House of Representatives

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Melania Trump’s secret to getting through hard times? Love (actually)

      by

      Melania’s guide to getting through hard timesLet’s take a quick break from the increasingly dreadful news for a little check-in, shall we? So … how are you holding up right now? How are those stress levels?Mine aren’t great, to be honest. I’m pickling in my own cortisol as I write this. But I’m not here to moan. I am here to share some helpful advice, courtesy of our inspiring first lady Melania Trump, about how to get through these challenging times.Now, I know what you may be thinking: what on earth does Melania Trump know about adversity? The woman divides her time between a gold penthouse in Manhattan and a mansion in Florida, occasionally dropping into the White House to wave at commoners. She’s not exactly worrying about the price of eggs or the balance of her 401(k).But let’s not be too quick to judge. Money doesn’t insulate you from everything, and I’m sure Melania has her own problems. I mean, the poor woman is probably forced to regularly socialize with Elon Musk – which would drain the lifeblood from anyone. Then there’s the fact her husband has taken to using the stomach-turning nickname the “fertilization president”.Melania’s also not just lounging around in luxury: I am sure she is working extremely hard for the millions of dollars Amazon has thrown at her for the privilege of making a sycophantic documentary about her life. And then there’s all the annoying first lady admin; her office has just had to reschedule the White House spring garden tours – which Melania is not expected to actually attend – because of some pesky protesters.So how does our first lady navigate these very stressful challenges? While presenting the state department’s 19th International Women of Courage awards, which honored eight women from around the world, Melania shared her secret trick for getting through hard times. It’s … wait for it … love.“Throughout my life, I have harnessed the power of love as a source of strength during challenging times,” Melania said. “Love has inspired me to embrace forgiveness, nurture empathy and exhibit bravery in the face of unforeseen obstacles.”Melania noted that the award recipients – which included women from Yemen, South Sudan, Israel and the Philippines – “came from diverse backgrounds and regions, yet love transcends boundaries and territories”. She further added that she was inspired by “the women who are driven to speak out for justice, even though their voices are trembling”.The first lady deserves an award of her own for that speech because I have absolutely no idea how she managed to say all that with a straight face. I mean, seriously, is she trolling us? How can she talk about love while her husband’s hate-filled administration is deporting everyone they can? Having the wrong tattoo – or just a stroke of bad luck – can now get you sent to a prison in El Salvador. (The secretary of state Marco Rubio, by the way, who is presiding proudly over these deportations, also made a speech at the International Women of Courage awards.)How can Melania talk about justice when the Trump administration is currently doing their best to deport or imprison anyone who speaks out for justice for Palestinians? And how dare she talk about diversity and women’s rights, when the Trump administration is erasing women from government websites as part of their crackdown on diversity, equity and inclusion.But, look, I don’t want to completely dismiss Melania’s advice. Perhaps she has a point. Perhaps, in these challenging times, we should all just channel Melania and reach for the power of love. So: if you happen to get into trouble with any US border guards because you’ve indulged in a little wrongthink online, just remind them of Melania’s words. Remind them that love transcends borders and territories. And then sit back, and enjoy your free trip to El Salvador.Katy Perry says she is ‘going to put the “ass” in astronaut’Please don’t, Katy. For more cringeworthy quotes on how “space is finally going to be glam”, read this feature in Elle. It profiles the all-women crew that has been chosen to joyride around space on Jeff Bezos’s Blue Origin rocket. They’re all going to be glammed up with lash extensions, folks! It’s gonna be one giant leap for womankind.Women in the US are dying preventable deaths because of abortion bansNew research details how three critically ill patients in the US could have survived if they’d been able to access abortions.How Taliban male-escort rules are killing mothers and babiesEven before the Taliban took power, Afghanistan had a maternal mortality rate three times higher than the global average. Now draconian policies, including guardianship rules that mean a woman can’t travel to hospital without being accompanied by a man, are contributing to an increase in maternal deaths in Afghanistan.House revolts over Republican bid to stop new parents from voting by proxyA small group of Republicans joined forces with Democrats to stop the GOP from blocking consideration of a measure that would allow new parents to temporarily designate someone else to vote in their place. “I think that today is a pretty historical day for the entire conference. It’s showing that the body has decided that parents deserve a voice in Washington,” the Republican Anna Paulina Luna said.The US woman with the world’s longest tongueImagine people screaming in shock every time you stick your tongue out. Such is the life of Chanel Tapper, a California woman who holds the Guinness World Record for woman with the globe’s longest tongue.US anti-abortion group expands campaign in UKA rightwing US group has been trying to export abortion extremism to the UK, lobbying heavily against the introduction of buffer zones around reproductive health clinics.Russell Brand charged with rape and sexual assault“Nation Could Have Sworn Russell Brand Was Already Convicted Sex Offender”, reads an Onion headline from 2023.At least 322 children killed since Israel’s new Gaza offensive, Unicef saysUnicef said “relentless and indiscriminate bombardments” had resulted in 100 children killed or maimed every day in the 10 days to 31 March.How Gina Rinehart is pushing the Maga message in AustraliaSome fascinating details in this Guardian series about Rinehart, who has been described as a “female Donald Trump” and is Australia’s richest person. Money clearly can’t buy taste because Rinehart is renovating her company headquarters to include a sculpture of Peanut the squirrel, Maga’s favourite rodent, and etchings of inspirational Elon Musk quotes.The week in pawtriarchyTrump’s tariffs are so far-reaching that they’ve even been imposed on the Heard and McDonald islands near Antarctica, inhabited only by penguins. (And a few seals.) I am sure the penguins, already suited up for an emergency meeting on the tariffs, are not too happy about this development – but the rest of us have been gifted some brrrrilliant memes. More

    • 125 Shares74 Views

      in US Politics

      George Santos prosecutors seek seven-year prison term for campaign fraud

      by

      Prosecutors are seeking more than seven years in prison for disgraced former congressman George Santos after he pleaded guilty to federal fraud and identity theft charges.The US attorney for the eastern district of New York argued in a court filing on Friday that a significant sentence was warranted because the New York Republican’s “unparalleled crimes” had “made a mockery” of the country’s election system.“He lied to his campaign staff, his supporters, his putative employer and congressional colleagues, and the American public,” the office wrote. “From his creation of a wholly fictitious biography to his callous theft of money from elderly and impaired donors, Santos’s unrestrained greed and voracious appetite for fame enabled him to exploit the very system by which we select our representatives.”The office also argued that Santos had been “unrepentant and defiant” for years, dismissing the prosecution as a “witch-hunt” and refusing to resign from Congress as his web of lies was debunked.Even after pleading guilty before trial, prosecutors said his claims of remorse “ring hollow”, noting that he has not forfeited any of his ill-gotten gains or repaid any of his victims.“The volume of Santos’s lies and his extraordinary pattern of dishonesty speaks to his high likelihood of reoffending and the concomitant need to remove him from the community he has repeatedly victimized,” prosecutors wrote.The 87-month sentence proposed by prosecutors represents the high end of court guidelines in such cases. That would be roughly four to five years behind bars plus a mandatory minimum two-year sentence for aggravated identity theft, they said.Santos’ lawyers did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment Friday, which was the deadline for both sides to submit their sentencing memos to court.A federal judge on Long Island is scheduled to hear arguments and decide on Santos’ sentence during a court hearing on 25 April.The once-rising Republican, who represented parts of Queens and Long Island, served barely a year in office before he was ousted by his House colleagues in 2023 – just the sixth congressperson ever expelled in the chamber’s history.Santos’ political demise came after it was revealed that he had fabricated much of his life story, leading to questions about how the political unknown had funded his winning campaign.The now-36-year-old cast himself as a wealthy businessman who had graduated from top colleges, worked at prestigious Wall Street firms and held a valuable real estate portfolio. In truth, he was struggling financially and faced eviction.Santos admitted in August that he duped voters, deceived donors and stole the identities of nearly a dozen people, including his own family members, to make donations to his congressional campaign.He was initially due to be sentenced in February, but a judge granted him a three-month reprieve to come up with more than half a million dollars in court fines.As part of his plea deal, Santos agreed to pay nearly $375,000 in restitution and $205,000 in forfeiture.Santos’s lawyers said at the time that he had little more than $1,000 in liquid assets and needed more time to build his newly launched podcast Pants on Fire in order to begin paying off the debt.Prosecutors maintain Santos profited handsomely from his infamy, arguing he has earned more than $800,000 from appearances on the video-sharing website Cameo and from a new documentary since his expulsion from Congress.Two of Santos’s campaign staffers have also pleaded guilty to federal charges in connection to the campaign financing scheme.Sam Miele, his former campaign fundraiser, was sentenced in March to one year and one day in federal prison. He admitted to impersonating a high-ranking congressional aide and charging donors’ credit cards without authorization while raising campaign cash for Santos.Nancy Marks, Santos’s former campaign treasurer, admitted she submitted to federal regulators bogus campaign finance reports filled with fake donors and even a fake $500,000 personal loan from Santos himself.The embellishments helped Santos hit campaign fundraising thresholds needed to qualify for financial backing from the national Republican party.Marks is due to be sentenced in May. More

    • 200 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      She’s a waitress raised on a farm – can Rebecca Cooke win a key Wisconsin seat?

      by

      Wisconsin’s third congressional district has voted for Donald Trump every time he’s been on the ballot, but the moderate Democrat Rebecca Cooke, a waitress who grew up on a dairy farm, thinks she can flip the state’s most competitive seat next year.Last year, Cooke outperformed other Democrats when she tried to unseat incumbent Derrick Van Orden, a retired US Navy Seal who attended the January 6 “Stop the Steal” rally at the Capitol and shouted “lies” during Joe Biden’s 2024 state of the union address. She lost the race by less than three points.She’s trying again. She launched her 2026 campaign in March, amid constituent anger at Van Orden for refusing to face questions at in-person town halls. She is doubling down on the campaigning that worked for in November, hitting the pavement across the western Wisconsin district.In the soul-searching among Democrats over the future of their party, Cooke aligns with the moderate Blue Dog coalition led by Washington state representative Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, who told Mother Jones that after she endorsed Cooke, Van Orden “shoulder-checked me on the floor”.But Cooke rejects a label within the party, calling them “somewhat harmful” and polarizing in her district. She tells voters that she thinks lawmakers in DC are either too far left or too far right, and that there need to be more regular folks willing to work across the aisle to get things done. The idea resonates with people, who tell her they’re over the polarization and chaos. She needs votes from people across the political spectrum to win in the moderately right-leaning district.Cooke’s resumé is the kind often cobbled together in small towns across the US: she works as a waitress, she ran a retail business and an Airbnb business, she worked on Democratic campaigns, and she started a non-profit to support female entrepreneurs. She first ran for the congressional seat in 2022, losing in the Democratic primary, then again in 2024, beating out two other Democrats to take on Van Orden.She has been waitressing since she was a teenager, she said. “I love that work. I love the hospitality industry. I think there’s so much dignity in hospitality work, and it’s something that allows me being able to work at night, to be able to campaign all day.”She said her “more working-class” background aligns with the district but upsets her opponents, who have brought up her work on Democratic campaigns. The National Republican Congressional Committee has repeatedly called her a “sleazy political activist” and said she is lying about her background.“I’d love them to see the car that I drive around, and the place that I live,” she said. “Anybody that knows me knows that I’m not rolling in dough by any means.”Cooke grew up on a dairy farm, but her family had to sell their cows because of how competition affected the price of milk. Losing the farm wasn’t just losing a business, she said. “It’s just very much a part of our way of life, and we’ve lost thousands of dairy farms in Wisconsin.”In June, farmers around the state will host breakfasts to promote dairy farming. She said she’ll be at every dairy breakfast she can get to in the district, shaking hands and introducing herself.“I don’t know what people’s political background is, but when I’m shaking their hand, I’ll say: ‘I’m Rebecca Cooke, I grew up on a dairy farm,’ and I tell them a little bit about my background,” she said. “By the end of the conversation, they go: ‘So, what party are you from?’ And I would rather that question if they’re agreeing with me on similar values.”Cooke said she thinks Democrats need to bring people back into a big tent through pragmatism and detailing how their agenda would help Americans afford their housing and groceries.The party needs to create its own “prosperity gospel instead of just demonizing the right”, she said. “What are we going to do better? And how are we going to help people find their path to the middle class?” Democrats need to be bold, fresh and and willing to be “more uninhibited”.“I really think the change that we want to see has to come from the inside out and not from the outside in,” she said. “We need to look to our communities to solve these gaps and this vacuum and work to recruit people to be those strong voices and to run for office.“It shouldn’t be like, this is coming from the national party, and this is what you should think or do. It should be, this is what’s coming from our communities, and this is what we want the party to do.” More

    • 138 Shares117 Views

      in US Politics

      US House Democrat blasts Trump for using ‘antisemitism’ to attack universities

      by

      The representative Jerry Nadler of New York has slammed Donald Trump’s crackdown on American universities in the name of fighting antisemitism, saying that withholding federal funding from schools will “not make Jewish students safer”.In a statement issued on Tuesday, the Democratic representative said he condemned Trump’s “latest attacks on higher education cloaked under the guise of fighting antisemitism”.“Once again, the president is weaponizing the real pain American Jews face to advance his desire to wield control over the truth-seeking academic institutions that stand as a bulwark against authoritarianism,” Nadler said.Last month, the Trump administration pulled $400m in federal grants and contracts from Columbia University over what it alleged to be the college’s failure to protect students from antisemitic harassment on campus tied to the pro-Palestinian campus protests of the last 18 months.Several weeks later, the university agreed to a series of changes put forth by the Trump administration as a pre-condition for restoring the funding.In recent weeks, the Trump administration has warned at least 60 other universities of possible action over alleged failure to comply with federal civil rights laws regarding antisemitism. On Monday, it announced a review of $9bn in federal contracts and grants awarded to Harvard University, over similar allegations that it failed to address issues of antisemitism on campus.In his statement on Tuesday, Nadler said that “withholding funding from Columbia and, potentially, Harvard will not make Jewish students safer”.“Cutting funding to programs that work to cure cancer and make other groundbreaking discoveries will not make Jewish students safer,” he said. “Impounding congressionally appropriated funding will not make Jewish students safer.”“Trump’s ‘review’ is part of a larger effort to silence universities and intimidate those who challenge the Maga agenda,” the representative added, describing it as “a dangerous and politically motivated move that risks stifling free thought and academic inquiry”.Nadler continued: “Make no mistake. Trump’s actions are not rooted in genuine concern for combatting hate. If Trump were truly committed to fighting antisemitism, he would not have crippled the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights, the only agency specifically tasked with enforcing anti-discrimination laws at our nation’s educational institutions.”The administration’s campaign to weaken universities perceived as bastions of leftism, along with Columbia’s apparent willingness to accept Trump’s terms for restoring funding, has prompted anxiety that academic freedom in the US is facing an unprecedented crisis.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“We cannot allow Trump’s authoritarian tactics to prevail – this is not the America we want to live in, nor is it the America we need,” Nadler’s statement said.He urged US universities to reject demands from the Trump administration and to “fight back against these hostile acts”. Experts have pointed out that Columbia had strong grounds to sue in order to stop the cuts, and have expressed surprise that the university opted not to pursue them.“If necessary, these issues must be litigated in federal court to put an end to the illegal and unconstitutional actions taken by the Trump administration,” Nadler said. More

    • 175 Shares80 Views

      in US Politics

      Capitol Hill hearing on ‘censorship industrial complex’ under Biden based on ‘fiction’, says expert

      by

      A Capitol Hill hearing held to explore supposed government censorship under Joe Biden was based on a “fiction”, a leading expert on countering online disinformation told members of Congress on Tuesday.Nina Jankowicz, head of the American Sunlight Project, a pro-democracy organization, went on the offensive at a House of Representatives foreign relations subcommittee meeting held to examine the existence of an alleged “censorship industrial complex”, which Republicans claim was established to stifle rightwing views on social media, rather than combat foreign propaganda, as officially stated.Having been labeled a “spearhead” and “tsarina” of such efforts by the committee’s Republican chair, Bill Huizenga, Jankowicz – who briefly led the Department of Homeland Security’s disinformation unit under the Biden administration – said the hearing was being held at a time when Donald Trump was attempting aggressive free speech restrictions.“The premise of this hearing, the so called censorship industrial complex, is a fiction that has not only had profound impacts on my life and safety, but on our national security,” she said in her opening statement at a fractious hearing that exposed the width of the chasm between Republicans and Democrats on the issue.“More alarmingly, this fiction is itself suppressing speech and stymieing critical research that protects our country.“I want to acknowledge the irony that we’re having this discussion as we witness an assault on the first amendment we have not seen in decades. The Trump administration has directed far more egregious violations of our constitution than the imagined actions of the Biden administration on which this hearing is premised.”She singled out the detention and attempted deportation of Rumeysa Ozturk, a doctoral student at Tufts University, who wrote an opinion article critical of Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, which she compared to the actions of authoritarian regimes in Russia, Belarus and Hungary.Republicans have used their control of the House and Senate to stage a series of hearings in different congressional committees on the alleged existence of a censorship complex – whose name derives from the military industrial complex described by president Dwight Eisenhower in his farewell speech before leaving the White House in 1961. Opponents dismiss the notion as a conspiracy theory.The committee hearings have coincided with the Trump administration’s dismantling of safeguards designed to stop the spread of influence and disinformation in cyberspace by Russia in particular, but also widely attributed to China and Iran.Even before Trump returned to office, the Republican-controlled Congress declined last December to renew the mandate of the state department’s global engagement center (GEC), the leading government agency fighting Russian and Chinese propaganda.Huizenga, a representative from Michigan, called on two other witnesses, Matt Taibbi and Benjamin Weingarten, to support the Republican contention that the body had been subverted to instead suppress rightwing opinion in America.As evidence, Taibbi, a former Rolling Stone journalist who was among the recipients of the so-called “Twitter files” released by Elon Musk, the platform’s owner, to show evidence of alleged censorship, cited the case of Alex Berenson, a former New York Times journalist.Berenson had been expelled from platform following White House pressure after posting that the Covid-19 vaccine did not prevent infection or the virus’s transmission, Taibbi claimed.Weingarten, a senior fellow at the Claremont Institute, a rightwing thinktank, condemned the GEC as a “truth squad … designed to suppress any information that countered national policy and to identify people who may have had opinions that were controversial or unwanted as foreign inspire”.Democrats lined up to denounce the hearing as “hypocrisy” and “waste of taxpayers money” in light of the Trump administration’s attempts to deport foreign students who had expressed pro-Palestinian views, moves that Jankowicz said violated the US constitution first amendment, which protects free speech.Sydney Kamlager-Dove, the subcommittee’s ranking Democrat, said the hearing was “out of touch with the concerns of everyday Americans.“I’ve been to the state department, and I do have concerns about censorship – – censorship of the employees who are terrified to say the wrong thing, to say anything, or have the wrong word in their job title and be terminated by an administration that publicly relishes punishing people for their speech,” she said. “If we want to talk about censorship, we should begin with Trump’s unprecedented assault on the first amendment and rule of law.”Keith Self, a Republican representative from Texas, provoked anger among Democrats by appearing to liken the Biden administration’s anti-disinformation efforts to steps by the Nazi to construct public opinion in 1930s Germany.“A direct quote from Joseph Goebbels [the Nazi propaganda minister]: ‘It is the absolute right of the state to supervise the formation of public opinion,’ and I think that may be what we’re discussing here,” he said. More

    • 163 Shares95 Views

      in US Politics

      House revolt over Republican bid to stop new parents from voting by proxy

      by

      An attempt by Republican leaders to stop new parents from voting by proxy sparked a bipartisan mutiny in the House of Representatives on Tuesday, during which a small group of GOP lawmakers joined with all Democrats to obstruct a key procedural motion and paralyze the chamber.The revolt was the first legislative setback Republicans have faced since Donald Trump returned to the White House with the GOP holding a slim majority in Congress’s lower chamber. It also delayed consideration of House speaker Mike Johnson’s legislative agenda for the week, which included a bill to stop federal judges from issuing nationwide injunctions – as several have done for Trump’s executive orders – and to require proof of citizenship to vote.Fueling the split was an attempt by the Republican Anna Paulina Luna and the Democrat Brittany Pettersen to force consideration of a measure allowing new parents to temporarily designate someone else to vote in their place. House leaders attempted an unusual parliamentary tactic to prevent the proposal from going forward, but were blocked by the votes of all 213 Democrats and nine Republicans.“I think that today is a pretty historical day for the entire conference. It’s showing that the body has decided that parents deserve a voice in Washington,” Luna said after the vote, though it remains unclear when the chamber will consider allowing proxy voting.Cradling her infant son, Pettersen referred to a fellow lawmaker who just announced she was pregnant: “I’m really excited to think that she will not go through what we went through on trying to make sure that we’re representing our constituents and taking care of our baby.”“It’s all worth it – changing Congress for the better,” the Colorado lawmaker added.The House’s then Democratic leadership allowed lawmakers to vote remotely after Covid broke out, but Republicans ended that policy after they took control of the chamber two years ago. In an interview with National Public Radio last week, Johnson described himself and the GOP as “pro-family” but said he opposed a return of proxy voting.“We want to make it as easy as possible for young parents to be able to participate in the process,” the speaker said. “But proxy voting, in my view, is unconstitutional.”Pettersen and Luna had managed to attract 218 signatures, including 12 Republicans, to a discharge petition, which forces a vote on a bill even if leadership objects. In response, GOP lawmakers on Friday inserted language blocking the petition in a rule that would have to pass the House in order to begin consideration of the bills targeting nationwide injunctions and requiring proof of citizenship to vote.“Congress is defined as ‘act of coming together and meeting’. I’ve never voted by proxy, because I believe it undermines the fabric of that sacred act of convening,” said the Republican Virginia Foxx, the chair of the rules committee, who added she feared the measure would pave the way for a return of universal proxy voting if Democrats retake control.“I know there’s a new laptop class in America that seems to operate increasingly in a virtual space, but that’s simply not a fact of life for most American workers, and I believe Congress should live by that standard.”Elected in 2022 to a Florida gulf coast district, Luna was a member of the far-right House Freedom caucus, but reportedly left on Monday after several of her counterparts backed leadership’s efforts to block her petition. In a speech on the House floor, Luna called herself “one of the most conservative members of this body” but said she viewed the issue as important enough to risk upending the House’s business for the week.“For almost two years now in this cause, I’ve met with leadership, and I’ve exhausted all tools in my legislative toolkit to to be able to bring this to the floor,” she said. “For a while we’ve had the majority, and we’ve had the ability to bring legislation to the floor on election integrity and also to call out rogue judges, and yet they chose at this point in time to tie this discharge petition killer to this rule that would also permanently paint me and the members supporting it.”The episode was reminiscent of the infighting that gripped the House GOP during Joe Biden’s presidency, which climaxed when a small group of Republicans collaborated with the Democrats to oust Kevin McCarthy as House speaker.Democratic lawmakers, who are still reeling from their party’s underwhelming performance in last November’s elections, broke into applause in the House chamber after the rule was voted down. The House then announced that no further votes were expected for the remainder of the week, though Pettersen said that her petition must be voted on by Thursday, raising the possibility that lawmakers will reassemble. More

    • 200 Shares117 Views

      in Elections

      Johnson Moves to Block a Bill Allowing New Parents in the House to Vote by Proxy

      by

      A long-simmering fight over whether to allow members of Congress to vote remotely after the birth of a new child is coming to a head on Tuesday afternoon, when Speaker Mike Johnson’s behind-the-scenes efforts to quash the majority-supported change to the chamber’s rules will be tested on the House floor.The quiet push from a bipartisan group of younger lawmakers and new parents started more than a year ago, when Representative Anna Paulina Luna, Republican of Florida, began agitating for a change to House rules that would allow new mothers to designate a colleague to vote by proxy on their behalf for up to six weeks after giving birth. Ms. Luna landed on the idea after her own child was born.There is no maternity or paternity leave for members of Congress, who can take time away from the office without sacrificing their pay but cannot vote if they are not physically in the Capitol. Proponents of the change have called it a common-sense fix to modernize Congress, where there are more women and more younger members than there were 200 years ago.Democrats including Representatives Brittany Pettersen of Colorado, who gave birth to her second child earlier this year, and Sara Jacobs of Colorado joined Ms. Luna’s effort, expanding the resolution to include new fathers and up to 12 weeks of proxy voting during a parental leave.But Mr. Johnson has adamantly opposed them at every turn, arguing that proxy voting is unconstitutional, even though the Supreme Court refused to take up a Republican-led lawsuit challenging pandemic-era proxy voting rules in the House. Mr. Johnson and his allies have argued that any accommodation that allow members to vote without being physically at the Capitol, no matter how narrow, creates a slippery slope for more, and that it harms member collegiality.“I do believe its an existential issue for this body,” Representative Virginia Foxx, Republican of North Carolina and chairwoman of the Rules Committee, said on Tuesday. “Congress is defined as the ‘act of coming together and meeting.’” Changing that, she said, “undermines the fabric of that sacred act of convening.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares91 Views

      in Elections

      Crucial Week for Trump: New Tariffs and Elections Will Test His Momentum

      by

      Down-ballot races in Florida and Wisconsin are seen as a referendum on the White House, while the president’s to-be-announced reciprocal tariff plan is increasingly worrying investors and consumers.President Trump’s political momentum will face a major test this week as Democrats try to turn various down-ballot races into a referendum on the White House, and Mr. Trump’s long-promised tariffs risk rattling allies and consumers alike.A State Supreme Court election in Wisconsin on Tuesday is seen as an indicator of support for Mr. Trump, particularly after Elon Musk and groups he funds spent more than $20 million to bolster Mr. Trump’s preferred candidate. White House officials have also been increasingly concerned with the unusually competitive race on Tuesday for a deep-red House seat in Florida left vacant after Representative Michael Waltz stepped down to serve as Mr. Trump’s national security adviser.The White House is hoping victories in those races will tighten Mr. Trump’s grip on the Republican Party as his team seeks to overcome the backlash from its inadvertent sharing of military plans on a commercial app with a journalist.The Florida election is critical for Republicans, who hold a narrow majority in the House as they try to pass the president’s agenda. The outcome of the Wisconsin race, in a battleground state that Mr. Trump narrowly won last year, could be a reflection of voters’ views on the president’s gutting of the federal work force, his crackdown on illegal immigration and his moves to purge diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.“It’s a big race,” Mr. Trump said of the Wisconsin judicial contest on Monday while signing executive orders in the Oval Office. “Wisconsin is a big state politically, and the Supreme Court has a lot to do with elections in Wisconsin.”Mr. Trump is also expected to reveal the details of his reciprocal tariff plan on Wednesday. He has labeled it “Liberation Day,” saying the nation will finally break free of past trade relationships that he argues have cheated the United States. Investors, however, are growing more concerned that the tariffs could fuel inflation and slow consumer spending, potentially driving up economic anxieties among voters.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More