare occasions, they can have documents brought to their office to be viewed if it is considered appropriate for them to do so. 

According to one former Senate GOP aide, an intelligence staffer will put the document in a special briefcase, which would then be handcuffed to their wrist. Upon arrival, the intelligence staffer would clear the room, save for the lawmaker, and show the document to them one page at a time. After each page is read, it is placed back into a bag and, upon completion, the handcuffed briefcase containing the document is returned. 

The news cycle being dominated by the handling of classified documents has left lawmakers wondering what can be done to keep sensitive materials from getting misplaced, and whether the intelligence community may be overzealous in classifying items that don’t need to be classified.

John Kirby, a White House spokesperson on national security issues, told reporters on Wednesday that procedures governing classified materials have been developed over many years and are changed over time to accommodate changes in technology.

“I wouldn’t go so far as to slap a Band-Aid on and say, ‘Yeah, everything is over-classified.’ But it’s a balance that we try to strike to make sure that everything is appropriately marked and appropriately handled,” Kirby said.

Sen. John Thune (S.D.), the No. 2 Senate Republican, said the proper handling of classified materials is typically under the purview of the executive branch, but that recent events have raised the question of whether there’s a role for Congress to play.

Wyden called the classification system a “broken down mess” that needs to be fixed.

Fueling the problem further, the administration has yet to cooperate with the Senate Intelligence Committee and share the classified papers it collected from Trump or Biden due to the pair of special counsel probes into the handling of those documents. The lack of cooperation has members of the panel fed up, with some teetering on the edge of making threats in the administration’s direction. 

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), ranking member of the committee, noted that the panel controls funding for some intelligence agencies, indicating that it could decide to withhold that funding if the stonewalling by the administration continues. 

In addition, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) vowed to block all Biden administration nominees until the committee is granted access to those papers. 

“I think that’s the purpose of all the oversight, is to find out what exactly needs to be done,” Thune said when asked what the upper chamber can do about the executive branch’s issues in handling those documents. “Clearly there are loopholes you can drive a mack truck through.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Trump says DeSantis running for president would be 'a great act of disloyalty’

Former President Trump said Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) running for president would be “a great act of disloyalty” as he kicked off his first two major campaign events as part of his own 2024 presidential run. 

Trump visited New Hampshire and South Carolina, two of the first states to vote in the primary calendar, on Saturday after a quieter-than-normal beginning to his reelection campaign. He launched his campaign in mid-November, but has yet to hold any major rallies that were consistent during his 2016 and 2020 runs. 

Trump announced the leaders of his New Hampshire and South Carolina campaigns during his speeches. After his South Carolina speech, he sat for an interview with The Associated Press and criticized DeSantis, who is rumored to be considering his own presidential run and who has consistently placed second in hypothetical Republican primary polls. 

Trump emphasized his own status leading in many of those polls and took credit for DeSantis’s first election as governor of Florida. 

“If he runs, that’s fine. I’m way up in the polls. He’s going to have to do what he wants to do, but he may run,” Trump said. “I do think it would be a great act of disloyalty because, you know, I got him in. He had no chance. His political life was over.”

Trump endorsed DeSantis ahead of the Republican primary for the gubernatorial race in 2018.

Trump faced criticism from many in his own party following the November midterm elections, in which Republicans underperformed their hopes and expectations. The president’s party has historically lost seats in Congress during the midterms, but Democrats were able to grow their majority in the Senate and only narrowly lost in the House. 

Many, including some allies of Trump, blamed the former president for endorsing GOP candidates in the primaries who were seen as less likely to win a general election but more loyal to him than their other challengers. 

Many of these candidates lost in key congressional and gubernatorial races. 

Polls began showing DeSantis, who has not publicly confirmed he a 2024 run, closing the gap with Trump or in some cases leading in hypothetical polls. But Trump led DeSantis by 17 points in a Morning Consult poll earlier this month. 

Trump told AP that he has not spoken to DeSantis in a long time. He expressed confidence about his own prospects with the possibility of DeSantis running in an interview with David Brody on “The Water Cooler” earlier this week, saying, “We’ll handle that the way I handle things.” 

Trump is the only major candidate who has officially launched their candidacy in the 2024 race, but many Republicans have indicated they are considering running, including former Vice President Mike Pence, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Source: TEST FEED1

Memphis police deactivate Scorpion unit following video release of Tyre Nichols's fatal arrest

The Memphis Police Department announced on Saturday that it has deactivated its special unit that patrols high-crime areas following the release of the video of Tyre Nichols’s fatal arrest. 

The department said in a statement that officials decided it was in the best interest of the community for the Street Crimes Operations to Restore Peace in Our Neighborhoods, or Scorpion, unit to be permanently dissolved. 

“In the process of listening intently to the family of Tyre Nichols, community leaders, and the uninvolved officers who have done quality work in their assignments, it is in the best interest of all to permanently deactivate the SCORPION Unit,” the department wrote. 

It said all officers who were currently assigned to the unit agreed with the decision. 

The news came less than a day after the department released the body camera footage showing the traffic stop that led to Nichols’s death. 

Nichols, a 29-year-old Black man, was pulled over for what officers alleged was reckless driving on Jan. 7. Police pulled Nichols out of his car after stopping him and wrestled him to the ground. 

Nichols ran away from the officers, but they ultimately caught up with him and beat him with a baton and kicked and punched him for three minutes. Footage showed more than 20 minutes passed between the time the officers beat Nichols and him receiving any medical attention. 

Nichols said he had shortness of breath and was taken to a hospital, where he died three days later from injuries he sustained during the arrest.

The five officers involved in the stop and Nichols’s death were fired and have since been charged with second-degree murder and other crimes. 

The Memphis police launched the Scorpion unit, which the five officers were members of, in November 2021 to reduce violent crime in “hot spots” throughout the city. 

Police Chief Cerelyn Davis told CNN that it was formed from an “outcry” from the community after a record number of homicides in 2021. She noted that 2022 was the first year where a drop in homicides happened in a “long time.” 

But prominent civil rights attorney Ben Crump, who is representing Nichols’s family, and others said the unit should be disbanded as it has engaged in “this type of brutality” on other occasions. 

Crump and the family’s other attorney, Antonio Romanucci, said in a letter to the police department that the behavior of these types of units can “morph into ‘wolf pack’ misconduct.” 

“While the heinous actions of a few casts a cloud of dishonor on the title SCORPION, it is imperative that we, the Memphis Police Department take proactive steps in the healing process for all impacted,” the department’s statement said Saturday. 

“The Memphis Police Department remains committed to serving our community and taking every measure possible to rebuild the trust that has been negatively affected by the death of Mr. Tyre Nichols,” it concluded.

Source: TEST FEED1