Zion Tech Group

Tag: Republican

  • Texas Republican Calls for Ilhan Omar To Be Deported


    A Texas Republican has called for Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, a U.S. citizen, to be deported to her home country of Somalia.

    “America would be a better place if @IlhanMN were deported back to Somalia,” Brandon Gill wrote Tuesday on X, formerly known as Twitter.

    Newsweek has contacted Omar’s office for comment via email outside of normal office hours.

    Rep. Brandon Gill (R-TX) speaks during a news conference with members of the Congressional Border Security Caucus to introduce the Birthright Citizenship Act at the U.S. Capitol Visitors Center on January 23, 2025 in Washington,…


    Why It Matters

    President Donald Trump has begun enacting his aggressive deportation program.

    Immigration and mass deportations were a key element of Trump’s 2024 campaign and Republicans sweeping to power on a national level.

    Americans support the need for immigration reform but disagree about how deportation policies should be carried out.

    A poll by The New York Times and Ipsos conducted from January 2 to 10 found that 55 percent of voters strongly or somewhat supported such plans. Eighty-eight percent supported “deporting immigrants who are here illegally and have criminal records.”

    What To Know

    Gill, a first-term representative for Texas’s 26th Congressional District, was reacting to a video shared on X on Tuesday, featuring a recent interview between the Minnesota Democrat and a reporter.

    About half an hour later, in a separate post, Gill said on X, “We should have never let Ilhan Omar into our country.”

    Omar, who represents Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District, arrived in the U.S. as a refugee in 1995 and became a naturalized citizen in 2000 at the age of 17.

    In the video, Omar, the first Somali American congresswoman, explained what undocumented Somalis, or those whose documentation may have expired, should do if questioned by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers.

    “You are not obligated to answer their questions. Just state that your are advised by a lawyer not to answer questions,” Omar told the reporter. “Disclosure of your name, immigration status, and the mode of entry is not mandatory. Learn the laws and prepare yourself and refrain from disclosing information that you prefer them not to know.”

    Omar is embroiled in a war of words with tech billionaire Elon Musk over the legal advice she was offering to undocumented immigrants if they encounter ICE agents.

    Last year, a misinterpreted clip of Omar’s speech in Somali sparked intense criticism from conservatives, leading to calls for her deportation. In response, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene introduced a motion to censure Omar, later stating to reporters, “I would love to expel her; I think she should be deported, I honestly do,” over the incorrect translation.

    What People Are Saying

    A spokesperson for Brandon Gill said in a statement, “Representative Omar’s conduct raises questions about to whom she is most loyal—the American people or illegal aliens from Somalia. Representative Gill simply stated that it is disgraceful for a sitting Congresswoman and U.S. citizen to facilitate the invasion of our country by illegal alien Somalis.”

    Elon Musk said in a post, X: “She is breaking the law. Literally. Outright.”

    In response, Congresswoman Ilhan Omar said on X: “Hey Elon Every single person in this country deserves to know their rights. That’s legal. Maybe you should brush up on our laws given the fact you’re breaking them to steal American’s sensitive data. PS. This video is manipulated, and I wasn’t even at the event shown.”

    “It just shows you how much he lacks an understanding of what the laws of the country are,” Omar said on Tuesday on CNN News Central when asked about Musk’s post.

    What Happens Next

    The dispute highlights the deep divisions in U.S. politics over immigration, as Republicans look to enact Trump’s hardline immigration agenda while progressives regroup and plot to oppose his agenda.



    In a recent controversial statement, a Texas Republican has called for Congresswoman Ilhan Omar to be deported from the United States. The representative, who has not been named, cited Omar’s past controversial statements and actions as reasons for her removal from the country.

    Omar, a Democrat from Minnesota, has been a vocal critic of the Trump administration and has been the target of numerous attacks from conservative politicians and media outlets. The Texas Republican’s call for her deportation has sparked outrage from many who see it as a blatant attempt to silence a prominent Muslim woman of color.

    Critics of the Texas Republican’s statement argue that it is a dangerous and xenophobic move that goes against the principles of free speech and democracy. They point out that Omar is a naturalized citizen of the United States and has the right to express her opinions, even if they are unpopular.

    The controversy surrounding this call for deportation is likely to continue as the political divide in the country deepens. It serves as a stark reminder of the ongoing struggle for tolerance and acceptance in American society.

    Tags:

    1. Ilhan Omar deportation
    2. Texas Republican statement
    3. GOP calls for Ilhan Omar removal
    4. Immigration controversy
    5. Political news Texas
    6. Deportation debate
    7. Ilhan Omar controversy
    8. Texas lawmaker demands deportation
    9. Republican stance on Ilhan Omar
    10. Immigration policy debate

    #Texas #Republican #Calls #Ilhan #Omar #Deported

  • 2025 Republican Policy Proposals: Immigration, Taxes and More


    A document being circulated by the House Budget Committee outlines an ambitious Republican agenda to lower taxes, roll back green energy initiatives, reduce federal spending on health care, trim the safety net and limit federal support for higher education. It contains more than 200 items, with a heavy emphasis on spending cuts that could help pay for extending tax cuts.

    Not everything on this list will become law — or even come up for a vote. Congressional Republicans are negotiating over the menu, and there are items certain to prove divisive among their members. They may also be limited by budget rules: Because they hope to pass most of their agenda through a so-called reconciliation process that will not require any Democratic votes in the Senate, only certain types of legislation can qualify. This week the White House also ordered a pause to funding for some of the programs Republicans are scrutinizing, though the effort was temporarily blocked by a judge.

    But even with so much uncertainty, the document provides an unusually detailed look at the ideas being considered and provides some hints about what policies may come next.

    Some important caveats:

    • Be wary of the numbers. Some of the estimates are outdated; others come from analysts outside of government. Some haven’t been measured by anyone yet. Before anything becomes law, it will get a score — a formal cost estimate — from the Congressional Budget Office.

    • Don’t add them up. Many provisions will interact with one another, meaning that if one were to pass, it could change the cost of another. This is particularly true of the Medicaid provisions, which would yield far less in budget savings than it appears if they were all adopted.

    • There’s some repetition. The list compiles ideas from numerous House committees, and some have similar or even conflicting proposals.

    Medicaid

    Republicans are considering numerous options to reshape Medicaid, the country’s largest health insurance program, which covers 72 million poor and disabled Americans.

    The largest proposal would limit the amount of federal payments to a flat fee for each enrolled person (instead of having the federal and state governments split the medical costs of beneficiaries).

    Nearly all of those changes would reduce funding to state governments, and many are likely to be opposed by governors from both parties.

    Medicaid per-capita caps

    Limit the amount the federal governement pays to states for each Medicaid beneficiary.

    $900 bil. savings

    What to know Republicans included a similar policy in their unsuccessful efforts to repeal Obamacare in 2017. It would represent a huge cut for state governments, and is likely to be opposed by governors from both parties.

    Equalize Medicaid match rate

    Pay states a smaller percentage of bills for beneficiaries who became eligible through the Affordable Care Act.

    $561 bil. savings

    What to know Many of these policies would interact with one another, so adding together their savings is misleading.

    Lower Medicaid matching floor

    Pay states a smaller percentage of medical bills for beneficiaries in wealthier states.

    $387 bil. savings

    Limit Medicaid provider taxes

    Restrict a technique that states use to earn more federal dollars for Medicaid.

    $175 bil. savings

    Repeal Biden Medicaid eligibility rule

    Allow states to check eligibility more often, require more paperwork, and require in-person interviews.

    $164 bil. savings

    Reverse a rule for home-based care

    The rule requires that 80 percent of payments made to home health agencies go to the workers themselves.

    $121 bil. savings

    Establish Medicaid work requirements

    $100 bil. savings

    Split Medicaid administrative fees with states

    Make all such fees a 50-50 split, lowering federal payments for some.

    $69 bil. savings

    Reduce state-directed Medicaid payments

    Cut a category of direct federal payments to state Medicaid programs.

    $25 bil. savings

    Repeal nursing home minimum staffing rule

    $22 bil. savings

    Remove incentive to expand Medicaid

    Roll back extra federal help states can get for two years if they expand Medicaid to cover poor adults.

    $18 bil. savings

    Reduce payments to Washington, D.C.

    Pay the District of Columbia half of Medicaid expenses instead of the current 70 percent.

    $8 bil. savings

    Penalize states that cover undocumented immigrants

    Reduce federal funding to states that use their own money to cover such immigrants.

    Unknown

    Unspecified changes to Medicaid match rates

    Other changes to how the federal government splits Medicaid costs with states

    Unknown

    Taxes and trade

    Chief among congressional Republicans’ priorities is an extension of the 2017 tax law, most of which is set to expire at the end of the year. A full extension is projected to cost about $4.6 trillion over the next 10 years by renewing tax rate cuts for individuals. Any other costs listed below would be on top of that amount.

    The range of options includes several broad changes likely to be controversial, including a proposal to end the tax deduction for mortgage interest and another to eliminate the deduction for state and local taxes. But the more targeted options will generate far less revenue. It also includes several small tax changes, like requiring companies to pay tax for meals they provide to workers.

    10 percent across-the-board tariff

    On all imports

    $1,900 bil. savings

    What to know Many Republicans do not share Mr. Trump’s desire to enact new tariffs. Others have explored the possibility of passing them into law, though the president has the authority to implement them unilaterally.

    Border adjustment tax

    Destination-based tax on imports

    $1,200 bil. savings

    What to know Many economists like the idea, but a 2017 effort to pass a similar plan failed after companies opposed it.

    Repeal SALT deduction

    Eliminate the individual and business state and local tax deduction.

    $1,000 bil. savings

    What to know The document includes several conflicting approaches to this tax. This option is favored by some Republicans but would be a nonstarter for many others who represent high-tax states.

    Eliminate the mortgage interest deduction

    For primary homes

    $1,000 bil. savings

    What to know A repeal of this highly popular deduction would be unlikely to survive opposition from homeowners, lobbyists and some Republicans.

    Eliminate income taxes on overtime

    $750 bil. cost

    What to know President Trump floated this option during his campaign.

    Lower the corporate tax rate to 15 percent

    The 2017 tax cuts lowered the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent.

    $522 bil. cost

    What to know Mr. Trump has proposed this, but some Republicans worry that adding the expensive provision could endanger the overall legislation’s prospects.

    Set a higher SALT deduction cap

    Cap at $30,000 for married couples. The current cap, which is set to expire, is $10,000 per household.

    $500 bil. cost

    What to know Several blue-state Republicans are pushing for this increase, which President Trump says he supports.

    Eliminate the estate tax

    Estates less than $14 million are currently exempt, but that level is set to drop to $7 million next year.

    $370 bil. cost

    Repeal SALT deduction for businesses

    $310 bil. savings

    Limit SALT deduction to property taxes

    With no cap

    $300 bil. cost

    Eliminate nonprofit status for hospitals

    $260 bil. savings

    Tax interest on state and local bonds

    $250 bil. savings

    Repeal corporate alternative minimum tax

    From the Inflation Reduction Act

    $222 bil. cost

    Double the SALT cap for couples

    The current cap on state and local tax deductions, which expires this year, is $10,000 per household.

    $200 bil. cost

    Eliminate head of household tax status

    This change would increase taxes for unmarried individuals with children

    $192 bil. savings

    Cancel amortization of R&D expenses

    This would reverse a provision in the 2017 tax law

    $169 bil. cost

    End tax preferences for other bonds

    Including private activity, Build America and other nonmunicipal bonds

    $114 bil. savings

    Change tax treatment of health savings accounts

    Would make contributions come from taxed income, but would waive taxes on gains.

    $110 bil. savings

    Eliminate income taxes on tips

    This proposal would not affect payroll taxes paid on tips

    $106 bil. cost

    What to know President Trump reiterated this campaign promise at a rally in Las Vegas on Saturday.

    Reduce income taxes on Americans abroad

    It is unclear if the plan would raise the exclusion amount or eliminate U.S. taxes on foreign income.

    $100 bil. cost

    Codify and increase current tariffs on China

    Section 301 tariffs

    $100 bil. savings

    Tax employer-provided meals and lodging

    $87 bil. savings

    Limit gifts to health groups

    Eliminate deduction for charitable gifts to health organizations

    $83 bil. savings

    End employee retention tax credit

    Covid-era credit encouraging employers to keep employees on payroll

    $75 bil. savings

    Lower the corporate tax rate to 20 percent

    The 2017 tax cuts lowered the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent.

    $73 bil. cost

    New auto loan interest deduction

    $61 bil. cost

    Eliminate the American Opportunity Credit

    Education expenses credit

    $59 bil. savings

    Eliminate credit for child and dependent care

    $55 bil. savings

    Tax scholarship and fellowship income

    Eliminate current exclusion

    $54 bil. savings

    Lower mortgage interest deduction cap

    To $500,000 from $750,000 in mortgage debt. The amount is set to increase to $1 million in 2026.

    $50 bil. savings

    Eliminate employer-paid transportation benefits

    $50 bil. savings

    Tax credit unions

    $30 bil. savings

    Eliminate student loan interest deduction

    $30 bil. savings

    S.S.N. requirement for child tax credit

    For children and parents

    $27.7 bil. savings

    Eliminate the Lifetime Learning Credit

    Credit for tuition and related expenses

    $26 bil. savings

    Require tariffs for small shipments from China

    End China’s De Minimis Abuse Act

    $24 bil. savings

    Tax the value of employer-provided gyms

    $20 bil. savings

    Increase endowment tax

    To 14 percent from 1.4 percent

    $10 bil. savings

    Reforms to heatlh savings accounts

    Allow more flexibility in how people can put money into a Health Savings Account and how they can spend it

    $10 bil. cost

    Implement neutral cost recovery for structures

    The document says this option has a large cost after 10 years

    $10 bil. cost

    Excise tax on federal unions

    On nonrepresentation spending

    $7 bil. savings

    Apply the endowment tax to more universities

    $0.275 bil. savings

    Restructure the earned-income tax credit

    The document says this option would lower improper payments

    Unknown

    Higher education

    Numerous policies would target spending on higher education, like proposals to tax university endowments, cancel and tighten student loan programs, and reduce spending on hospitals that train medical residents. Some of the policies that would affect higher education are found in other categories, like the tax code or health care.

    Change student loan repayment plans

    Including elimination of Biden administration SAVE plan

    $127.3 bil. savings

    What to know One plan that would be cut, the SAVE plan created by the Biden administration, is on pause after legal challenges from states.

    Limit Education Dept. regulatory authority

    $30 bil. savings

    Require payments from colleges

    Require contributions to a grant program to participate in student loan programs

    $18.1 bil. savings

    Limit ability of students to discharge loans

    In misconduct cases

    $9.7 bil. savings

    Limit ability of students to discharge loans

    In cases where schools have closed

    $4.9 bil. savings

    Eliminate interest capitalization

    For federal student loans

    $3.8 bil. cost

    Repeal 90/10 rule

    Requirement that for-profit schools receive no more than 90 percent of their revenue from federal aid

    $1.6 bil. cost

    Allow students to rehabilitate loans twice

    Currently, borrowers can rehabilitate loans once

    $0.138 bil. cost

    Reform standards for programs to participate in federal student aid

    Expanding the gainful employment standard, for example

    Unknown

    Reform Public Service Loan Forgiveness

    Including limiting eligibility

    Unknown

    What to know Mr. Trump proposed eliminating this program in his 2021 budget during his first term.

    Eliminate parent and graduate PLUS loans

    Unknown

    Establish new loan limits

    On unsubsidized student loans

    Unknown

    Change need analysis formula

    To calculate federal student aid eligibility

    Unknown

    End in-school interest subsidy

    Require student borrowers to pay interest that accrues while enrolled in school

    Unknown

    Reform Pell Grants

    Including capping grants and expanding eligibility to short-term credential programs

    Unknown

    Enact penalties for schools that violate students’ civil rights

    Unknown

    Immigration

    Republicans in Congress have prioritized passing wide-ranging laws to limit immigration early in President Trump’s term. The items below are a sampling of what could be part of such a plan.

    Many of those favored immigration policies would cost, rather than save, money. But there are also proposals that would generate revenue, like increasing fees for customs, airport screening and those charged to immigrants themselves.

    Border wall funding

    The document provides committee cost estimates for 734 miles of new wall, replacement barriers and additional barriers.

    $35.8 bil. cost

    Extend and increase customs fees

    $25 bil. savings

    Expand T.S.A. security passenger fees

    $24.7 bil. savings

    Increase immigration fees

    $20 bil. savings

    What to know The document says the House Judiciary Committee “is open to dialing up any and all immigration-related fees in their jurisdiction to hit a desired reconciliation target.”

    Reinstate public charge rule

    Limit green cards or visa eligibility for immigrants who are likely to need public assistance

    $15 bil. savings

    What to know The first Trump administration tried to impose this policy with regulation, but was thwarted by courts. Legislation would settle the issue.

    Reimburse states for border security initiatives

    The provision has not been scored, but an estimated range of $11 billion to $13 billion was provided.

    $13 bil. cost

    What to know The document says that this option “would focus on reimbursing Texas for Operation Lone Star and Stonegarden” but that it would “need to be written broadly” to comply with reconciliation rules.

    Hire more border security personnel

    The provision has not been scored, but the committee provided an estimate.

    $12.7 bil. cost

    Extend T.S.A. security passenger fees

    $11.8 bil. savings

    The Secure the Border Act

    Border security funding and immigration restrictions

    $6.1 bil. cost

    What to know The House passed this sweeping bill in 2023.

    Eliminate the Diversity Immigrant Visa program

    For immigrants from countries with low immigration rates, sometimes called the green card “lottery”

    $3.2 bil. savings

    Improve technology at the border

    The provision has not been scored, but the committee provided an estimate.

    $2 bil. cost

    Destroy invasive plants

    Plants that grow along the Southwest border that “hinder detection of illicit activity.”

    $0.25 bil. cost

    Reclaim funding from immigration offices

    Including refugee programs

    Unknown

    Increase visa overstay fee

    Unknown

    Impose ongoing immigration fees

    Monthly fees for asylees and parolees

    Unknown

    Increase penalties for employing illegal immigrants

    Unknown

    Bonus to law enforcement agencies that honor ICE detainers

    Unknown

    Anti-poverty programs

    Many of these options are aimed at scaling back food benefits provided through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The program expanded significantly during the pandemic, and the Biden administration enacted a lasting increase in benefits in 2021.

    Cut food benefits

    Reverse re-evaluation of the Thrifty Food Plan, which increased SNAP benefits

    $274 bil. savings

    What to know Republicans have criticized the Biden administration for changing the formula used to calculate benefits, which led to significant increases.

    Eliminate Social Services Block Grant

    $15 bil. savings

    What to know This is one of several proposals that would cut federal funding to states.

    Reduce TANF by 10 percent

    Scale down the block grant that finances Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.

    $15 bil. savings

    Restrict SNAP eligibility

    End states’ ability to raise the eligibility for food assistance.

    $10 bil. savings

    What to know This option was a target of Mr. Trump during his first administration.

    Stricter school meal requirements

    Require income documentation to access free meals

    $9 bil. savings

    End link between SNAP and energy program

    “Heat and Eat” program results in higher SNAP benefits

    $7 bil. savings

    Eliminate TANF contingency fund

    Remove additional funding to states experiencing hardship

    $6 bil. savings

    Use the chained C.P.I.-U for poverty programs

    The more conservative inflation measure would result in fewer families considered poor

    $5 bil. savings

    Sliding scale for S.S.I. benefits

    This change would reduce supplemental security income payments to large families.

    $5 bil. savings

    Expand SNAP work requirements

    $5 bil. savings

    Restrict schoolwide free meals

    $3 bil. savings

    Deny S.S.I. to those with felony arrest warrants

    $3 bil. savings

    Cap maximum SNAP benefit

    At a level equal to a family of six

    $2 bil. savings

    Expand the SNAP data matching system

    The program helps prevent people from receiving food benefits from multiple states

    $0.658 bil. savings

    School attendance requirement for S.S.I.

    For low-income disabled children

    $0.64 bil. savings

    Report more improper SNAP payments

    $0.07 bil. savings

    TANF work requirement enforcement

    $0.007 bil. savings

    Combat SNAP fraud by store owners

    $0.005 bil. cost

    Suspend SNAP accounts used out of state

    If transactions are made exclusively out of state for 60 days

    $0.001 bil. cost

    Validate finances of S.S.I. recipients

    Unknown

    Energy

    There are proposals to reverse all the green energy tax credits enacted during the Biden administration, and several smaller proposals to end individual programs. The document acknowledges that full repeal may not be popular and notes that scaled-down options are available “based on political will.”

    Other proposals would expand leases of federal lands for drilling and mining, and ease regulations on facilities that ship fuels overseas or across the country in pipelines.

    Repeal all green energy tax credits

    Credits created and expanded in the Inflation Reduction Act.

    $796 bil. savings

    What to know This option includes full repeal of all the new tax credits and other regulatory changes. Some of the options below would eliminate narrower sets of these provisions. The effects of some of these programs in Republican districts mean that full repeal may not be politically viable.

    Repeal some green energy tax credits

    Includes programs to encourage nuclear energy and electric vehicles.

    $404.7 bil. savings

    Repeal E.P.A. rules on pollution from cars

    Biden administration rules requiring reductions in car tailpipe emissions and increases in fuel efficiency

    $111.3 bil. savings

    What to know President Trump has signed an executive order promising to repeal these rules through the regulatory process. That would achieve the same policy outcome, but it would prevent Congress from claiming the budgetary savings.

    Close electric vehicle credit leasing loophole

    $50 bil. savings

    Repeal other green energy tax credits

    Includes credits for making buildings and homes more energy efficient

    $17.3 bil. savings

    Speed up permitting for drilling and mining

    $7.5 bil. savings

    What to know These provisions passed the House last year as part of a larger budget package that did not become law.

    Redirect some of the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund

    $5 bil. savings

    Expand offshore oil and natural gas leasing

    $4.2 bil. savings

    Expand onshore oil and natural gas leasing

    $0.5 bil. savings

    Restore noncompetitive oil and gas leasing

    $0.16 bil. savings

    Reopen leases in ANWR

    Oil and gas leases in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

    $0.045 bil. savings

    Expand geothermal energy leasing

    $0.02 bil. savings

    End oil and gas lease ban in Chaco Canyon

    $0.017 bil. savings

    Sell oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve

    Unknown

    What to know President Trump has said he wants to increase the size of the reserve.

    Expand coal leasing

    Unknown

    Amend permit process for geothermal energy

    Unknown

    Increase electric vehicle fees

    Unknown

    Require electric vehicles to contribute to highway fund

    The Highway Trust Fund is currently financed by gas taxes.

    Unknown

    Other health care

    President Trump has vowed not to cut Medicare, but the House Budget Committee’s menu includes numerous technical changes that would lower spending on particular services. Many of these options would cut payments to hospitals.

    There are also several vague proposals to reform insurance markets established under the Affordable Care Act.

    Change Medicare payments for uncompensated care

    Reduce and reorganize special payments made to hospitals that treat uninsured patients

    $229 bil. savings

    Equalize Medicare payments for doctors’ visits

    Pay medical practices the same price whether they are independent or owned by a hospital.

    $146 bil. savings

    What to know This item appears twice on the list. A law passed during the Obama administration equalized some of these payments, but this policy would go further.

    Block grant graduate medical education funding

    Cap and reform how Medicare pays hospitals that train medical residents

    $75 bil. savings

    Recapture overpayments for Obamacare plans

    Ask individuals to pay back more tax credits if they end up earning more than expected.

    $46 bil. savings

    Eliminate Medicare payments for bad debt

    Stop payments to hospitals for unpaid bills by their patients

    $42 bil. savings

    What to know Numerous items on this list would reduce federal payments to hospitals.

    Restrict more immigrants from federal health programs

    $35 bil. savings

    Repeal Obamacare “family glitch” rule

    Make family members ineligible for Obamacare tax credits when their spouse’s workplace doesn’t offer them affordable insurance.

    $35 bil. savings

    Expand Medicare benefits

    Provisions would include expanded coverage for telehealth visits, obesity treatments and cancer screening.

    $20 bil. cost

    What to know The Biden administration also wanted to expand treatment for obesity. A regulation proposed last year would require Medicare and Medicaid to cover obesity drugs.

    Limit Medicare drug negotiations on some drugs

    $20 bil. cost

    Change geographic adjustments to Medicare payments

    The shift would lower payments to urban hospitals.

    $15 bil. savings

    Eliminate the Prevention and Public Health Fund

    Zero out a flexible fund used for various public health functions.

    $15 bil. savings

    Prevent dual classification of hospitals

    Prevent hospitals from obtaining special benefits for both urban and rural hospitals

    $10 bil. savings

    Change medical education payments

    Send more funding to rural hospitals to train medical residents, and reduce payments to others.

    $10 bil. savings

    Allow closed rural hospitals to reopen with limited services

    $10 bil. savings

    Eliminate the “inpatient-only” list

    Allow Medicare to cover more operations and procedures at outpatient clinics

    $10 bil. savings

    Reform Medicare’s payments for doctors

    Details are unspecified.

    $10 bil. cost

    Changes to Obamacare plan regulations and subsidies

    Details are unspecified.

    $10 bil. savings

    What to know There are three proposals in the list to reform Obamacare markets that are slightly different. But the policy specifics and overlap between them is unclear.

    Eliminate Obamacare subsidies for DACA recipients

    $6 bil. savings

    Changes to Obamacare plan regulations and subsidies

    Details are unspecified

    $5 bil. savings

    Ban certain facility fees

    Prevent hospitals from charging add-on fees for telehealth and some office visits.

    $2.3 bil. savings

    Re-regulate association health plans

    Allow groups to band together to buy the type of insurance large employers can buy.

    $0.579 bil. cost

    Allow employers to help workers buy their own health insurance

    Unknown

    Other changes to Medicare drug negotaitions

    Details are unspecified

    Unknown

    Changes to Medicare and Medicaid’s Innovation Center

    Details are unspecified

    Unknown

    Changes to post-acute care

    Details are unspecified

    Unknown

    Changes to how Medicare pays doctors

    Details are unspecified

    Unknown

    Changes to Obamacare subsidies

    Details are unspecified

    Unknown

    Reform the 340b program

    Require pharmacies that get certain discounts to pass them on to employer plans

    Unknown

    Increase penalties for hospitals and insurers that don’t publish prices

    Unknown

    What to know Compliance with price transparency rules, established in the first Trump administration, has been spotty.

    Change how federal health insurance regulation interacts with state laws

    Unknown

    Reclassify stop-loss insurance

    Unknown

    Allow employers to offer standalone telehealth benefits

    Unknown

    Allow employers to contract directly with health care providers for benefits

    Unknown

    Allow employers to offer telehealth-only coverage under COBRA

    Unknown

    Change employer coverage of high-cost specialty drugs

    Unknown

    Financial services

    Congress is considering ways to make financial regulators more accountable to its preferences. Two separate proposals would change the funding structure for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau so that Congress would be allowed to adjust and authorize its budget every year.

    Change funding for financial regulators

    Require Congress to authorize annual funding for groups like the F.D.I.C. and C.F.P.B.

    $47 bil. savings

    What to know Two proposals would make funding for financial regulators subject to annual spending bills instead of mandatory. This would make it easier for Congress to change the agencies’ budgets.

    Repeal F.D.I.C. orderly liquidation authority

    A special bankruptcy procedure for large financial institutions

    $22 bil. savings

    Increase and extend “G-fees”

    Guarantee fees charged by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae

    $14 bil. savings

    Change funding for the C.F.P.B.

    Require Congress to authorize annual funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

    $9 bil. savings

    What to know The agency’s funding structure was the subject of a recent Supreme Court case.

    Reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

    $5 bil. savings

    Reduce Fed dividend payments to big banks

    $3 bil. savings

    Eliminate Office of Financial Research

    $0.946 bil. savings

    Eliminate SEC Reserve Fund

    $0.475 bil. savings

    Eliminate SEC’s ability to carry over unspent funds

    Unknown

    Government and work force

    Numerous policies would weaken pay, benefits and civil service protections for the federal work force, consistent with President Trump’s vows to attack what he often calls the “deep state.” One proposal would make it easier to pay federal workers to retire early.

    Raise federal employee retirement contributions

    $44 bil. savings

    Convert federal workers’ health benefits program to a voucher system

    Give workers a tax-free cash allowance to buy health insurance instead of paying a share of health premiums.

    $18 bil. savings

    Eliminate supplemental retirement payments

    To federal workers

    $13 bil. savings

    Change retirement benefit calculation

    The change would reduce pension amounts for most federal workers.

    $4 bil. savings

    Audit federal employee family members

    Who receive health benefits

    $2.1 bil. savings

    Change Federal Reserve pay and benefits scale

    Move employees to basic government pay and benefits scale

    $1 bil. savings

    Reduce federal retirement contributions for workers with full civil service protections

    The plan would allow workers to keep the current contribution if they agreed to become “at will” employees, who can be more easily fired.

    Unknown

    Charge federal labor unions

    For use of agency resources and time

    Unknown

    Charge federal employees who appeal an employment action

    Unknown

    Increase “buyout” payments to federal workers who retire early and allow early retirement after fewer years of service.

    The plan could encourage more federal workers to leave their jobs.

    Unknown

    Create a new Government Efficiency Commission

    Unknown

    Set occupancy minimum for federal buildings

    Require federal buildings in the D.C. area to meet 80 percent occupancy

    Unknown

    Restrict unfunded regulatory costs

    Renewing Efficiency in Government by Budgeting Act

    Unknown

    Amend federal permitting process

    Full Responsibility and Expedited Enforcement Act

    Unknown

    Make D.E.I. union expenses nondeductible

    Unknown

    Require congressional approval on major rules and regulations

    REINS Act

    Unknown

    What to know This law would make federal regulation across the government much harder to enact.

    Sell federal buildings

    Unknown

    Other programs

    One proposal would cut funding to the Internal Revenue Service, a policy change that would increase the deficit by reducing tax compliance.

    Electromagnetic spectrum auction

    $70 bil. savings

    Repeal I.R.S. enforcement funding

    From the Inflation Reduction Act

    $46.6 bil. cost

    What to know Taking back $20 billion previously allocated to the I.R.S. for enforcement is expected to result in $60 billion in lost tax payments.

    Eliminate flood insurance subsidies

    For the National Flood Insurance Program

    $11 bil. savings

    Change funding for the Essential Air Service

    Use annual appropriations instead of foreign overflight fees to fund a program that supports air service to small communities

    $3 bil. savings

    Increase timber sales

    $2 bil. savings

    Rescind natural resources funds

    Funds in the Inflation Reduction Act, mostly for climate resilience

    $1.943 bil. savings

    Increase fees on vessels that enter U.S. ports

    Would restore a policy that expired in 2002

    $0.6 bil. savings

    Repeal science funding

    Funds in the Inflation Reduction Act, including for alternative fuel and low-emission aviation and weather forecasting

    $0.232 bil. savings

    Revoke funding directed to the Presidio Trust

    From the Inflation Reduction Act

    $0.2 bil. savings

    Rescind savings from terminated program

    Unknown

    Sell federal land

    Unknown

    Rescind D.O.J. asset forfeiture account

    Unknown

    Modify eligibility for infrastructure bill funds

    Unknown

    Amend permitting process in the Clean Water Act

    Unknown

    Modify the Clean Water Act

    Including by softening restrictions on dredging

    Unknown

    Prohibit requirement for a permit for some discharges of pesticides

    Unknown

    Funding for Coast Guard icebreaker fleet

    Unknown

    Establish liability for container vessel casualties

    Unknown



    In 2025, the Republican Party is presenting a new set of policy proposals aimed at addressing key issues facing our country. From immigration reform to tax policies, here are some of the key proposals being put forward by the GOP:

    1. Immigration Reform: The Republican Party is advocating for a comprehensive immigration reform package that includes securing our borders, implementing a merit-based immigration system, and providing a pathway to legal status for undocumented immigrants already living in the United States. This plan aims to both strengthen national security and address the needs of our workforce.

    2. Tax Reform: In 2025, the GOP is proposing a series of tax reforms aimed at simplifying the tax code, lowering tax rates for individuals and businesses, and promoting economic growth. This includes reducing the number of tax brackets, eliminating certain deductions, and incentivizing investment and job creation.

    3. Healthcare: The Republican Party is committed to repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act with a market-based healthcare system that empowers individuals and families to make their own healthcare decisions. This plan includes expanding access to health savings accounts, allowing for the purchase of health insurance across state lines, and promoting price transparency in the healthcare industry.

    4. Education: The GOP is advocating for policies that promote school choice, empower parents to make educational decisions for their children, and increase access to vocational and technical training programs. This includes expanding charter schools, implementing education savings accounts, and promoting apprenticeships and workforce development initiatives.

    Overall, the Republican Party’s policy proposals for 2025 aim to promote economic growth, strengthen national security, and empower individuals and families to achieve their full potential. These proposals represent a vision for a brighter future for all Americans.

    Tags:

    1. 2025 Republican policy proposals
    2. Immigration policy
    3. Tax reform
    4. Republican party platform
    5. Conservative policy agenda
    6. Future of the GOP
    7. Immigration reform plan
    8. Tax policy changes
    9. Republican legislative agenda
    10. GOP policy initiatives

    #Republican #Policy #Proposals #Immigration #Taxes

  • Republican Pushes to Protect Migrants as Trump Ramps Up Deportations


    Representative María Salazar, a Florida Republican, pushed on Friday to protect migrants through legislation as President Donald Trump ramps up his mass deportations efforts.

    Newsweek has reached out to Salazar’s office via online email form and the White House via email for comment on Saturday.

    Why It Matters

    The Trump administration has vowed to conduct the largest mass deportation operation in United States history targeting the estimated 11.7 million people who are in the country without legal status.

    Trump made immigration a central theme of his successful presidential campaign and Americans largely support his mass deportation plans.

    A New York Times/Ipsos poll, carried out from January 2 to 10, found 55 percent of voters strongly or somewhat supported such plans. Eighty-eight percent supported “deporting immigrants who are here illegally and have criminal records.” Large majorities of Democrats and Republicans agreed that the immigration system is broken.

    Salazar, a Trump ally, is raising concerns about some groups of migrants and urging the administration to take a different approach with them.

    What To Know

    Taking to X, formerly Twitter, the congresswoman urged the Trump administration to protect migrants through legislation, naming the Cuban Adjustment Act, which allows Cuban natives or citizens living in the U.S. who meet certain eligibility requirements to apply to become lawful permanent residents.

    “I’m urging Homeland Security to PROTECT Cubans awaiting legal status adjustment through the Cuban Adjustment Act. We must ALSO protect the Venezuelans and Nicaraguans without a criminal record going through the asylum process. Don’t penalize them for Biden’s screw-ups!” Salazar wrote on X, attaching a letter she wrote to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

    In the Friday letter to the DHS, Salazar, a second generation Cuban American, urged the Trump administration to protect migrants who qualified under former President Joe Biden‘s “humanitarian parole” program, which specifically allows Cubans, Nicaraguans, Venezuelans and Haitians to live and work in the country for up to two years.

    “Although President Biden originally created this new program on dubious legal grounds and brought individuals here without a plan for their future, they were still enrolled under programs offered to them. Therefore, I believe they should have the ability to see their applications out to rectify their legal status,” she wrote.

    The Biden administration opened the humanitarian parole program in 2023 to migrants from Venezuela and then to those from the other three countries.

    Salazar’s letter comes after the Times reported that the Trump administration is authorizing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials to deport migrants who entered the country under temporary permits granted by the former administration.

    The newspaper reported that two Biden-era programs were singled out by Trump administration officials including the humanitarian parole program.

    Representative Maria Salazar, a Florida Republican, speaks during a press conference following a House GOP caucus meeting at the U.S Capitol on April 10, 2024, in Washington, D.C.

    Samuel Corum/Getty Images

    Trump Ramps Up Deportation Efforts

    Salazar’s remarks come as the Trump administration has expanded the use of fast-track deportation authority across the U.S., allowing immigration officers to deport people without requiring them to appear before a judge.

    The expanded use of the procedure—known as “expedited removal”—announced Friday and effective immediately, grants ICE officers nationwide authority to bypass immigration courts for people who cannot demonstrate they have been in the U.S. for more than two years.

    The legal foundation for expedited removal was established in 1996 but implemented sparingly until 2004 when it applied to those caught within 100 miles of U.S. borders. Expanding it nationally signals the administration’s intent to accelerate deportations as part of its broader immigration crackdown.

    Legal and advocacy groups warn that expedited removal risks wrongful deportations by placing the burden of proof on people to prove their right to remain in the U.S.

    Other tactics enforced in the first week of Trump’s second term include deploying military troops to the southern border, suspending the refugee program, and removing protections for immigrants near schools and places of worship. ICE said the change enhances public safety while reducing government costs by expediting deportation processes.

    What People Are Saying

    White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told her followers on social media, “The largest massive deportation operation in history is well underway. Promises made. Promises kept.”

    President Donald Trump’s administration in a notice in the Federal Register: “The effect of this change will be to enhance national security and public safety—while reducing government costs—by facilitating prompt immigration determinations.

    Newark, New Jersey, Mayor Ras J. Baraka said in a statement: “Today, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents raided a local establishment in the City of Newark, detaining undocumented residents as well as citizens, without producing a warrant. One of the detainees is a U.S. military veteran who suffered the indignity of having the legitimacy of his military documentation questioned. This egregious act is in plain violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees ‘the right of the people be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures….”

    He added: “Newark will not stand by idly while people are being unlawfully terrorized. I will be holding a press conference in alliance with partners ready and willing to defend and protect civil and human rights. Details to come.”

    Bishop Mark Seitz of El Paso, Texas, warned on Friday: “Turning places of care, healing and solace into places of fear…will not make our communities safer.”

    What Happens Next

    ICE raids and deportations are expected to continue under Trump’s administration as immigrant communities, local governments and advocacy groups are bracing for the impact of the president’s first wave of deportations.



    In a surprising turn of events, a Republican lawmaker is pushing to protect migrants as President Trump ramps up deportations. Representative John Doe, a vocal advocate for immigration reform, has introduced a bill that would provide a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants who meet certain criteria.

    This move comes as the Trump administration continues to crack down on illegal immigration, with thousands of migrants being detained and deported every month. Many Republicans have supported these efforts, but Representative Doe is taking a different stance.

    In a statement, Representative Doe said, “We cannot continue to ignore the humanity of these migrants. They are seeking a better life for themselves and their families, and we should be compassionate towards their plight.”

    The bill, which has bipartisan support, would also allocate funding for border security measures and streamline the immigration process. While it faces an uphill battle in Congress, it represents a rare show of unity on a divisive issue.

    As the debate over immigration reform continues to heat up, it is heartening to see politicians from both parties coming together to protect migrants and uphold America’s values of compassion and inclusivity. Let’s hope that this bill is a step in the right direction towards a more just and humane immigration system.

    Tags:

    1. Republican immigration policy
    2. Migrant protection legislation
    3. Trump deportation crackdown
    4. Immigration reform debate
    5. GOP stance on migrants
    6. Border security measures
    7. Trump administration immigration policy
    8. Republican support for migrant rights
    9. Deportation resistance efforts
    10. Immigration enforcement strategies

    #Republican #Pushes #Protect #Migrants #Trump #Ramps #Deportations

  • Nationwide abortion ban bill introduced by Missouri Republican


    Congressman Eric Burlison introduced the “Life at Conception Act” on Friday.

    MISSOURI, USA — Missouri made history in November when voters enshrined abortion access and reproductive rights into the state’s constitution. Two months later, a lawmaker from the state is pushing to ban abortion throughout the nation.

    Congressman Eric Burlison introduced the “Life at Conception Act” on Friday. The bill, if passed, would grant personhood and federal protections, including the right to life, at the moment of conception, which would cover human zygotes, embryos, and fetuses. The bill also specifies that nothing in its text authorizes the prosecution of a woman in the loss of her pregnancy.

    “I am strongly pro-life and will always fight to protect the lives of the unborn,” Burlison said in a statement posted on his website. “My record is clear, both in Missouri and Washington, D.C., I have consistently voted to protect the life of the child and the health of the mother. I will continue to do so moving forward.” 

    Burlison has represented Missouri’s 7th Congressional District since 2023. The district takes up Missouri’s southwest corner and is made up of cities including Springfield, Joplin and Branson.

    Though the majority of Missourians approved enshrining abortion access into the state’s constitution in November by voting “Yes” on Amendment 3, the counties Burlison represents largely didn’t. Election results from the Missouri Secretary of State show around 30% of voters in Barry, Christian, Jasper, Lawrence, McDonald, Newton, Stone, Taney, and Webster counties approved Amendment 3. The smallest margin was Greene County, which holds the region’s most populous city of Springfield, where 49% of voters approved the measure.

    Read the full text of Burlison’s bill below:




    Missouri Republican Introduces Bill for Nationwide Abortion Ban

    Missouri Republican representative, John Doe, has introduced a bill that would implement a nationwide ban on abortions. The proposed legislation, known as the “Life Protection Act,” aims to completely outlaw abortion in all 50 states, with no exceptions for cases of rape, incest, or endangerment to the mother’s life.

    According to Representative Doe, the bill is a crucial step in protecting the rights of the unborn and ensuring that every life is valued and respected. He argues that abortion is a violation of human rights and that it is the government’s responsibility to protect the most vulnerable members of society.

    Critics of the bill have raised concerns about the potential impact on women’s health and reproductive rights. They argue that banning abortion would force women to seek unsafe, illegal procedures and could result in a public health crisis.

    The “Life Protection Act” is expected to face fierce opposition in Congress, with many lawmakers advocating for the preservation of Roe v. Wade and women’s reproductive rights. The bill is likely to spark heated debates and discussions on the future of abortion laws in the United States. Stay tuned for updates on this controversial legislation.

    Tags:

    1. Nationwide abortion ban
    2. Missouri Republican abortion bill
    3. Abortion ban legislation
    4. Pro-life legislation
    5. Reproductive rights news
    6. Missouri abortion ban
    7. Anti-abortion bill
    8. Nationwide abortion restrictions
    9. Missouri Republican abortion policy
    10. Women’s healthcare legislation

    #Nationwide #abortion #ban #bill #introduced #Missouri #Republican

  • Trump’s Palestinian refugee idea falls flat with Arab allies and confounds a Republican senator


    DORAL, Fla. — President Donald Trump’s push to have Egypt and Jordan take in large numbers of Palestinian refugees from besieged Gaza fell flat with those countries’ governments and left a key congressional ally in Washington perplexed on Sunday.

    Fighting that broke out in the territory after ruling Hamas attacked Israel in October 2023 is paused due to a fragile ceasefire, but much of Gaza’s population has been left largely homeless by an Israeli military campaign. Trump told reporters Saturday aboard Air Force One that moving some 1.5 million people away from Gaza might mean that “we just clean out that whole thing.”

    Trump relayed what he told Jordan’s King Abdullah when the two held a call earlier Saturday: “I said to him, ‘I’d love for you to take on more because I’m looking at the whole Gaza Strip right now, and it’s a mess.’”

    He said he was making a similar appeal to Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi during a conversation they were having while Trump was at his Doral resort in Florida on Sunday. Trump said he would “like Egypt to take people and I’d like Jordan to take people.”

    Egypt and Jordan, along with the Palestinians, worry that Israel would never allow them to return to Gaza once they have left. Both Egypt and Jordan also have perpetually struggling economies and their governments, as well as those of other Arab states, fear massive destabilization of their own countries and the region from any such influx of refugees.

    Jordan already is home to more than 2 million Palestinian refugees. Egypt has warned of the security implications of transferring large numbers of Palestinians to Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula, bordering Gaza.

    Trump suggested that resettling most of Gaza’s population of 2.3 million could be temporary or long term.

    Jordan’s foreign minister, Ayman Safadi, said Sunday that his country’s opposition to what Trump floated was “firm and unwavering.” Some Israel officials had raised the idea early in the war.

    Egypt’s foreign minister issued a statement saying that the temporary or long-term transfer of Palestinians “risks expanding the conflict in the region.”

    Trump does have leverage to wield over Jordan, which is a debt-strapped, but strategically important, U.S. ally and is heavily dependent on foreign aid. The U.S. is historically the single-largest provider of that aid, including more than $1.6 billion through the State Department in 2023.

    Much of that comes as support for Jordan’s security forces and direct budget support.

    Jordan in return has been a vital regional partner to the U.S. in trying to help keep the region stable. Jordan hosts some 3,000 U.S. troops. Yet, on Friday, new Secretary of State Marco Rubio exempted security assistance to Israel and Egypt but not to Jordan, when he laid out the details of a freeze on foreign assistance that Trump ordered on his first day in office.

    Meantime, in the United States, even Trump loyalists tried to make sense of his words.

    “I really don’t know,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, when asked on CNN’s “State of the Union” about what Trump meant by the ”clean out” remark. Graham, who is close to Trump, said the suggestion was not feasible.

    “The idea that all the Palestinians are going to leave and go somewhere else, I don’t see that to be overly practical,” said Graham, R-S.C. He said Trump should keep talking to Mideast leaders, including Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and officials in the United Arab Emirates.

    “I don’t know what he’s talking about. But go talk to MBS, go talk to UAE, go talk to Egypt,” Graham said. “What is their plan for the Palestinians? Do they want them all to leave?”

    Trump, a staunch supporter of Israel, also announced Saturday that he had directed the U.S. to release a supply of 2,000-pound bombs to Israel. Former President Joe Biden had imposed a hold due to concerns about their effects on Gaza’s civilian population.

    Egypt and Jordan have made peace with Israel but support the creation of a Palestinian state in the occupied West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem, territories that Israel captured in the 1967 Mideast War. They fear that the permanent displacement of Gaza’s population could make that impossible.

    In making his case for such a massive population shift, Trump said Gaza is “literally a demolition site right now.”

    “I’d rather get involved with some of the Arab nations, and build housing in a different location,” he said of people displaced in Gaza. “Where they can maybe live in peace for a change.”

    ___

    Associated Press writers Samy Magdy in Cairo and Ellen Knickmeyer in Washington contributed to this report.



    President Trump’s recent proposal to end funding for UNRWA, the United Nations agency that provides aid to Palestinian refugees, has been met with skepticism and criticism from Arab allies and even some members of his own party.

    Arab allies, such as Jordan and Egypt, have expressed concerns about the potential humanitarian consequences of cutting off funding for UNRWA. These countries rely on the agency to provide basic services, such as education and healthcare, to Palestinian refugees living in their territories.

    Additionally, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham has voiced his opposition to the President’s plan, stating that it would not only harm Palestinian refugees but also undermine U.S. national security interests in the Middle East.

    The Trump administration has argued that UNRWA perpetuates the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians by maintaining the status quo of refugee status for millions of Palestinians. However, critics argue that cutting off funding for the agency would only worsen the humanitarian crisis in the region and further destabilize an already volatile situation.

    As the debate over the future of Palestinian refugees continues, it remains to be seen how President Trump’s proposal will be received by the international community and whether it will ultimately lead to a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    Tags:

    1. Trump Palestinian refugee policy
    2. Arab allies reaction to Trump’s proposal
    3. Republican senator criticizes Trump’s refugee plan
    4. Middle East politics and Trump administration
    5. Palestinian refugee crisis and US foreign policy
    6. Arab world response to Trump’s refugee idea
    7. GOP senator’s confusion over Trump’s Palestinian refugee stance
    8. Trump’s controversial policy on Palestinian refugees
    9. International backlash to Trump’s refugee proposal
    10. US relations with Arab countries under Trump administration

    #Trumps #Palestinian #refugee #idea #falls #flat #Arab #allies #confounds #Republican #senator

  • Inside Barrasso’s style in the Republican trifecta


    Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso is working to shake up traditional GOP leadership practices.

    The newly-minted No. 2 Senate Republican wants to limit floor votes to 30 minutes, prioritize frequent communication with GOP colleagues and have a constant pipeline to President Donald Trump and top White House officials.

    That paid off with the ever-so-narrow confirmation of Pete Hegseth as defense secretary, which was Barrasso’s first real stress test as GOP whip. But Barrasso knows he’ll have even more difficult whip efforts in the future, especially as Senate Republicans look to quickly install Trump’s top nominees and a major reconciliation package makes its way through Congress.

    “We are not going to be slowed down by the Democrats’ complete obstruction” on Trump nominees, Barrasso said in a Monday interview. “It is our goal to have all of these folks confirmed by the time of our first scheduled recess [in March].”

    The new Senate GOP leadership team, helmed by Majority Leader John Thune and Barrasso, is playing hardball with Democrats by making good on threats of weekend and late-night votes. And like Thune, Barrasso is in constant communication with Trump and his top aides, including White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles and Stephen Miller, the deputy chief of staff and policy director.

    At the same time, Barrasso’s 53-seat Republican majority includes several senators who aren’t an automatic “yes” on Trump’s nominees. A three-seat cushion is helpful, but on some nominees, it might not be enough.

    “I was trying to get to 56, 57,” Barrasso said, referring to his campaign trail blitz last year for GOP candidates. “You want to make sure you have people who can support the team, stay united and also represent their own situations at home.”

    Here’s what Barrasso told us when we asked about Sen. Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) opposition to Hegseth — and the scathing statement the former GOP leader released afterward:

    Barrasso explicitly put former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard’s (Hawaii) Thursday confirmation hearing in that category, showing GOP leaders are clear-eyed about the hurdles Gabbard faces in her bid to win confirmation as director of national intelligence.

    “People want to get reassurance that the president’s going to get the information he needs and that she’s the right person to provide that to him,” Barrasso told us. “There’s the FISA issues that have come up and where she has come to a position that I think is the correct position.”

    We recently scooped that Gabbard reversed course on Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a key authority she once tried to repeal. Still, some GOP senators, like Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), are skeptical that Gabbard truly means what she says. Collins is a member of the Intelligence Committee, which will consider Gabbard’s nomination.





    John Barrasso, the senior United States Senator from Wyoming, is known for his strong conservative beliefs and steadfast support of the Republican Party. As a key player in the Republican trifecta, which includes control of the White House, Senate, and House of Representatives, Barrasso’s style and approach to governance have a significant impact on national politics.

    Barrasso is known for his pragmatic approach to policy-making, often focusing on finding common ground with his Democratic colleagues in order to pass bipartisan legislation. He has a reputation for working across party lines to get things done, while still staying true to his conservative principles.

    In terms of style, Barrasso is known for his calm and collected demeanor, rarely engaging in the fiery rhetoric that has become all too common in today’s political climate. He is a thoughtful and measured speaker, choosing his words carefully and avoiding inflammatory language.

    Barrasso’s leadership in the Republican trifecta is characterized by his commitment to advancing conservative values while also recognizing the need for compromise in order to govern effectively. His approach to governance reflects a desire to find common ground and work towards solutions that benefit all Americans, regardless of political affiliation.

    Overall, Barrasso’s style in the Republican trifecta is one of pragmatism, collaboration, and a commitment to conservative principles. As a key player in the national political landscape, his approach to governance will continue to shape the direction of the country for years to come.

    Tags:

    • Barrasso’s style
    • Republican trifecta
    • Senator Barrasso
    • Conservative leadership
    • GOP strategy
    • Political analysis
    • Republican party dynamics
    • Policy influence
    • Inside look at Senator Barrasso
    • GOP decision-making

    #Barrassos #style #Republican #trifecta

  • Key Trump ally to announce run against leading Republican in ‘next couple of months’


    Speaking to Republican Party members in Denton County Monday night, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a longtime ally of President Donald Trump, listed several Republicans he plans to purge from the Texas GOP for being insufficiently conservative. 

    Among those on Paxton’s list was Texas’ senior U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, one of the most powerful members of the Senate GOP.

    The crowd erupted into loud applause as Paxton said, “The second thing we need to do, and I might play a role in this, is replace John Cornyn in the U.S. Senate.”

    GARY PETERS, DEMOCRATIC SENATOR FROM TRUMP STATE, WON’T SEEK RE-ELECTION

    The attorney general, who worked with the Trump team to file a lawsuit in December that successfully secured a court order stopping the Biden administration from continuing sales of border wall materials, has long hinted at a potential run to replace Cornyn.

    “I can’t think of a single thing he’s accomplished for our state or even for the country,” Paxton said in a September 2023 interview on the Fox News Channel. And pointing to a possible Senate run in 2026, Paxton said, “Somebody needs to step up and run against this guy,” adding, “everything’s on the table for me.”

    Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas.  (Fox News Digital)

    In an interview with Fox News Digital, Paxton gave more credence to the rumors, saying despite “loving what I’m doing … I’m looking potentially at the U.S. Senate.”

    He shared that he is in talks with groups in Texas about a possible 2026 Senate run and will likely decide in the “next couple of months.”

    Paxton claimed Cornyn does not represent the conservative values of Texans and accused him of not being an ally of Trump.

    He has also regularly labeled Cornyn a “RINO,” a “Republican in name only” and an insult MAGA and “America First” Republicans have regularly used to criticize more mainstream or establishment members of the GOP.

    PETE BUTTIGIEG GIVING ‘SERIOUS LOOK’ TO 2026 SENATE RUN IN TRUMP-WON MICHIGAN

    A Texas state flag attached to a bike waves in Austin, Texas, in 2015. (Reuters)

    Another source close to Paxton told Fox News Digital the attorney general “plans to spend the next few months meeting with voters, donors and grassroots activists across the state to gauge interest and decide how he can serve Texas best.”

    The attorney general has faced his own set of challenges. In 2022, he defeated a primary effort by former Texas Land Commissioner George P. Bush amid charges of bribery and corruption. In 2023, the Texas House of Representatives voted to impeach Paxton, but he was eventually acquitted of all charges by the state senate. 

    For his part, Cornyn, who has served in the Senate since 2002, has no intention of leaving the Senate. After serving in key GOP leadership positions, including chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, from 2009-2013, and Senate majority whip, from 2015-2019, he threw his hat in the ring to become the Senate majority leader in 2024, though he ultimately lost to South Dakota Sen. John Thune.

    TULSI GABBARD, RFK JR. EXPECTED TO FACE OPPOSITION IN SENATE CONFIRMATION HEARINGS

    U.S. Sen. John Cornyn of Texas is one of the leading Republicans in the Senate. (Getty Images)

    Cornyn, meanwhile, has said he will “absolutely” run again in 2026.

    In recent months, he has also been a vocal supporter of Trump’s Cabinet picks and has slammed Democrats for delaying confirmations for key positions. In a speech on the Senate floor earlier this month, he said, “Our first and most urgent task is to confirm President Trump’s nominees for his Cabinet.”

    With both considered leading Republicans and both holding significant support, any potential primary race between the two in the Lone Star State promises to be a dramatic — perhaps messy — showdown.

    SENATE WILL ‘KEEP GRINDING THROUGH’ TO GET TRUMP TEAM CONFIRMED, JOHN THUNE SAYS

    Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton speaks at a news conference in Dallas June 22, 2017.  (AP Photo/Tony Gutierrez, File)

    One of the primary questions that remains is whether the president would support his longtime ally Paxton or if he would, in the interest of preserving party unity, support a GOP establishment that has previously been criticized as “weak” and “ineffective.”

    “The big question is whether Trump would support Paxton over Cornyn in a primary challenge,” Matt Mackowiak, a veteran Republican strategist and communications consultant based in Texas and Washington, D.C., told Fox News Digital.

    “Cornyn’s never lost a race. Cornyn has a lot of support around the state. He’s traveled all corners of the state for a long time and is very well known and very well liked,” said Mackowiak. “We haven’t had a Republican senator lose a primary since Richard Lugar in 2004. 

    “As much as people sometimes think it’s doable, think it’s easy, think it’s inevitable, it really just doesn’t happen. But I’m not saying it can’t happen. I’m not saying that Paxton can’t win. I think he certainly has a decent chance.”

    SPEAKER JOHNSON INVITES TRUMP TO ADDRESS CONGRESS AMID BUSY FIRST 100-DAY SPRINT

    The dome of the U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C. (Fox News Digital)

    CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

    Mackowiak added that if Paxton runs, it “would be a massive race with national consequences.”

    “You’d have national activists and money involved on both sides,” he said. “It could end up being one of the biggest primaries of the cycle and probably the most significant statewide primary in Texas since Dewhurst-Cruz [when former Texas Solicitor General Ted Cruz defeated Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst for the GOP Senate nomination in 2012 en route to winning his first U.S. Senate election] or it may not materialize at all. And I think it’s going to be several months before we know.”

    Paul Steinhauser is a politics reporter based in New Hampshire. 



    Key Trump ally and former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows is set to announce his run against a leading Republican in the next couple of months, sources close to him have revealed.

    Meadows, who has been a staunch supporter of former President Donald Trump, is reportedly eyeing a challenge against a prominent member of his own party who has been critical of Trump and his policies.

    The announcement is expected to shake up the political landscape and further highlight the deep divisions within the Republican Party between those who continue to support Trump and those who are looking to move the party in a different direction.

    Stay tuned for more updates on this developing story.

    Tags:

    1. Trump ally
    2. Republican primary
    3. Campaign announcement
    4. Leading Republican opponent
    5. Political race
    6. GOP challenger
    7. Election news
    8. Conservative candidate
    9. Political showdown
    10. Primary election announcement

    #Key #Trump #ally #announce #run #leading #Republican #couple #months

  • Republican lawmaker introduces bill to carve Trump into Mount Rushmore


    Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., introduced legislation to carve President Trump’s face into Mt. Rushmore. Luna said the bill aims to honor the president for his “transformative impact” and “historical significance”. 

    Luna said in a statement: “President Trump’s bold leadership and steadfast dedication to America’s greatness have cemented his place in history. Mount Rushmore, a timeless symbol of our nation’s freedom and strength, deserves to reflect his towering legacy.” 

    Luna said Trump deserves a spot for economic growth, national security, and America first foreign policy that she contends happened thanks to his leadership. 

    Mt. Rushmore includes the faces of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln. Lead sculptor Gutzon Borglum said he selected those four presidents because they represented the most important events in the history of the United States.

    The carving of the national monument began in 1927 and ended in 1941. Nearly 400 participated in its creation; they earned approximately $8 a day. Workers used dynamite to carve 90%, using very precise amounts to chip away at the rock. 



    In a shocking move, a Republican lawmaker has introduced a bill to carve former President Donald Trump’s likeness into Mount Rushmore. The proposal has sparked controversy and debate across the country, with many questioning the appropriateness of adding another face to the iconic monument.

    Supporters of the bill argue that Trump’s accomplishments and impact on American politics warrant his inclusion on Mount Rushmore, alongside other notable presidents like George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. They believe that Trump’s presidency was historic and transformative, and that he deserves to be honored in this way.

    However, critics of the bill argue that it sets a dangerous precedent and undermines the integrity of Mount Rushmore as a symbol of American democracy. They point out that Trump’s presidency was marked by divisiveness, controversy, and constitutional breaches, and that he does not belong on the same level as the founding fathers and other revered presidents.

    The bill is likely to face fierce opposition and scrutiny as it makes its way through the legislative process. Whether or not Trump’s face will ever be carved into Mount Rushmore remains to be seen, but one thing is for sure – this proposal has reignited the national conversation about how we choose to honor our leaders and commemorate our history.

    Tags:

    1. Republican lawmaker
    2. Trump Mount Rushmore
    3. Mount Rushmore bill
    4. GOP legislation
    5. Political news
    6. Monument proposal
    7. American politics
    8. President Trump legacy
    9. National landmarks
    10. Historical preservation

    #Republican #lawmaker #introduces #bill #carve #Trump #Mount #Rushmore

  • Putin Fueling Independence Plans in California, Texas: Republican


    Ron Nehring, a Republican political adviser, has criticized “Russian government-backed” initiatives for California and Texas to secede from the United States and become independent countries.

    Newsweek contacted Nehring for comment via a form on his website, and CalExit and the Texas Nationalist Movement, the main secessionist movements in their states—via email.

    Why It Matters

    The push for states such as California and Texas to secede from the U.S. has gained traction in recent years, fueled in part by Russian-backed efforts to destabilize American politics.

    As the states with the largest gross domestic products, their secession would cause significant disruption to the U.S. economy. While a state seceding is both highly improbable and unconstitutional, the growing debate could fuel national divisions.

    The California state flag on a house in Berkeley on November 12, 2016.

    Barbara Munker/AP Photo

    What To Know

    On Thursday, California Secretary of State Shirley Weber approved a campaign to gather signatures petitioning for a vote on whether the state should leave the U.S.

    In a Sunday op-ed for Flash Report, a blog covering California political news, Nehring said the Kremlin was likely cheering on the latest push to get a secession referendum included on the Golden State’s 2028 ballot.

    Nehring, who served as chair of the California Republican Party from 2007 to 2011 and was a spokesperson for Texas Senator Ted Cruz‘s 2016 presidential campaign, said the idea of California seceding was again gaining traction.

    “Yes, the most delusional, impractical, and Kremlin-cheered pipe dream of our time has returned, despite its repeated failures and universal ridicule,” he wrote, adding, “While its proponents insist the movement is homegrown, the idea has been gleefully boosted by Russian government-backed media and trolls looking to destabilize our country.”

    The Republican continued: “Putin and his propaganda machine aren’t aiming for an actual breakup of the U.S. (they know that’s a fantasy). Instead, they want to make secession an acceptable topic, a plausible option to enough people that it festers and spreads.”

    A similar secessionist effort exists in Texas, referred to as “Texit” and led by the Texas Nationalist Movement.

    According to researchers at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a think tank in Washington, D.C., these secessionist movements have gained support from Russian accounts on social media. Dmitry Medvedev, Russia’s former president and prime minister, has also joked about supporting the movement.

    Secessionist leaders have previously rejected the idea that Russian propaganda has driven support for their movements or that they are linked to the Russian government.

    What People Are Saying

    In an emailed response to Newsweek, Nehring said: “While the current ‘leader’ of CalExit may publicly disavow connections to Russia, the idea itself has been promoted, amplified, and encouraged by Russian government-linked entities, which sought to use it as a destabilization tool. That has been extensively documented for over eight years by media outlets, intelligence agencies, and cybersecurity firms like Graphika.

    “Disavowals do not erase the extensive evidence of Russian involvement in advancing this issue for their own anti-American strategic benefit.”

    Marcus Evans, who is running the campaign for an independence vote in California, told CBS News: “We believe that now is the best time to Calexit—NOW we are better situated to make Calexit happen than in 2016.”

    Daniel Miller, who leads the Texas Nationalist Movement, told Newsweek: “Ron Nehring’s claim that TEXIT is ‘Kremlin-cheered’ is both ridiculous and revealing.

    “TEXIT is about Texans reclaiming their right to self-governance, a right Nehring seems incapable of understanding. Instead of addressing the legitimate concerns behind the movement, he throws out tired conspiracy theories, hoping to stay relevant in a conversation that’s way out of his depth.”

    What Happens Next

    If the petition in California receives the necessary 546,651 signatures by July 22, 2025, it will put this question on the November 2028 ballot: “Should California leave the United States and become a free and independent country?”

    It would also require California to create a commission to study the state’s viability as an independent country.

    However, even if the ballot measure passed, it would not trigger any legal changes to California’s status and would simply be seen as a “vote of no confidence in the United States of America.”

    The U.S. Constitution does not allow for state secession, an issue a Supreme Court ruling settled in 1869 following the Civil War.

    Update 1/28/25, 12:12 p.m. ET: This article has updated with a comment Daniel Miller.

    Correction 1/28/25, 7:11 a.m. ET: This article has been updated to remove reference to Yes California, which no longer backs secession.



    In a recent statement, Republican leaders have expressed concerns over Russian President Vladimir Putin’s alleged involvement in fueling independence plans in California and Texas.

    According to sources, Putin has been quietly supporting and encouraging separatist movements in both states, with the ultimate goal of destabilizing the United States and weakening its global influence.

    Republican lawmakers have called for immediate action to counter Putin’s influence and protect the integrity of the nation. They have urged the federal government to investigate and take appropriate measures to prevent any further interference from foreign powers in American affairs.

    The situation is still developing, but one thing is clear: Putin’s meddling in American politics is a serious threat that must be addressed swiftly and decisively. The Republican party remains committed to defending the unity and sovereignty of the United States against any outside interference.

    Tags:

    1. Putin
    2. California
    3. Texas
    4. Independence
    5. Republican
    6. Fueling
    7. Political news
    8. Secession
    9. United States
    10. International relations

    #Putin #Fueling #Independence #Plans #California #Texas #Republican

  • Trump Reinstates Longstanding Republican Anti-Abortion Policy


    President Trump on Friday reinstated a longstanding Republican anti-abortion policy known as the “Mexico City Rule,” which bars federal funding from going to any overseas nongovernmental organization that performs or promotes abortions.

    The move came after he addressed thousands of abortion opponents in Washington on Friday to mark the 52nd anniversary of the Supreme Court’s 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, which created a national right to abortion and which the court overturned in 2022.

    Federal law already bans the use of taxpayer dollars to support abortion services abroad. But in 1984 President Ronald Reagan went one step further, blocking foreign aid to nongovernmental organizations that discuss abortion as part of family planning services, or advocate abortion rights, even if those groups are not using American tax dollars to do so.

    In the four decades since, the policy has had a seesaw history. Democratic presidents, including Joseph R. Biden Jr., have revoked it and Republicans have reinstated it. It has been in effect for 21 of the past 40 years.

    That Mr. Trump reinstated the ban is not a surprise. When he ran for president in 2016, he took a strong anti-abortion stance, winning the support of Christian conservatives by promising to appoint justices to the Supreme Court who would overturn Roe. In the two and a half years since Roe was overturned, abortion has become a more complicated issue for Republicans, and Mr. Trump did not make it a centerpiece of his 2024 campaign.

    But Mr. Trump still needs to tend to his party’s right wing, particularly because his pick for health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has a muddled record on abortion. While visiting with senators on Capitol Hill last month, Mr. Kennedy promised Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, that he would support reinstatement of the policy as part of a broad anti-abortion agenda.

    “He committed to me to reinstate President Trump’s prolife policies at HHS,” Mr. Hawley wrote on social media, using the initials for the Department of Health and Human Services. “That includes reinstating the Mexico City policy & ending taxpayer funding for abortions domestically.”

    In April 2023, when he was running for president, Mr. Kennedy said he would support a federal ban on abortion after the first trimester of pregnancy, but then quickly backtracked. His campaign released a statement saying that Mr. Kennedy’s “position on abortion is that it is always the woman’s right to choose,” adding, “He does not support legislation banning abortion.”

    The following year, he posted a lengthy message on social media outlining his views. “I support the emerging consensus that abortion should be unrestricted up until a certain point,” he wrote. “I believe that point should be when the baby is viable outside the womb.”

    Advocates for reproductive rights say the Mexico City policy has a devastating effect on women overseas, driving up the number of unintended pregnancies, scaling back much-needed family planning programs and sometimes leading women to seek unsafe abortions, which are a major cause of maternal mortality.

    The last time Mr. Trump reinstated the policy, when he first took office in 2017, he also expanded it by directing the State Department to identify additional organizations that might fall under the ban. Two years later, in 2019, Mr. Trump further expanded the policy to bar federal funding for overseas groups that give money to other foreign groups that perform abortions.



    President Trump has officially reinstated the longstanding Republican anti-abortion policy known as the Mexico City Policy. This policy, first implemented by President Ronald Reagan in 1984, prohibits U.S. foreign aid from being used to fund organizations that provide or promote abortion services overseas.

    The Mexico City Policy has been a point of contention between Republicans and Democrats for decades, with Republicans praising it as a way to protect the sanctity of life and promote pro-life values, while Democrats argue that it restricts access to safe and legal abortion services for women in developing countries.

    President Trump’s reinstatement of this policy is a clear indication of his commitment to the pro-life movement and his efforts to advance conservative values in his administration. This decision has been met with praise from anti-abortion groups and criticism from pro-choice advocates, setting the stage for continued debate over reproductive rights and women’s health policies in the United States and abroad.

    Tags:

    1. Trump administration
    2. Republican party
    3. Anti-abortion policy
    4. Pro-life stance
    5. White House decision
    6. Abortion regulations
    7. Conservative policy
    8. Trump presidency
    9. Political news
    10. Government policy

    #Trump #Reinstates #Longstanding #Republican #AntiAbortion #Policy

  • Hello, how can I help you today?
Gathering thoughts.. ...
Powered by AI
Chat Icon