What the data say about the House Speaker vote

Just In | The Hill 

Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), the Republican leader in the House, cannot garner the votes necessary to be named the House Speaker despite his party gaining control of the chamber. There are 21 Republican representatives that have refused to support his candidacy, effectively holding him and the process hostage.

Compromise is necessary when an immovable objective is confronted with an unstoppable force. The current situation has reached such a dilemma. It is clear that instead of the Republican leadership conceding political capital with the 21 holdouts to buy their favor, negotiations with the Democratic leadership are needed to find a way for a House Speaker to be elected. This means engaging Democrats to form a coalition to elect McCarthy, some other Republican Representative, or even Democratic Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), the incoming Democratic House leader. 

Such an effort would have multiple benefits.

First, the 21 Republican holdouts would immediately be neutralized and lose much of the influence they have gained to date. Given that most of them believe the false claim that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from former President Trump, even with overwhelming evidence to the contrary, these people should be treated with respect, since they were voted to be there — but not as special members that they have managed to become. Their efforts are the roadblock for the 118th Congress to be formed, holding the government hostage.

Second, with such a slight majority in the House, the GOP will be forced to work with and compromise on many issues with their Democratic brethren over the next two years. As such, this is the perfect opportunity to begin such a process and demonstrate that compromise rather than gridlock can be the theme of the 118th Congress. Moreover, with a split government, neither party will have the power to pass laws without mutual agreement. No one could have foreseen that the need for such compromise would arrive even before this Congress even officially opens. 

Third, the nation’s business should take precedence over party politics. Whether it is McCarthy or some other Representative, a House Speaker must be elected so that the tasks of government can be executed in a timely manner, with no further delays. 

If the Republican Party wishes to demonstrate that it can function in the best interest of the nation, finding a way to compromise across the aisle is imperative. Otherwise, their slim majority will be short-lived after the 2024 election. 

What has become clear is that the Republican majority in the House is in name only. There are no longer two political parties. The 21 Republican holdouts have become their own party, much like how the far-left progressive wing of the Democrat party (dubbed “the Squad”) challenged Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) when she was the Speaker. Much to her credit, she managed to maneuver her slim majority despite these differences.

Electing McCarthy as House Speaker is less about the person and more about the principle. The dysfunction on display is a risk to our nation’s credibility around the world. Indeed, it tarnishes not only the Republican Party, but what the United States represents. If our nation’s democracy cannot function and operate effectively, what can be expected in other countries that emulate our system and seek similar freedoms? 

How long the current deadlock continues remains anyone’s guess. The insurrection to stop the election certification on Jan. 6, 2021 was a threat to our nation’s democracy — and so is the current standoff on Jan. 6 2023. The sooner that some resolution is achieved, without giving away “the bank” to the 21 holdouts, the sooner our democracy can begin to heal from this self-inflicted wound and the internal political cancer that it has exposed.

What is certain is that if 21 GOP representatives are unwilling to act in the best interest of the country, there are 212 Democratic Representatives available who may be willing to do so. The sooner such negotiations begin and come to fruition, the sooner this debacle can be put behind us.  

Sheldon H. Jacobson, Ph.D., is a professor in computer science at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. A data scientist and operations researcher, he applies his expertise in data-driven risk-based decision-making to evaluate and inform public policy.

​Campaign, Opinion Read More 

The 13 Republicans who switched their votes to McCarthy

Just In | The Hill 

Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) made significant gains in his bid to become the next House Speaker on Friday after a deal with his detractors swung 13 votes in his favor.  

It’s not enough to make McCarthy the Speaker, as he needs a majority of those present. But his 214 votes fell just three shy of the number needed to seize the gavel, and it marked the first time this week that he bested the Democratic leader, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.), who had led every previous ballot.  

Jeffries received 211 votes, reflecting one Democratic absence. The seven Republicans who maintained their opposition to McCarthy split their votes between two of their GOP colleagues. Two additional Republicans were absent during Friday’s vote. 

It’s not clear if McCarthy can win over his final opponents. But it does represent real progress for the embattled Speaker-in-waiting after a difficult and historic week in which 20 Republicans repeatedly blocked his path.  

Here are the Republicans who switched sides.  

McCarthy ‘Noes’ who are now ‘Yes’ (13)

Rep. Dan Bishop (N.C.)

Bishop was the first of the group of 20 to switch sides by virtue of the alphabet. Republicans backing McCarthy rose and gave him a loud ovation after he announced on the floor his vote for McCarthy, on the 12th ballot.  

Rep.-elect Josh Brecheen (Okla.)

Rep. Michael Cloud (Texas)

Rep. Andrew Clyde (Ga.)

Applause from McCarthy supporters also followed the announcements by Brecheen, Cloud and Clyde as they announced their support for McCarthy.

Rep. Byron Donalds (Fla.)

Donalds, in just his second term in Congress, was thrown into the spotlight this week when he became the first McCarthy supporter to switch to the opposition, in the third ballot, and was later nominated by the detractors to challenge McCarthy directly. 

Yet Donalds spent most of Thursday playing a central part of the talks with McCarthy’s allies. In the 12th ballot as the votes changed, he was not nominated against McCarthy.

Rep. Paul Gosar (Ariz.)

Gosar voted for McCarthy on Friday.

Rep.-elect Anna Paulina Luna (Fla.)

“Pending negotiations in good faith … with this entire conference, Kevin McCarthy,” Luna said to applause. 

Luna, who has been an adamant opponent of McCarthy, told reporters Thursday night that talks in Emmer’s office had been “all net positive.”

That was one day after she issued a statement saying “I did not come to Congress to conduct business as usual or bow to the notion that this is just ‘how things are done in D.C.’”

“I have made my position clear, and it remains the same as when you elected me: I will stand strong until we get a Speaker who will fight for the American people and fix the chaos and corruption in our nation’s Capitol,” she added. “I will continue to stand firm against all forms of pressure.”

Rep. Mary Miller (Ill.)

Miller also said she would back McCarthy based on pending talks.

Rep. Ralph Norman (S.C.)

Norman, another Freedom Caucus member, backed McCarthy on the floor.

Earlier he had said he was still reviewing the details of the agreement. But during an appearance on Fox News Friday morning, he said the deal includes “commonsense proposals” he and others put forward weeks ago.

“We’ll be looking at it, seeing if it’s enforceable, seeing if it’s something that will — will make — it — all of it makes sense, and we’re excited about having these changes made which should have, should have been done anyway,” he said. “We shouldn’t have to ask for them.”

Rep.-elect Andy Ogles (Tenn.)

Asked Thursday if he could ever change from voting for people other than McCarthy, Ogles said: “We’ll see.”

On Friday, he voted for the California Republican.

Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.)

Perry has been one of the most vociferous opponents of McCarthy with his statements in recent weeks. On Friday, he backed him on the floor.

“We’re at a turning point. I’ve negotiated in good faith, with one purpose: to restore the People’s House back to its rightful owners,” he said in a statement. “The framework for an agreement is in place, so in a good-faith effort, I voted to restore the People’s House by voting for McCarthy.”

Perry had spent long hours in the negotiations, and had expressed sharp reservations with McCarthy that have to do more with personal distrust than with anything more tangible that McCarthy might be able to provide. 

“We’re at a Reagan moment — ‘trust but verify,’” Perry tweeted Thursday night. “The devil is in the details, and we’ll take our time to ensure it’s right, not easy. One way or another, the status quo must go.”

But on Friday, his vote moved McCarthy a little closer to his goal.

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) 

Roy, former chief of staff to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), has been at the forefront of the negotiations with McCarthy’s allies and once the deal was close, he was expected to back McCarthy.

Roy, more than most of the detractors, has been consistent in his specific demands, which center around assurances that all legislation — particularly government spending bills — receive a robust debate and a separate floor vote. 

If a deal emerges, it will be because Roy has endorsed it. 

“We’re still talking. … I can’t speak to where the numbers are,” Roy said Friday just before noon. “[We’ve] had the guts of something that I believe in for a number of days. But you’ve got to get it all kind of worked out and work with the various interests in the conference.” 

Rep.-elect Keith Self (Texas)

“We are making progress,” the lawmaker-elect said, before naming McCarthy as his choice for Speaker.

Noes (7)

Rep. Andy Biggs (Ariz.)

Biggs, a former chair of the far-right Freedom Caucus, was among the earliest — and loudest — critics of McCarthy, challenging the long-time Republican leader for the Speaker’s spot in the GOP’s closed-door nomination vote in November, and then again on the House floor this week.

On Friday morning, he retweeted a Newsweek column praising McCarthy’s conservative opponents. 

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.)

Boebert, a member of the conservative Freedom Caucus, told Fox News’s Sean Hannity Wednesday night that she will not support McCarthy — even after former President Trump, of whom she is a close ally, urged the conference to do so.

“I’m not going to support Kevin McCarthy, Sean,” she told the television host.

While those comments were made before House Republicans announced their tentative deal, Boebert told reporters Thursday night, “I am not a part of any negotiation.”

Rep.-elect Eli Crane (Ariz.)

Asked Thursday if there is anything McCarthy can do to win his support, Rep.-elect Eli Crane (R-Ariz.) said: “I don’t think so.”

But he backed him on Friday.

Rep. Matt Gaetz (Fla.)

Gaetz, who has expressed opposition to McCarthy since the internal GOP election in November, told reporters Thursday night that he is not supportive of the tentative deal.

“That’s correct,” he said, clarifying his continued opposition to McCarthy after being briefed on the new terms. Pressed on what his issues are with the deal, he responded, “It results in Kevin McCarthy becoming the Speaker.”

Rep. Bob Good (Va.)

Good, another McCarthy opponent from the start, told reporters Thursday that he will never vote for McCarthy.

“You never have to ask me again if I’m a ‘no’ Kevin McCarthy. I will never vote for Kevin McCarthy,” Good said.

Rep. Andy Harris (Md.)

Emerging from a closed-door meeting in Emmer’s office, Harris would not comment on the tentative deal — or even acknowledge that one was in place.

“What deal?” he told reporters when asked about progress on terms of an agreement.

He also rebuffed questions about what concessions he would like to see from McCarthy.

“You don’t think I’m negotiating in the press, do you?” he said.

Harris voted for McCarthy on the floor on Friday.

Rep. Matt Rosendale (Mont.)

Rosendale voted for Rep. Kevin Hern (R-Okla.) on Friday, though he at first offered a tease.

“Kevin,” Rosendale said, not finishing the name. “Hern!”

Rebecca Beitsch contributed.

​House, News, Chip Roy, House Speakership vote, Kevin McCarthy, Lauren Boebert, Matt Gaetz Read More 

Who repped who in the Jan. 6 probe: A look at the frequently used witness lawyers

Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories 

The Jan. 6 select committee repeatedly raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest by some of the lawyers representing crucial witnesses in their investigation — particularly those paid by Trump-friendly entities.

The concerns were brought into sharp relief during their late-November interview with Wisconsin State House Speaker Robin Vos, a Republican who declined to answer any questions on how he came to be represented by Edward Greim, a Federalist Society-affiliated lawyer who also represented at least six other committee witnesses.

In a tense exchange with the panel’s vice chair, Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), Greim told Vosin his interview not to answer Cheney’s questions about legal representation. “The committee has no business knowing that, has no business inquiring into this,” Greim interceded.

The committee investigators highlighted their unresolved questions about witness representation in their final report but left ultimate judgment about potential conflicts or witness evasiveness to the public.

POLITICO reviewed the nearly 300 witness transcripts released by the Jan. 6 select committee to identify the lawyers most frequently tapped by the panel’s witnesses. Here’s what we found:

Frequently tapped attorneys

Lawyers from a small handful of firms each represented five or more of the select committee’s witnesses. They are:

David Warrington and Michael Columbo (The Dhillon Law Group): Attorneys David Warrington, Michael Columbo and several others represented 11 of the panel’s witnesses, including several central figures in the probe.

Among them was Donald Trump himself, who fought a committee subpoena in court. Others included former national security adviser Michael Flynn, Trump White House personnel adviser Johnny McEntee, Trump political adviser Katrina Pierson, “Stop the Steal” rally organizers Amy and Kylie Kremer, and Trump election day operations director Michael Roman.

Other witnesses: Laura Cox, Zach Parkinson, Kathy Berden and Charles Bowman.

Daniel Benson and Jonathan Gonzales (Kasowitz Benson), eight clients: This New York-based firm, which has counted Trump as a client in the past, represented key figures from the Trump White House, including adviser Eric Herschmann, Ivanka Trump, and Jared Kushner. Ivanka Trump’s chief of staff Julie Radford and aide Rachel Craddock were also repped by the firm. Two of Trump’s Oval Office aides, Molly Michael and Austin Ferrer, employed Kasowitz Benson as well. Trump campaign lawyer Alex Cannon was also a client

Stefan Passantino and (Michael Best), seven clients: Passantino represented Cassidy Hutchinson, who later switched lawyers and accused him of trying to suppress crucial information — an accusation he and his allies dispute. Passantino also represented Beau Harrison, a Trump White House aide present for some of the same exchanges that Hutchinson described, Trump campaign adviser Joshua Findlay and John Isakson, who dropped out of Trump’s effort to solicit false electoral college certificates in Georgia.

Other witnesses: Madixon Fox Porter, Jacqueline Kotkiewicz, Douglas Sellers

Ed Greim and Paul Brothers (Graves Garrett), seven clients: Witnesses represented by this Missouri-based firm include Vos, Trump Justice Department aide Ken Klukowski, Trump White House official Bobby Peede and Jan. 6 rally organizer Justin Caporale.

Other witnesses: Robert Gabriel, Arina Grossu, Angela McCallum

Todd Steggerda and Emily Kelley (McGuire Woods), eight clients: These attorneys primarily represent figures connected to the Republican National Committee, including Chair Ronna McDaniel and her chief of staff Richard Walters.

Other witnesses: Hanna Allred, Austin Boedigheimer, Kevin Zambrano, Mike Reed, Michael Ahrens and Cassie Docksey.

Robert Driscoll and Alfred Carry (McGlinchey Firm), five clients: McGlinchey’s clients all played notable roles in the select committee’s investigation. They included Trump White House adviser Stephen Miller, Georgia GOP Chair David Shafer, Georgia pro-Trump alternate elector Shawn Still, former White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and former Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne.

Unrepresented witnesses

Nearly three-dozen witnesses opted to appear before the select committee without personal counsel. They included Oath Keepers adviser Kellye SoRelle, Proud Boy George Meza, D.C. Police commander Robert Glover, former Melania Trump chief of staff Stephanie Grisham, and Proud Boys documentarian Nick Quested. Most of these witnesses were cooperative and not combative with investigators. Many of them were current or former government officials, who appeared alongside agency counsel. Those include Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, former Defense Secretary Mark Esper, and former acting U.S. attorney for Washington D.C. Michael Sherwin.

Other notable attorneys

Emmet Flood, who was in the Trump White House counsel’s office amid the Mueller investigation, represented two witnesses — Kellyanne Conway and Marc Short. William Burck, a mainstay of earlier Trump-focused congressional probes, represented Mike Pompeo. John Rowley and John Irving represented Cleta Mitchell and Rep. Scott Perry. Charles Burnham represented John Eastman and Jeffrey Clark. George Terwilliger represented Mark Meadows, and his son Zach Terwilliger represented at least two other White House figures: Kayleigh McEnany and Amy Swonger.

Timothy Parlatore, who like Rowley represents Trump in Jan. 6 matters before the federal grand jury, represented two key witnesses before the committee: Doug Mastriano and Bernard Kerik. Joseph McBride, an incendiary attorney who represents several Jan. 6 riot defendants, appeared on behalf of committee witnesses Alexander Bruesewitz and Ali Alexander. A.B. Culvahouse represented Greg Jacob, and Robert Costello represented Rudy Giuliani.

​ Read More 

Here are key things you need to know if you’re eyeing a Medigap policy alongside basic Medicare

US Top News and Analysis 

Dragos Condrea | Istock | Getty Images

If you’re signing up for Medicare, you’ve likely discovered that there are a lot of out-of-pocket costs that come with your coverage.

For about 23% of Medicare’s 65.1 million beneficiaries, the solution for covering those outlays is a so-called Medigap plan.

These policies, sold by private insurance companies, generally pick up part or most of the cost-sharing — i.e., deductibles, copays and coinsurance — that comes with basic Medicare (Part A hospital coverage and Part B outpatient care).

However, they do have limitations, and monthly premiums can be pricey.

More from Personal Finance:
How to reduce financial sting of home maintenance, repairs
Some 2023 Medicare costs are higher, some are lower
Where to keep cash amid high inflation, rising interest rates

Nevertheless, some beneficiaries determine that pairing basic Medicare with a Medigap policy is a better fit than choosing to get their Parts A and B benefits delivered through an Advantage Plan (or having no supplemental insurance at all). Those plans, which can restrict coverage to in-network providers, also usually include Part D prescription drug coverage, often come with no premium and may offer extras like dental and vision. 

The reasons that some beneficiaries instead choose Medigap alongside basic Medicare vary from person to person, according to Elizabeth Gavino, founder of Lewin & Gavino and an independent broker and general agent for Medicare plans.

For example, she said, they may want more freedom in choosing doctors and other providers or need coverage while away from home  — i.e., they travel a lot, sometimes for extended stays. (Advantage Plans may disenroll you if you remain outside their service area for a certain time — typically six months.)

VIDEO4:3604:36
Biogen Alzheimer’s drug could get Medicare coverage in 2025 if approved, says Dr. Scott Gottlieb

Here’s what to know about Medigap policies if you’re considering purchasing one.

Medigap policies are standardized

Medigap policies are standardized across most states — available plans are designated A, B, C, D, F, G, K, L, M and N — so you know the benefits are the same regardless of where you live or which insurance carrier is offering, say, Plan G or Plan N.

However, not every plan is available in all states. And, Plans C and F aren’t available to people who are newly eligible for Medicare in 2020 or later.

To be clear, each lettered plan differs in what is covered.

For instance, some may pay the full Part A deductible ($1,600 per benefit period in 2023), while others don’t. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has a chart on its website that shows the differences. You also can use the agency’s search tool to find available plans in your ZIP code.

Many states let doctors charge 15% ‘excess charge’

Also be aware that in many states, some doctors or other providers may charge you the difference between the Medicare-approved amount under Part B and their full fee, with a 15% cap on that “excess charge.” 

“If your state is one that allows up to the 15% excess charge, consider [a plan] that covers it,” Gavino said. 

Also, be aware that Medigap plans don’t cover costs associated with prescription drug coverage (unless, perhaps, the policy was issued prior to 2006.) This means you’d need to purchase a standalone Part D plan if you want that coverage.

Medigap also doesn’t cover services that are excluded from Medicare’s coverage, generally speaking, such as dental or vision.

There are rules that go with Medigap signup

When you first enroll in Part B, you generally get six months to purchase a Medigap policy without an insurance company checking on your health history and deciding whether to insure you.

After that, depending on the specifics of your situation and the state you live in, you may have to go through medical underwriting.

There’s huge variation in cost

Despite Medigap policies’ standardization, the premiums can vary greatly.

For example, in New York, the lowest monthly premium for Plan G is $278 and the highest is $476, according to the American Association for Medicare Supplement Insurance. In Iowa, the least expensive Part G policy is $79 and the most expensive is $192.

There are several reasons for the wide variance in pricing, said Danielle Roberts, co-founder of insurance firm Boomer Benefits. That includes the cost of health care in your area, the open enrollment rules for your state and the actual loss ratio experienced by the insurance company across all policyholders with that same plan, she said.

“For example, Medigap plans cost more in New York because they have year-round open enrollment,” Roberts said.

If the carrier can’t underwrite for health, then they must raise the rates for everyone.
Danielle Roberts
Co-founder of Boomer Benefits

“This means that residents there can literally wait until they get sick to buy a policy,” she said. “If the carrier can’t underwrite for health, then they must raise the rates for everyone.”

Additionally, insurance companies routinely roll out new plans, Roberts said. So if an insurer begins offering a plan and taking on new policyholders for it, over time the premiums rise a little each year due to inflation and claims, making that plan less competitive when another insurer opens a new plan that hasn’t incurred any losses yet, she said.

“Healthy people who can pass underwriting begin to switch plans to the cheaper company and then the first company is left with a lot of people who can’t pass underwriting to switch,” Roberts said. “That is an aging block of business with many policyholders who have costly health conditions, which further drives up the rates.”

The way a Medigap plan is ‘rated’ also matters

Another difference in Medigap premiums can come from how the plans are “rated.” If you know this, it may help you anticipate what may or may not happen to your premium down the road.

Some plans are “community-rated,” which means everyone who buys a particular one pays the same rate regardless of their age. 

Others are based on “attained age,” which means the rate you get at purchase is based on your age and will increase as you get older. Still others use “issue age”: The rate won’t change as you age, but it’s based on your age at the time you purchase the policy (so younger people may pay less).

These are some other things to consider

Svetikd | E+ | Getty Images

If you work with an agent, ask how many insurance companies they work with (or are “appointed with”), according to the American Association for Medicare Supplement Insurance. They may not recommend a particular insurer’s policies if they don’t get a commission to do so.

There also may be a household discount offered.

“One trend we see is that carriers are becoming more lenient with this and not requiring the spouse to be on the policy to qualify,” Roberts said. “Many will give you a discount just for having another person living at the same residence.”

Also, be aware that some insurance companies give large discounts to new enrollees, but the reduction in price may go away in a year or two.

“You’ll want to know that up front,” Roberts said.

Read More 

Miami Democrats face internal feud after disastrous 2022 midterms

Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories 

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — The 2022 midterms saw Republicans win Miami-Dade County for the first time in 20 years. Now, the Democratic infighting has begun.

Ten party officials in Florida’s most populous county are asking the statewide Florida Democratic Party to audit the county party over alleged campaign finance “improper activity.” The request comes after Republicans won nearly every race in the county, which Hillary Clinton won by nearly 30 percentage-points just six years ago. The county has long been held up as an overwhelming Democratic home turf.

Miami-Dade Democratic Party Chair Robert Dempster has said an audit of the county party is underway, but the group of 10 say they would like to hand off those duties to the statewide party. The Miami-Dade Democratic Executive Committee has 257 total members.

“Many signers of this letter have been raising the alarm for many months that Robert Dempster was unfit to lead our Party,” former Miami-Dade County Democratic Chairman Juan Cuba said during a Friday interview. “And even after losing every race in Miami-Dade this November, there has been zero accountability and very little self-reflection.”

Dempster said the county party is behind on audits, but those were due before he took office and the “10 signatories are well aware of that.” He also said that Cuba also fell behind on audits when he was chairman of the county party.

“We have been exceedingly transparent with our membership about our finances, reporting and our efforts to reconcile any good faith errors, and can provide meeting minutes since we installed a new treasurer a few months ago as such,” Dempster said.

The group says if Florida Democratic Party Chairman Manny Diaz does not conduct an audit, they will turn the matter over to the Miami-Dade County Inspector General’s Office and the Florida Elections Commission.

“Our sincere hope is that there was no illegal campaign activity during his tenure, but if this audit finds wrongdoing, we demand you to take immediate action in suspending and removing Robert Dempster as DEC Chair,” read the letter.

Diaz did not return a request seeking comment. He is facing his own calls to resign after a disastrous election cycle that saw Gov. Ron DeSantis wins by a historic 19-points and Republicans take legislative supermajorities even though Republicans underperformed across the country.

Among those signing the letter are Cuba, former Democratic state Rep. Cindy Lerner, former state Rep. Robert Asencio and Verlance Echoles, president of the Miami-Dade Democratic Black Caucus.

The letter to Diaz alleges the county party has $61,000 in contributions and $107,000 in expenditures not accounted for on campaign finance reports, no expenses reported for the second quarter, and a contribution given to Miami City Commission candidate Quinn Smith recorded two months after he lost.

The 2022 midterms were a disaster across the board for Democrats, but losing Miami-Dade County was perhaps the single biggest symbolic blow. There had been signs in recent years that Republicans had been making in-roads into what was once one of the state’s bluest counties, but its flipping red was still seen as a big blow to Florida Democrats.

Diaz, the state party chairman, is a former Miami mayor, who was elected by party leaders amid the promise that he could help boost fundraising efforts, but that never materialized. Republicans raised significantly more than Democrats in nearly every key midterm race, but Diaz has so far declined to step down.

The 10 signatories want the audit completed by Jan. 20, which coincides with a Florida Democratic Party organizational meeting where they will decide on party leadership headed into the 2024 presidential election cycle.

​ Read More 

New US Sanctions Target Supply of Iranian Drones to Russia

USA – Voice of America 

The United States on Friday issued new sanctions targeting suppliers of Iranian drones that Washington said have been used to target civilian infrastructure in Ukraine during the conflict with Russia.

Russia has been attacking vital Ukraine infrastructure since October with barrages of missile and drones, causing sweeping power blackouts as cold weather sets in.

The U.S. Treasury Department said it imposed sanctions on six executives and board members of Iran’s Qods Aviation Industries (QAI), also known as Light Airplanes Design and Manufacturing Industries.

The Treasury described QAI, which has been under U.S. sanctions since 2013, as a key Iranian defense manufacturer responsible for designing and producing drones.

“We will continue to use every tool at our disposal to deny [Russian President Vladimir] Putin the weapons that he is using to wage his barbaric and unprovoked war on Ukraine,” Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said in the statement.

Iran’s mission to the United Nations in New York and Russia’s embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Iran has previously acknowledged sending drones to Russia but said they were sent before Russia’s February invasion.

Moscow has denied its forces used Iranian drones in Ukraine.

Friday’s sanctions reflect U.S. concerns about Iranian-Russian military cooperation and Russia’s use of Iranian drones to hit Ukraine, a threat that could become more potent if Tehran were to provide missiles to Moscow to shore up Russian supplies.

Among those designated was Seyed Hojatollah Ghoreish, QAI’s board chairman and senior official in Iran’s Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics, who “has led Iran’s military research and development efforts and was responsible for negotiating Iran’s agreement with Russia for the supply of Iranian [drones] for Russia’s war in Ukraine,” the Treasury said.

The Treasury also imposed sanctions on Ghassem Damavandian, QAI’s managing director and board member, saying he had likely facilitated QAI’s supply of drones to Iranian military services and the training of Russian personnel on use of QAI-made drones.

Four others who have served as QAI board members were also placed under sanctions: Hamidreza Sharifi-Tehrani, Reza Khaki, Majid Reza Niyazi-Angili and Vali Arlanizadeh.

The sanctions also targeted the director of Iran’s Aerospace Industries Organization, which the Treasury said was the key organization responsible for overseeing Iran’s ballistic missile programs.

The move freezes any U.S. assets of those designated and generally bars Americans from dealing with them. Those engaged in certain transactions with them also risked being hit by sanctions.

The United States has previously imposed sanctions on companies and people it accused of producing or transferring Iranian drones that Russia has used to attack civilian infrastructure in Ukraine.

Read More 

Kamala Harris reveals Biden's 2023 priorities includes inflation, job growth: 'Never been more optimistic'

Vice President Kamala Harris teased the Biden administration’s top priorities for 2023, following a meeting at the White House Thursday with members of the Cabinet.

After the meeting, Harris shared a photo of the administration’s top officials at the White House and said they would be focusing on slashing inflation, job growth, and growing the economy.

In the tweet, the vice president said she has “never been more optimistic about our future.”

“I’ve never been more optimistic about our future. Today, standing with [President Joe Biden] and other members of the Cabinet, we discussed our plan for 2023. Together we will deliver on lowering inflation, creating more jobs, and building an economy that works for everyone,” she wrote.

U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris gives remarks on the South Lawn of the White House on September 13, 2022 in Washington, DC. 

U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris gives remarks on the South Lawn of the White House on September 13, 2022 in Washington, DC. 
(Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

TWITTER EXPLODES AFTER BIDEN REFERS TO KAMALA HARRIS AS ‘PRESIDENT’: ‘A DISASTER’

Harris’ first two years in office have caused quite a headache for the administration as she continuously faces backlash over how she carries out her official duties. 

While Biden appointed her as the immigration czar two years ago, when she was tasked with finding and addressing the “root cause” of the current immigration crisis, she has yet to visit the U.S.-Mexico border. 

She is also widely criticized in the media over her many staffing exoduses and her fairly common “word salad” comments. 

Like, in Sept., when Harris traveled along with Education Secretary Miguel Cardona to Claflin University in South Carolina, she overly emphasized that “community banks” were located in one’s own community.

4 MILLION BORDER ENCOUNTERS SINCE KAMALA HARRIS ASSIGNED TO ADDRESS ‘ROOT CAUSE’ OF PROBLEM

She said, “We invested an additional $12 billion into community banks, because we know community banks are in the community, and understand the needs and desires of that community as well as the talent and capacity of community.”  

Harris also gave a bewildered response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

During a CBS News interview in July, Harris suggested the landmark decision should have remained in place: “I think that, to be very honest with you, I do believe that we should have rightly believed, but we certainly believe that certain issues are just settled. Certain issues are just settled.”

Vice President Kamala Harris and U.S. President Joe Biden in the State Dining Room of the White House October 4, 2022 in Washington, DC. 

Vice President Kamala Harris and U.S. President Joe Biden in the State Dining Room of the White House October 4, 2022 in Washington, DC. 
(Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Despite the apparent lack of media support, Harris said in a recent interview that 2022 was a strong year for her.

FOX NEWS POLL: 75% DISSATISFIED WITH NATION’S DIRECTION

“There are things that I’ve done as vice president that fully demonstrate the strength of my leadership as vice president that have not received the kind of coverage that I think [the] Dobbs [decision] did receive,” Harris said during an interview last month with Washington Post columnist Jonathan Capehart.

Vice President Kamala Harris speaks on the South Lawn of the White House December 13, 2022 in Washington, DC. 

Vice President Kamala Harris speaks on the South Lawn of the White House December 13, 2022 in Washington, DC. 
(Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

An optimistic 2023 viewpoint comes as current U.S. inflation sits at 7.1%, which is down from the summer’s high of 9.1% but up from the 1.4% it was on day one of the Biden administration. Prices are also up 13.8% and the average family in America has lost $5,800 in annual income.

As for the direction of the country under Biden and Harris, a whopping 75% of people said in an August Fox News poll that they were dissatisfied. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The unhappiness was shared by Republicans, Democrats and independents alike as large majorities rate the economy negatively, fail to see signs of a recovery, and are generally unhappy with the way things are going in the country.

source
Fox News

Fox News>

[World] Damar Hamlin: How anti-vaxxers exploited player's collapse

Damar Hamlin attempts a tackleImage source, Getty Images
Image caption,

Damar Hamlin attempts a tackle before his collapse on the field on Monday night

Online activists used the on-field collapse of American football star Damar Hamlin to spread anti-vaccination messages starting just minutes after Monday night’s incident.

In what has become a familiar pattern since Covid vaccines became available about two years ago, several influential accounts used the event to spread anti-vaccination content.

They included the Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who tweeted: “Before the covid vaccines we didn’t see athletes dropping dead on the playing field like we do now… Time to investigate the covid vaccines.”

That tweet was viewed around a million times within a day. But the idea that young, healthy athletes have never collapsed suddenly before Covid vaccines is easily disproven.

A US study looking at athletes over four years found many unexplained deaths were in fact caused by cardiac arrest – a cause more common in male and African-American players.

A study from 2016 notes that there are approximately 100 to 150 sudden cardiac deaths during competitive sports in the United States each year.

While rare and potentially dangerous cases of heart inflammation have been associated with some Covid vaccines, these real cases have been muddled together with unrelated illnesses and misinterpreted, sometimes cherry-picked data.

Combined with a wave of anti-vaccine activity online throughout the pandemic, it has given birth to a group of activists who ascribe nearly any tragic or unexplained death to vaccines.

The loudest voices in the anti-vaccination lobby have followed this pattern throughout the pandemic, even though heart problems are a symptom of Covid itself.

‘Cynical’ anti-vax lobby

Hamlin, a defensive back for the Buffalo Bills, suffered a cardiac arrest during Monday night’s high-profile matchup against the Cincinnati Bengals.

On Wednesday he remained in hospital, but an uncle said he was showing signs of improving. There has been no further information about any underlying causes which could have contributed to his cardiac arrest.

Research by the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), a non-profit campaign group based in London and Washington, found that mentions of an anti-vaccine film quadrupled after the player’s collapse.

CCDH chief executive Imran Ahmed said activists were “cynically exploiting tragedy to baselessly connect any injury or death of a notable person to vaccinations”.

The day after the match the documentary Died Suddenly, which was released in November last year, was mentioned nearly 17,000 times, the CCDH says. The BBC previously looked into the claims in the film and found little or no evidence behind many of them.

Caroline Orr Bueno, a researcher on misinformation who has spent a decade looking at the anti-vaccination movement, says the film gave rise to communities of people across several social media platforms primed to hunt for news events to back up their views.

“They believe the anti-vaccine rhetoric that they are seeing,” she says, “and they are joining in out of genuine concern without necessarily knowing that they’re being misled.”

Pray for Damar sign at Buffalo Bills home stadiumImage source, Getty Images

Googling is not science

A Twitter account promoting the Died Suddenly video sent out a message just minutes after Hamlin was transported off the field in Cincinnati claiming there was an “undeniable pattern”.

When contacted for a response, the owners of the account responded with a list of anecdotal reports of athletes suffering heart problems.

Backers of the film and other anti-vaccination activists collect news reports of heart attacks and unexplained deaths, automatically ascribing them to Covid-19 vaccines.

This focused obsession has created a hypersensitive pattern-spotting spiral, with activists and followers often believing the link between every sudden athlete death and vaccines is “obvious”, although there is scant solid research to back up their claims.

Heart attack v cardiac arrest

While it might seem unusual for young, healthy people to experience heart problems, there are important differences between a heart attack and cardiac arrest.

Most heart attacks are caused by blockages in arteries and are associated with older people as well as lifestyle factors like smoking and diet.

Most cardiac arrests are caused by a problem with the heart’s electrical system which keeps it pumping. These heart rhythm malfunctions are often genetically inherited and can be seen in young people who appear otherwise healthy.

Premier League fans will remember the dramatic moment in 2012 when Bolton’s Fabrice Muamba collapsed, having suffered a cardiac arrest. The 23-year-old’s heart stopped beating for 78 minutes.

A 2018 study by the Football Association looked back over 20 years of data from screening more than 11,000 players and found not only were cardiac deaths more common than previously thought – although still rare – but that most of them were in people with no previously diagnosed heart problem.

It started with Eriksen

One of the first clear examples of anti-vaccination activists taking advantage of a high-profile news event was the televised collapse of Danish football star Christian Eriksen during the European football championships in June 2021.

Influential accounts immediately began blaming Covid vaccines.

Only after the initial wave of speculation and misinformation was it revealed by the director of Eriksen’s club at the time, Inter Milan, that the midfielder had not received a Covid-19 vaccine prior to his collapse.

Christian Eriksen recovered from his heart condition, which was not caused by a vaccineImage source, Getty Images
Image caption,

Christian Eriksen recovered from his heart condition, which was not caused by a vaccine

In November, Twitter stopped enforcing its Covid misinformation policy, a development that Imran Ahmed of the CCDH called “particularly worrying”.

“Anti-vax lies are deadly and platforms must stop allowing dedicated spreaders of disinformation from abusing their platforms and the trust of other users.”

The BBC has contacted Twitter and Marjorie Taylor Greene for comment.

source

State Department says Speaker fight likely to compound national security concerns

The State Department on Thursday said that inconclusive elections for Speaker of the House are likely to compound concerns on Capitol Hill over the ability of lawmakers to carry out their duties related to national security and foreign policy. 

The absence of a Speaker of the House — with House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy losing at least eight rounds of votes for Speaker — has left lawmakers and members-elect without the credentials to attend briefings or meetings on sensitive and classified information with administration officials. 

State Department spokesperson Ned Price said on Thursday that lawmakers’ concerns “will be compounded” the longer the House remains without an elected Speaker — necessary to swear in members and authorize committee formations that allow them to participate in foreign policy and national security tasks.

“Well, of course, over time, those concerns, concerns on the part of the members themselves and the members-elect themselves, will be compounded,” Price said.

“The first few days of any Congressional term usually is spent on procedural elements like this but of course, if this continues on, there will be additional concerns. I’m sure we will hear additional concerns from the Hill as well,” Price continued, citing Congress’s role in oversight, appropriations and authorization for different agency and foreign policy actions. 

The spokesperson continued that it is “much more difficult” for the State Department to take “into account the prerogatives and the perspectives of members of both chambers of Congress” when there is not a seated House of Representatives.  

“But this is the process. The process is playing out. And I expect, we can all expect at some point, before too long, the process will conclude.”

GOP lawmakers told The Hill on Thursday that the absence of a Speaker has blocked them from receiving or accessing materials that include information on rocket attacks on U.S. bases in Syria, the current state of Russia’s war in Ukraine and concerns over Taiwan’s security in the face of an aggressive China. 

source