Tag Archives : Build House

More openly LGBTQ+ candidates than ever are running for office this year

More than 1,000 openly LGBTQ+ candidates are running for public office this election cycle, new data shows, a record-breaking total that signals a potential shift in the national political landscape during one of the worst legislative years in recent history for LGBTQ+ Americans.

At least 1,008 openly LGBTQ+ people are running for office – from school boards to Congress – this year, the LGBTQ Victory Fund, which works to elect more LGBTQ+ candidates to public office, said Thursday. The total is just slightly higher than the previous record set in 2020, when 1,006 out LGBTQ+ people ran.

In 2021, an off-year election cycle, 410 openly LGBTQ+ people ran for office.

More than 40 percent of openly LGBTQ+ candidates this year are running for a state legislative seat, according to the LGBTQ Victory Fund data. In just the first half of the year, hundreds of bills have been introduced in state legislatures nationwide that would restrict the rights of LGBTQ+ Americans.

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

Dozens of those measures, including a ban on classroom instruction related to sexual orientation or gender identity in Florida and limitations placed on transgender athletes in at least 10 states, have already become law.

Battles over LGBTQ+ rights have thus far primarily been fought at the state level, although House lawmakers earlier this week passed legislation that would codify the Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, the landmark 2015 decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.

The measure would also address a national patchwork of marriage laws – most of which were rendered unenforceable by Obergefell. One hundred and fifty seven House Republicans voted against the bill, titled the Respect for Marriage Act.

At least 138 openly LGBTQ+ candidates are running for federal office this year, the LGBTQ Victory Fund said Thursday, a 73 percent increase over 2020, when 80 out LGBTQ+ people ran.

Currently, just 11 members of Congress – all of them Democrats – identify as LGBTQ, according to data from the group’s partner organization, the LGBTQ Victory Institute.

In a statement, Annise Parker, the president and chief executive of the LGBTQ Victory Fund, said the election of more LGBTQ+ candidates this year will be a “deafening rebuke to the wave of hate impacting our community.”

“The writing is on the wall for the LGBTQ community and our allies: our rights are on the ballot this year,” Parker, formerly the mayor of Houston, said Thursday. “The people we elect this cycle will make decisions about what our kids are allowed to learn and say in the classroom, what health care choices people will be allowed to make about their own bodies and possibly, whether we will continue to be allowed to marry those we love.”

Openly LGBTQ+ people running for office this year also represent the most diverse slate of candidates in history, the LGBTQ Victory Fund said.

At least 100 more LGBTQ+ people of color are running this year compared to 2020, the group said, a 58 percent increase from two years ago and a 225 percent increase from 2018.

From 2020, there has been a 66 percent increase in Black/Afro-Caribbean candidates (141 in 2022 versus 85 in 2020), a 78 percent increase in Asian American/Pacific Islander candidates (41 versus 23) and a 34 percent increase in Latino/Hispanic candidates (123 versus 92).

A record 55 transgender people are also running for public office this year, according to the LGBTQ Victory Fund data, a 62 percent increase over 2020. The number of gender non-conforming candidates on the ballot this year also sits at a record high of 20, compared with zero in 2020 and two in 2018.

Gay candidates continue to represent the majority of openly LGBTQ+ people running for office, at 515, although the number of bisexual, pansexual, queer and asexual candidates ticked up substantially this year compared with prior cycles. 

Notably, the number of lesbians running for office has declined since 2020, but two lesbian women – Tina Kotek of Oregon and Maura Healey of Massachusetts – could make history later this year as the nation’s first openly lesbian governors.

Source: TEST FEED1

Here are the House Republicans who backed legislation protecting contraception access

Eight House Republicans on Thursday voted for a bill that would protect access to contraceptives, nearly a month after Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said the bench should reverse a precedent safeguarding access to forms of birth control.

The House approved the legislation, dubbed the Right to Contraception Act, in a 228-195 vote, with all Democrats supporting the measure. Two Republicans voted present, and six did not vote.

The eight Republicans who backed the measure were Reps. Liz Cheney (Wyo.), Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), Anthony Gonzalez (Ohio), John Katko (N.Y.), Adam Kinzinger (Ill.), Nancy Mace (S.C.), Maria Elvira Salazar (Fla.) and Fred Upton (Mich.).

GOP Reps. Bob Gibbs (Ohio) and Mike Kelly (Pa.) voted present.

Gonzalez, Katko, Kinzinger, Upton and Gibbs are all not running for reelection this year.

It is unclear if the bill will attract enough Republican support in the Senate to pass.

Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, an anti-abortion group, said it was scoring against the bill, arguing that it would “trample on freedoms of conscience for health care providers,” and labeling its definiton of contraceptives as “overbroad.”

The legislation calls for codifying access to contraceptives on the federal level — which would permit individuals to receive and use birth control, and allow health care providers to supply such products to patients. It also authorizes the attorney general, health care providers and others to take civil action against states that are in breach of the bill.

The legislation protects a wide variety of contraceptives, including oral and emergency medications, intrauterine devices and condoms.

House passage comes nearly one month after the Supreme Court issued a ruling overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that protected access to abortion as a constitutional right. In a concurring opinion, Thomas said the bench should “reconsider” all substantive due process precedents, including Griswold v. Connecticut, the 1965 ruling that protects the right of married couples to use contraceptives.

The majority opinion, however, said, “Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.”

Mace wrote on Twitter that she supported the contraceptives bill because South Carolina, her home state, is considering an abortion bill that does not include exceptions for rape and incest. A state House panel on Tuesday said it will not recommend the exceptions in its draft abortion legislation.

“My state is banning almost all exceptions for women including rape & incest victims. Today I voted to protect access to contraceptives – to protect every woman in South Carolina. You can’t ban abortion and then not protect women’s access to contraceptives,” Mace said.

In the Capitol on Thursday, the congresswoman wore a blazer that had pieces of duct tape with the words “My State is Banning EXCEPTIONS. Protect CONTRACEPTION” written on them secured to the back.

She told reporters ahead of the vote that “if you’ve been a victim of rape, you should have access to emergency contraceptive.”

A spokesperson for Gibbs told The Hill that the congressman “wasn’t going to play Democrats’ BS games trying to create fake outrage.”

The spokesperson also claimed that Democrats “don’t want solutions or bipartisanship, they want the campaign issue” because they opted for their own bill over a Republican-sponsored measure that would allow oral contraceptives approved by the Food and Drug Administration to be acquired over the counter.

Source: TEST FEED1

Fox News contributor: Biden should 'recalibrate' statements after 'pretending' to have cancer

A Fox News personality suggested on Thursday that President Biden’s recent coronavirus diagnosis provides an opportunity for the president to “recalibrate” what he says in public following a statement a day earlier during which Biden mentioned he had cancer.

“I don’t want any bad health on him, I think life comes at you fast. I think when you’re pretending to have cancer one day and you’ve got COVID the next, you might want to recalibrate how you treat things and how you talk,” Fox contributor Joey Jones said on Thursday’s edition of the daytime “Outnumbered” panel show.

“I don’t wish bad luck on him and I’m not going to say that that’s the reason why. It’s just, maybe it’s a good opportunity for him to have a reality check.”

Biden turned some heads on Wednesday while speaking during an event in Massachusetts when he mentioned that he was among the millions of Americans who have dealt with cancer.

“That’s why I — and so damn many other people I grew up with — have cancer,” Biden said. As clips of the remarks quickly spread online, a Washington Post fact checker pointed to a White House medical report relaying that Biden has had non-melanoma skin cancers removed.

“This is what the President was referring to,” a White House spokesperson wrote on Twitter in response.

On Thursday morning, the White House announced that the president had tested positive for COVID-19. The president’s physician, Kevin O’Connor, said that Biden was experiencing a runny nose and fatigue and that he met the Food and Drug Administration’s criteria for the antiviral treatment Paxlovid.

Biden is the second president, after former President Trump, to test positive for the disease while in office. Trump was diagnosed before the widespread availability of vaccines.

Jones, speaking on Fox on Thursday, said he “gets so frustrated with these politicians who think they have to connect themselves with every dire thing that happens in an American’s life.”

Biden’s statement on his cancer history is “proof that politicians have taken that too far,” Jones said.

“So what I hope is that he recovers fast, it doesn’t hurt him that much at all and when he recovers he reconsiders just how politicians work on stuff like this,” he said. “Because saying he had cancer the way he did and backtracking it the way they did, that’s karma man. You don’t want to fool with that. You don’t want to put into the universe something like that.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Pelosi says Biden has not warned her against a trip to Taiwan

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Thursday that President Biden has not talked to her directly about an official trip to Taiwan she’s reportedly set to take during Congress’s long August break. 

Biden on Wednesday weighed in on the potential trip, indicating that the Pentagon, concerned about a backlash from China, is seeking to discourage the visit from happening.

“The military thinks it’s not a good idea right now,” Biden said as he stepped off of Air Force One at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland, “but I don’t know what the status of it is.”

Speaking to reporters in the Capitol on Thursday, Pelosi declined to confirm that the trip was happening — “You never even hear me say if I’m going to London, because it is a security issue,” she said — while suggesting the Pentagon’s concern is that Beijing would attack her plane, rather than allow it to land in Taipei. 

“I think what the president was saying is that maybe the military was afraid that our plane would get shot down, or something like that, by the Chinese,” she said. “I don’t know exactly. I didn’t see it. I didn’t hear it. 

“You’re telling me and I heard it anecdotally,” she added. “But I haven’t heard it from the president.” 

Pelosi has been a long-time critic of China, particularly when it comes to its human rights abuses and policy towards Taiwan, a semi-autonomous island chain which Beijing still claims as its own. In an effort not to confront Chinese leaders directly on the contentious topic, U.S. administrations of both parties have, for decades, adopted a fragile and hazy approach to Taiwan’s political standing, known as “strategic ambiguity.” 

Pelosi’s scheduled trip to Taiwan, first reported by The Financial Times, quickly caught the attention of Chinese leaders, who are warning of stiff, if unnamed, repercussions if she goes through with it. 

“If the United States insists on having its own way, China will take strong measures in response to defend national sovereignty and territorial integrity,” said Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian, according to Reuters. “All possible consequences that arise from this will completely be borne by the U.S. side.”

Pelosi on Thursday seemed to downplay the significance of the visit, emphasizing that while it’s important to demonstrate official U.S. backing for Taiwan, her position should not be interpreted as a call for full independence from Beijing.  

“I think that it’s important for us to show support for Taiwan,” she said. “I also think that we have — none of us has ever said we’re for independence when it comes to Taiwan. That’s up to Taiwan to decide.”

Pelosi’s visit, if it materializes, would mark the first time a House Speaker has visited Taiwan since 1997, when then-Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) made the trip.

Source: TEST FEED1

Congress and the Army have one chance to get Army Aviation right

As Congress considers major defense policy and spending bills this summer, it should start paying closer attention to an Army procurement program that is just getting off the ground: the Future Long Range Assault Aircraft, or FLRAA. If done right, the FLRAA helicopter, the successor to the venerable Black Hawk, will provide a revolutionary upgrade to the Army’s vertical lift capability in range, speed, agility and overall performance.  

Congress controls the purse strings and it has a vital role in oversight of the FLRAA program. The helicopter the Army selects must be affordable, producible and sustainable, and it must meet the operational needs of ground force commanders. The Army will choose a winner between the Sikorsky/Boeing team or Bell sometime in the next few months.  

How the Army measures and evaluates key attributes of the mission is vital. The long-range assault aircraft, first and foremost, must perform air assault operations. From my time as an Army Aviator, this means massing combat power — infantry, artillery, supplies — on the objective. That is the only way to achieve the element of surprise and overwhelm the foe. An air assault is not a single aircraft mission; it is a multi-aircraft mission that requires certain flight dynamics to maximize the number of aircraft in a landing zone. This equates to combat power, which is important to every infantryman on board.  

Speed, range and maneuverability also are important as the Army extends its operational reach in every theater. Speed must be evaluated at tactical altitudes. Against a near-peer threat, that is under 100 feet — quite different from counter-insurgency operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, where missions were flown around 1,500 feet.  

Infrared and radar guided missiles are now the key threat. Flying very low allows a helicopter to mask in the “clutter” of terrain and avoid radar and line of sight. Maneuverability is also a critical component to mission performance and survivability, allowing helicopters with agility to support the ground force in and around the objective area, the most common scenario.  

The cost of the program is a key consideration and takes on many forms. Congress, specifically its defense committees and subcommittees, must ask questions that address both acquisition and total cost. This is something that is always mentioned but rarely addressed in a meaningful way. Failure to clearly examine costs up front results in everyone — Congress, the armed services, and taxpayers — paying more in time, effort and dollars. 

Total cost, at a minimum, includes training for pilots, mechanics and units, military construction costs, maintenance and operations. Total cost can negatively impact operations and doctrine in ways that are not intuitive but are real nevertheless. Ask the Marine Corps about unanticipated costs associated with fielding the V-22, for example. It took the Marines 20 years to work through the challenges and costs associated with changes to operations, training, infrastructure and employment. We would be foolish not to learn from this experience.  

A budget-constrained Army needs a FLRAA aircraft that will not require additional facilities, longer or more complex training, or bigger sustainment chains.  

When I served in Congress, I heard a lot about maintaining the health of the defense industrial base. Its health is essential to maintain a ready force with validated production capabilities, a robust supply chain, and close alignment with the armed services. Congress does not need to maintain an industrial base from the 1980s; we need to work with current innovators who can accelerate design and delivery. 

Production is keenly important. Hot production lines and dedicated suppliers reduce risks. The Army has had failed Aviation programs in the past because aircraft could not be produced in a cost-effective manner, meet the required capabilities, or deliver according to schedule. Congress must ensure the Army avoids these pitfalls this time around. 

Army Aviation must incorporate lessons learned. The American soldier must be able to win the fight now, considering current threats. That means procuring a helicopter that achieves the objective of an air assault mission — massing soldiers and combat capability on the mission objective. Congress and the Army must ask the hard questions to ensure the capability they choose is affordable and transformational in every aspect, providing our soldiers with the best tools to accomplish their missions and return home safely. 

Geoff Davis, a Republican, represented Kentucky’s 4th Congressional District from 2005 to 2012. He is a former Army Aviator and was a member of the House Armed Services and Ways and Means committees.  

Source: TEST FEED1

'Politics stops for this': Allies, critics wish Biden a speedy COVID recovery

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle — including some of President Biden’s most vocal political opponents — are sending him well wishes, after the White House announced he had tested positive for COVID-19.

The 79-year-old president, who is fully vaccinated and had received two booster shots, was said to be experiencing “mild symptoms,” according to White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre.

Shortly after news of Biden’s diagnosis broke, some of his fiercest critics in Congress took to social media to send messages of support to the commander in chief.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) both said they were wishing the 46^th president a speedy recovery.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), who last month recounted Biden’s “greatest list of failures” during a podcast, offered good health wishes, while Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said the president was in his prayers.

Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.) — who earlier this week was subpoenaed in his home state to appear before a special grand jury investigating efforts by former President Trump and his allies to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia — said he wished “the best for the president,” while mocking public health measures.

Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said “politics stops” when it comes to medical challenges.

Democrats rallied behind Biden following the diagnosis, with many using it as an opportunity to urge their constituents to get vaccinated.

Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) said Biden’s positive COVID-19 result served as a reminder that “this pandemic is not over.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Watch live: White House holds briefing on Biden's positive COVID-19 diagnosis

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and COVID-19 response coordinator Ashish Jha on Thursday will speak with the press hours after the announcement that President Biden tested positive for COVID-19, reportedly with mild symptoms.

The briefing is scheduled for 2 p.m. ET.

Watch the live video above.

Source: TEST FEED1

Alaska Airlines to introduce electronic bag tags for frequent fliers

Alaska Airlines announced on Tuesday it was rolling out an electronic bag tag program, the first airline in the U.S. to introduce the feature.

In a press release, Alaska Airlines said they will launch the new program in late 2022 to include 2,500 frequent fliers. In early 2023, the program will expand to include members who subscribe to the company’s mileage plan.

Electronic bag tags allow guests to skip the step of printing out a traditional bag tag that would have to be scanned at the airport.

Instead, guests can activate the devices from their home or car 24 hours in advance of boarding their flight via a mobile app from Alaska Airlines.

Charu Jain, the senior vice president of merchandising and innovation at Alaska Airlines, said the new process “allows our guests to tag their own bags in just seconds and makes the entire check-in process almost all off-airport.”

“Not only will our electronic bag tags allow our guests to quickly drop-off their luggage after they arrive at the airport, the devices will also give our employees the opportunity to spend more one-on-one time with guests who ask for assistance and reduce lines at our lobbies,” Jain added in a statement.

The news comes after airlines across the U.S. are struggling with delays caused by staffing shortages, which was especially significant over the Fourth of July holiday weekend.

In March, Alaska Airlines also introduced a self bag-drop system at San Jose International Airport. The new initiatives are part of the company’s goal to streamline the flight experience for guests and particularly frequent fliers.

Alaska Airlines is using technology from the company Bagtag, which has partnered with other airlines including Germany’s Lufthansa and China Southern Airlines.

Bagtag Managing Director Jasper Quak said he was “proud to announce the first American carrier adopting our EBT solutions.”

“Alaska Airlines’ relentless efforts to make their passenger journey a true 21st century experience makes us very confident in a successful rollout among their guests,” he said in a statement.

Source: TEST FEED1

How the Jan. 6 hearings affect Trump's potential 2024 run

The House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol has triggered fresh debate about former President Trump’s viability as a candidate as he mulls launching a 2024 White House bid.

The committee, through testimony, text messages and video footage, has highlighted Trump’s role in spreading false claims about the 2020 election in the weeks leading up to the riots, as well as his actions on the day of the attack.

With Trump openly musing about announcing a third White House campaign, the committee’s work has some Republicans wondering if the former president is the best person to serve as the party’s potential nominee in 2024.

Watch the video above for more.

Source: TEST FEED1

Democratic group targeting GOP candidates in ad during Jan. 6 hearing

A Democratic super PAC will air an ad during Thursday’s prime-time hearing of the Jan. 6 House select committee that targets four GOP candidates for statewide office who have downplayed the Capitol riot or disputed the 2020 election results.

The ad from American Bridge will focus on Pennsylvania gubernatorial candidate Doug Mastriano, Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake, Michigan gubernatorial candidate Ryan Kelley and North Carolina Senate candidate Ted Budd.

The 30-second ad, which displays images of the rioting at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, features audio of each of the candidates speaking about that day or their baseless view that the 2020 election was fraudulent.

The ad uses a clip of Mastriano saying he was in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6 “to hear my president speak.”

“Yes I was in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, Yes the FBI did raid my house,” Kelley says in another audio clip in the ad.

The ad uses a clip of Budd saying of the riot: “It was nothing. It was just patriots standing up.”
And Lake is heard saying “the election of 2020 was stolen from us” over an image of her standing with former President Trump.

“At least 120 election deniers are on the ballot this year.,” the ad reads. “This November take our democracy back.”

Thursday’s ad is part of the Democratic group’s broader “Bridge to Democracy” campaign to focus on state and local races for positions like governor, secretary of state, attorney general and state legislators in 12 key states “where a fair election is vital for a democratic and a legitimate 2024 presidential fight.”

The three gubernatorial races targeted in Thursday’s ad — Michigan, Pennsylvania and Arizona — are in states President Biden carried in 2020 but where Trump and his supporters filed numerous legal challenges claiming the vote count was fraudulent. Those lawsuits were dismissed and there was no evidence of widespread fraud.

The ad will air during the Jan. 6 hearing Thursday night, when committee members are expected to focus on Trump’s inaction during the roughly three hours where rioters stormed the Capitol to try to halt the certification of the 2020 election results.

Source: TEST FEED1