United States Politics and Government

Subterms

    More stories

    • 75 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Cómo ver el debate presidencial Biden-Trump

      by

      El debate será transmitido desde Atlanta a partir de las 9 p. m. hora del Este el jueves.El momento se ha estado gestando durante cuatro años: el presidente Joe Biden y el expresidente Donald Trump en el escenario de un debate, otro punto álgido de sus largas hostilidades.El debate, organizado por CNN en sus estudios de Atlanta a partir de las 9 p. m., hora del Este, se llevará a cabo sin público y antes de que Trump y Biden acepten formalmente las candidaturas de sus partidos este verano, en un cambio radical respecto al pasado.¿Dónde puedo verlo?The New York Times retransmitirá el debate con comentarios y análisis en tiempo real de los periodistas.CNN emitirá el debate en todas sus plataformas, incluido su principal canal por cable, así como CNN International, CNN en Español y CNN Max. La cadena también tiene previsto retransmitir el debate en CNN.com. No será necesario iniciar sesión ni estar suscrito para ver la transmisión.CNN también compartirá su señal con otras cadenas de televisión y de noticias por cable para que puedan emitir el debate simultáneamente. Eso significa que también podrás verlo en Fox News, ABC News y probablemente en otros sitios.¿Robert F. Kennedy Jr. estará en el escenario?No. No cumplió los requisitos de CNN, lo que significa que Ross Perot sigue siendo el último candidato independiente que se ha clasificado para un debate presidencial de elecciones generales, y eso fue en 1992. Para este debate, los participantes tenían que recibir al menos un 15 por ciento de apoyo en cuatro encuestas nacionales aprobadas y clasificarse para la votación en suficientes estados para tener la oportunidad de obtener los 270 votos electorales necesarios para ganar la presidencia.¿Quién moderará el debate?Los moderadores serán Jake Tapper y Dana Bash, quienes son presentadores fijos en la mesa de CNN y los anfitriones del programa dominical de entrevistas políticas de la cadena, State of the Union. Tapper es el corresponsal jefe de CNN en Washington y Bash es jefa de la corresponsalía política de la cadena.Neil Vigdor cubre temas políticos para el Times, y se enfoca en cuestiones relacionadas con el derecho al voto y la desinformación electoral. Más de Neil Vigdor More

    • 88 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Rampant Identity Theft Is Taxing the I.R.S.

      by

      The National Taxpayer Advocate criticized the agency for being too slow to resolve cases, leaving victims waiting years for their refunds.Rampant identity theft has overwhelmed the Internal Revenue Service, resulting in a backlog of 500,000 unresolved fraud cases, leaving taxpayers without refunds and credits that they are due, the agency’s watchdog wrote in a report to Congress on Wednesday.The report by the National Taxpayer Advocate described the slow pace of addressing the identity theft cases as a “blemish” on the performance of the I.R.S., which is in the midst of a sweeping modernization campaign that aims to improve taxpayer services. While the I.R.S. was criticized by the watchdog for identify theft delays last year, the backlog has gotten only worse.The I.R.S. is taking nearly two years to resolve identity theft victims’ assistance cases and has an inventory of approximately 500,000 cases, up from 484,000 cases in September.“I.R.S. delays in resolving identity theft victim assistance cases are unconscionable,” Erin Collins, the taxpayer advocate, wrote in the report.Calling on the agency to prioritize assistance for victims, she added: “Delays of nearly two years make a mockery of the right to quality service in the Taxpayer Bill of Rights.” The backlog of cases is likely to give congressional Republicans more fodder to criticize the I.R.S. and to call for cleaving back more of the $80 billion in funding that the agency received through the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Critics of the agency have been arguing that it is bloated and failing to put that money to good use.Identity theft has long been a problem for the I.R.S. Criminals often steal taxpayers’ identifying information and file paperwork to fraudulently claim their refund. Taxpayers realize this only when they try to claim their refund, leading to a laborious process in which they have to submit an identity theft affidavit and a paper tax return before the agency will open a case to investigate the matter.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 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to Biden Administration’s Contacts With Social Media Companies

      by

      The case, one of several this term on how the First Amendment applies to technology platforms, was dismissed on the ground that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue.The Supreme Court handed the Biden administration a major practical victory on Wednesday, rejecting a challenge to its contacts with social media platforms to combat what administration officials said was misinformation.The court ruled that the states and users who had challenged the contacts had not suffered the sort of direct injury that gave them standing to sue.The decision, by a 6 to 3 vote, left fundamental legal questions for another day.“The plaintiffs, without any concrete link between their injuries and the defendants’ conduct, ask us to conduct a review of the yearslong communications between dozens of federal officials, across different agencies, with different social-media platforms, about different topics,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote for the majority. “This court’s standing doctrine prevents us from exercising such general legal oversight of the other branches of government.”Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil M. Gorsuch, dissented.“For months,” Justice Alito wrote, “high-ranking government officials placed unrelenting pressure on Facebook to suppress Americans’ free speech. Because the court unjustifiably refuses to address this serious threat to the First Amendment, I respectfully dissent.”The case arose from a barrage of communications from administration officials urging platforms to take down posts on topics like the coronavirus vaccine and claims of election fraud. The attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, both Republicans, sued, saying that many of those contacts violated the First Amendment.Judge Terry A. Doughty of the Federal District Court for the Western District of Louisiana agreed, saying the lawsuit described what could be “the most massive attack against free speech in United States’ history.”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

    • 138 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Women Are Paying for Birth Control When They Shouldn’t Have To

      by

      Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont has called on a government watchdog to investigate. Here’s what you need to know.Last week, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, chair of the Senate health committee, called on a government watchdog to investigate why insurance companies are still charging women for birth control — a move that thrust access to contraceptives back into the spotlight.In a letter to the Government Accountability Office, the senator noted that insurance companies were charging Americans for contraceptives that, under federal law, should be free — and that they were also denying appeals from consumers who were seeking to have their contraceptives covered. Some experts estimate that those practices could affect access to birth control for millions of women.Since 2012, the Affordable Care Act has mandated that private insurance plans cover the “full range” of contraceptives for women approved by the Food and Drug Administration, including female sterilizations, emergency contraceptives and any new products cleared by the F.D.A. The mandate also covers services associated with contraceptives, like counseling, insertions or removals and follow-up care.That means that consumers shouldn’t have any associated co-payments with in-network providers, even if they haven’t met their deductibles. Some plans might cover only generic versions of certain contraceptives, but patients are still entitled to coverage of a specific product that their providers deem medically necessary. Medicaid plans have a similar provision; the only exception to the mandate are plans sponsored by employers or colleges that have religious or moral objections.Yet many insurers are still charging for contraceptives — some in the form of co-payments, others by denying coverage altogether.A Quarter of Women Are Paying Unnecessarily for Contraceptives In his letter, Senator Sanders cited a recent survey by KFF, a nonprofit health policy research organization, that found that roughly 25 percent of women with private insurance plans said they had paid at least some part of the cost of their birth control; 16 percent reported that their insurance plans had offered partial coverage, and 6 percent noted that their plans did not cover contraceptives at all. Additionally, a 2022 congressional investigation, which analyzed 68 health plans, found that the process to apply for exceptions and have contraceptives covered was “burdensome” for consumers and that insurance companies denied, on average, at least 40 percent of exception requests.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

    • 75 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Jamaal Bowman’s Election Loss: 5 Takeaways

      by

      Representative Jamaal Bowman of New York became the first member of the House’s progressive “squad” to lose a seat in Congress on Tuesday, dealing a stinging defeat to the Democratic left after a brutal intraparty fight.The contest on the outskirts of New York City centered on Democrats’ disagreements over Israel’s war in Gaza. Progressive groups raced to try to save Mr. Bowman, a leading voice against the war. Pro-Israel political groups pumped record-shattering sums into defeating him.But by the end, it devolved into a broader spat over race and class that tested the Democratic coalition. Mr. Bowman’s opponent, the Westchester County executive, George Latimer, also benefited from old-fashioned local alliances and a series of embarrassing missteps by the incumbent.Here are five takeaways from the results.AIPAC notched its first big win.George Latimer capitalized on decades-old political alliances and an alliance with pro-Israel groups that spent more than $15 million on the race.Dave Sanders for The New York TimesAfter the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attacks, political groups aligned with Israel issued a message to its critics like Mr. Bowman: Moderate your views or prepare for stiff political opposition.Tuesday’s result showed that was no idle threat.The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, Democratic Majority for Israel and other affiliated organizations ultimately spent more than $16 million to defeat Mr. Bowman, more than any outside group has ever put into a House race.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

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Bowman Falls to Latimer in House Primary in New York

      by

      Representative Jamaal Bowman of New York, one of Congress’s most outspoken progressives, suffered a stinging primary defeat on Tuesday, according to The Associated Press, unable to overcome a record-shattering campaign from pro-Israel groups and a slate of self-inflicted blunders.Mr. Bowman was defeated by George Latimer, the Westchester County executive, in a race that became the year’s ugliest intraparty brawl and the most expensive House primary in history.It began last fall when Mr. Bowman stepped forward as one of the leading critics of how Israelis carrying out their war with Hamas. But the contest grew into a broader proxy fight around the future of the Democratic Party, exposing painful fractures over race, class and ideology in a diverse district that includes parts of Westchester County and the Bronx.Mr. Bowman, the district’s first Black congressman and a committed democratic socialist, never wavered from his calls for a cease-fire in Gaza or left-wing economic priorities. Down in the polls, he repeatedly accused his white opponent of racism and used expletives in denouncing the pro-Israel groups as a “Zionist regime” trying to buy the election.His positions on the war and economic issues electrified the national progressives, who undertook an 11th-hour rescue mission led by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York. But they ultimately did little to win over skeptical voters and only emboldened his adversaries.A super PAC affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a pro-Israel lobby, dumped $15 million into defeating him, more than any outside group has ever spent on a House race.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 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Gov. Spencer Cox Holds Off Challenger From Right in Utah’s G.O.P. Primary

      by

      Gov. Spencer Cox of Utah fended off a challenge from the right in his primary on Tuesday, according to The Associated Press, defeating State Representative Phil Lyman, who had the endorsement of the state Republican Party.Mr. Cox, a relative moderate, faced opposition from Mr. Lyman and G.O.P. colleagues who considered him not conservative enough. Mr. Cox has been openly critical of former President Donald J. Trump, and has not endorsed him as he runs for president for a third time.At the state G.O.P. convention in Salt Lake City in the spring, Mr. Cox, who is in his first four-year term after having served as lieutenant governor, failed to secure the party’s endorsement for his re-election bid. At the event, the crowd booed Mr. Cox, who was forced to be on the defensive about his Republican credentials.Despite party frictions, Mr. Cox was widely popular among Utahns in his first term, and his nomination makes a second term all the more likely. Republicans have controlled the Utah governorship since 1985.Mr. Cox will face the Democrats’ nominee, State Representative Brian King, a former minority leader of the State House, in the November election.Mr. Lyman, a former county commissioner, is known for an illegal ATV ride that he staged in 2014 to protest a federal decision banning motor vehicle use in a local canyon. Mr. Lyman and his supporters viewed the protest as an act of civil disobedience, and Mr. Trump pardoned him in 2020.Though Mr. Trump did not weigh in on the governor’s race, Mr. Lyman emphasized his support for the former president throughout his campaign. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      John Curtis, a Moderate House Republican, Wins Utah’s Senate Primary

      by

      Representative John Curtis, a centrist Republican, won his party’s primary for U.S. Senate in Utah on Tuesday, according to The Associated Press, beating a more conservative candidate endorsed by former President Donald J. Trump.Mr. Curtis, who has held a House seat in eastern Utah since 2017, has portrayed himself as a moderate workhorse in the image of the senator whose seat he is vying to fill: Mitt Romney, a former presidential candidate who said he was retiring to make way for a “new generation of leaders.”Mr. Curtis, 64, is perhaps not the fresh-faced successor Mr. Romney, 77, had imagined. But Mr. Curtis, a member of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus and a leader of Republican efforts to address climate change in Congress, is a clear heir apparent to Mr. Romney’s centrist style of politics.Unlike Mr. Romney, Mr. Curtis is not a vocal critic of Mr. Trump. Mr. Romney, who voted twice to remove Mr. Trump from office during the former president’s two impeachment trials in the Senate, had pleaded with his fellow Republicans to unite behind an alternative to the former president for 2024.While Mr. Curtis declined to support Mr. Trump in the 2016 election, he largely backed his agenda once he was elected to Congress. But he refused to support Mr. Trump’s false claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him. In the midst of this year’s Senate primary race, and seeking to polish his conservative bona fides, Mr. Curtis defended the former president’s vow to prosecute his political enemies if elected president.“I think it’s just human nature to feel the way that President Trump has expressed himself,” Mr. Curtis said during a debate ahead of the primary.Still, he faced attacks from his main primary opponent, Trent Staggs, the mayor of Riverton, Utah, for not being sufficiently supportive of the former president. Mr. Trump had endorsed Mr. Staggs, describing him in a video last weekend as “a little bit of a long shot” but “MAGA all the way.” For months, polls showed Mr. Curtis leading the race by a wide margin.Mr. Curtis began his political career as a Democrat. He unsuccessfully ran for the Utah State Senate in 2000, and then served for a year as the chair of the Democratic Party in Utah County. He ran for mayor of Provo as a Republican in 2009, and served in that position until 2017.That year, when Representative Jason Chaffetz, the influential chair of the House Oversight Committee, abruptly retired from his House seat in eastern Utah, Mr. Curtis jumped into the race, winning the Republican primary with 40 percent of the vote and defeating his Democratic opponent in the special election in a landslide. Mr. Curtis has since cruised to re-election to three full terms in the House. More