mark
Source NM
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/4/25 6:23am
Harmeet Dhillon,  confirmed on April 3, 2025, as President Donald Trump's nominee for assistant attorney general for civil rights, prepares for her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill on Feb. 26, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)WASHINGTON — The Senate cleared two more of President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice nominees Thursday, installing another attorney who defended Trump last year and a new lead on civil rights who has drawn intense criticism from advocacy groups. The Senate confirmed California lawyer Harmeet Dhillon in a 52-45 vote to the role of assistant attorney general, heading up the agency’s Civil Rights Division, one of the largest at Justice. Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski was the only Republican to oppose the nomination. Dhillon, a Trump legal adviser and the managing partner at Dhillon Law Group in San Francisco, specializes in commercial litigation, employment law, First Amendment rights and election law matters, according to the biography on her firm’s website. Dhillon is also the CEO and founder of the Center for American Liberty, which states its mission as “defending the civil liberties of Americans left behind by civil rights legacy organizations.” Dhillon previously sat on the ACLU Northern California board and defended members of the Sikh community, to which her family belongs, from attacks after 9/11, according to reporting from San Francisco-based KQED-FM. But Dhillon also has a trail of controversies, including repeatedly denying the 2020 presidential election results and fueling conspiracies following the 2022 attack on Paul Pelosi, husband of then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat. Civil rights advocates also point to her recent legal work challenging voting and transgender rights. “She’s not out there to protect the rights of all of us, and that’s what her record has demonstrated,” Lena Zwarensteyn, of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, told States Newsroom Thursday. In an eight-page letter to senators, led by the Leadership Conference and signed by dozens of advocacy groups, the coalition wrote Dhillon has “relentlessly tried to limit access to the ballot box” and “denied, diminished and tried to erase” the existence of transgender youth. States Newsroom reached out to the White House for comment. Former Missouri AG elevated The Senate also confirmed in a party-line vote, 52-45, Dean Sauer, former Missouri solicitor general and Trump’s defense lawyer, to lead government litigation. After representing Trump’s presidential immunity argument before the U.S. Supreme Court last year, Sauer will now argue before the high bench on the DOJ’s behalf. Sauer made headlines in January 2024 when he suggested to a three-judge panel for the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals that a president might be shielded by presidential immunity for ordering SEAL Team Six to assassinate a rival. 

[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics, nominees, Trump, U.S. Senate]

[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/4/25 6:22am
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee during her confirmation hearing on Jan. 15, 2025. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)WASHINGTON — Judge James E. Boasberg on Thursday strongly implied there was probable cause that the Trump administration violated his orders over deportation flights carried out under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. “It seems to me … that the government acted in bad faith throughout that day,” he said of March 15, when the administration sent three flights of Venezuelan nationals to a notorious El Salvador mega-prison and seemingly defied his order to return them. “If you believed everything you did was legal, I can’t believe you would have operated the way you did that day,” Boasberg said to Drew Ensign, a deputy assistant attorney general who is representing the administration in the case. An order of contempt could come as soon as next week, Boasberg said. He said if he finds the government in contempt, there would be hearings to determine the official, or officials, who defied his order and the possible consequences of those actions. Contempt would allow Boasberg to issue a fine against certain officials in order to force compliance or he even could order U.S. marshals to jail an official. During Thursday’s hearing, Boasberg questioned why the proclamation was signed “in secret,” noting it was put into use before a judge could review it. “Is there any other inference (than) that there was an expedited effort to get people on planes…before my hearing,” Boasberg asked, referring to a March 15 hearing that ended with the judge placing the temporary restraining order blocking the use of the law. For more than an hour Thursday, Boasberg grilled Ensign about the timing of three deportation flights after the wartime law was invoked. In the order, Boasberg also required the return of any mid-air flights to the U.S. But rather than return the flights, the government delivered more than 261 men to a notorious mega-prison in El Salvador known as CECOT.  Boasberg questioned Ensign on which government officials were aware his temporary restraining order was in place and asked for the name of the person who decided not to turn the flights around. Ensign said he was not sure and then cited attorney-client privileges, which Boasberg seemed skeptical about. Ensign then said he was not aware of who made the decision to not turn the flights around. The Trump administration has denied it violated any orders and has said that it followed the law. Contempt hearings possible Boasberg asked American Civil Liberties Union attorney Lee Gelernt what process for a contempt finding they would recommend. Gelernt said having the government write sworn declarations answering pointed questions and having officials questioned under oath would be acceptable steps. “We feel the order was violated,” Gelernt said.  ACLU has already filed for a preliminary injunction while the case proceeds. In the motion for a preliminary injunction, ACLU argued that the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act violates administrative and immigration laws and constitutional rights to due process. “Plaintiffs will suffer severe and irreparable harm in the absence of a preliminary injunction, as demonstrated by class members who have already been removed and consigned to a life sentence in a Salvadoran prison without … notice or the opportunity to contest the government’s designation,” according to the brief. A hearing for a preliminary injunction is set for April 8. The Trump administration on March 28 made an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to allow for deportations under the wartime law – something that until now, had only been used during wars: the War of 1812, World War I and World War II. A decision from the high court is expected soon. Seeking information President Donald Trump has publicly attacked Boasberg, calling for his impeachment. The Justice Department has also tried to have Boasberg removed from the case. Attorney General Pam Bondi invoked the “state secrets privilege” late last month to refuse to answer Boasberg’s detailed questions about the flights. Boasberg rejected that argument in Thursday’s hearing, asking Ensign if the information was classified. Ensign said it was not classified. Boasberg then questioned why the Trump administration refused to show him the information he was seeking, as is common in cases with sensitive information such as national security details. There are specific rooms called Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, or SCIFs, where sensitive information can be discussed with officials, such as a federal judge. Boasberg said the administration was acting “pretty sketchily” in not showing him the information.  In various hearings, Boasberg has expressed doubt that the Trump administration can use the wartime law to deport Venezuelans accused of gang ties without due process. Boasberg has agreed that the president has broad authority over foreign policy and deportations, but has deemed deportations can’t be done without due process. Aside from determining if the Trump administration violated his restraining order with the deportation flights, Boasberg is trying to determine if the president violated the Alien Enemies Act by deporting Venezuelans without proper judicial review. Department of Justice attorneys have argued that those subject to the Alien Enemies Act do not need to be notified. Instead, they argue anyone subject to the proclamation who wants to challenge it can make a habeas corpus claim – that is, challenge the legality of their detentions. Flights to El Salvador At issue are three deportation planes that eventually went to the prison in El Salvador on March 15. Two of the planes left before Boasberg gave a verbal order to pause deportations under the Alien Enemies Act. One plane left after Boasberg issued a written order, but the Trump administration has said those on the third flight had removal orders under Title 8, not the wartime law. Ensign said the proclamation was signed on March 14, but didn’t go into effect until the next day. Boasberg questioned how U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement was able to have enough time to load up three planes and deport Venezuelans under the proclamation if they only knew about it that day. Ensign conceded that ICE likely was preparing for the proclamation ahead of time. “If that’s true, one could infer, they were working on the proclamation before it was public,” Boasberg said. Boasberg also noted public comments the president made, where Trump said he wasn’t sure who signed the proclamation or when it was signed. Ensign said he had not seen the press conference during which the president made those remarks. Deportation errors Boasberg questioned Ensign about who was notified when he first placed the temporary restraining order. Ensign stuttered and seemed uncomfortable, and said he could not remember. Boasberg gave him time to recall. Ensign listed off members of his DOJ team and points of contact at the State Department and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Boasberg again noted the “rushed” nature of the flights and how the government has erred in deporting people, including a Maryland father who originally from El Salvador who was sent to prison due to what ICE and DOJ have called an “administrative error.” Boasberg also noted that eight women and one Nicaraguan national were returned from the March 15 flights because the prison was only for men and El Salvador was only taking Venezuelans and their own nationals. Boasberg asked Ensign why the Trump administration would “risk putting people on these planes that should not be on (the) planes.” Ensign said he didn’t have specific operational details. Family members and attorneys for many of the men have disputed the Trump administration’s claims that those taken to El Salvador were members of the Tren de Aragua. They claim the men were deported because ICE agents misinterpreted their tattoos. Many deportees had no criminal record and were in asylum hearings before an immigration judge, they added. 

[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics, contempt, deportation, Federal judge, trump administration]

[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/4/25 6:20am
The U.S. Capitol, wrapped in fog, on Dec. 18, 2024. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Republicans on Thursday advanced a budget resolution that, once approved by both chambers of Congress, will pave the way for trillions of dollars in tax and spending cuts. The 52-48 vote moved senators one step closer to a marathon amendment voting session, which will likely take place Friday or Saturday, before they give the budget their final stamp of approval. Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul was the only member of his party to vote against moving forward. The House will have to vote to adopt the revised budget resolution in order to unlock the complex reconciliation process that GOP leaders plan to use to enact an extension of the 2017 tax law, hundreds of billions in new funding for border security and defense, and substantial cuts to federal spending. The compromise budget resolution, released Wednesday, will also clear the way for Republicans to raise the debt limit later this year by between $4 and $5 trillion. The tax-and-spending blueprint is not a bill and never goes to the president for a signature. It’s what’s known as a concurrent resolution, so only the House and Senate need to approve it for its provisions to take effect. Once GOP lawmakers do that, they can move their sweeping policy goals through the Senate without garnering the support of at least 60 lawmakers to move past the legislative filibuster. That means GOP leaders won’t need to negotiate any part of the yet-to-be-drafted reconciliation bill with Democrats, only the various factions that make up the party. But that will prove a challenging task given their especially narrow majorities. In the House, there are only 220 GOP members at the moment, a much smaller number than when the original tax law package passed during Trump’s first administration. Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., can only lose three Republicans on partisan bills if all members of the chamber are voting. There are currently two absences, but if that changes before Congress clears the bill, Johnson’s margins might shift slightly. Republicans hold 53 seats in the Senate and can lose only three members on the reconciliation package, if Vice President J.D. Vance is available to break a tied vote.  

[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics, budget, Congress, Republicans, U.S. Senate]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/3/25 5:01pm
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. departs after testifying in a confirmation hearing before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions at the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Jan. 30, 2025, in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)A federal judge in Rhode Island will grant a request from Democratic state officials to temporarily prevent President Donald Trump’s administration from cutting state health grants, the judge said at a Thursday afternoon hearing. U.S. District Court Judge Mary McElroy said the 24 Democratic attorneys general and governors were likely to prevail on the merits of their case seeking to restore funding that the Trump administration’s Department of Health and Human Services abruptly rescinded late last month. ““I’m going to grant the temporary restraining order. The balance of the equities are to maintaining the funding as it is,” McElroy said after brief arguments from attorneys representing a consortium of state governments and HHS. “The harm to the plaintiff states and the plaintiff agencies if we cease that … is clearly irreparable.” HHS, under Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., revoked $11 billion in grant funding to states beginning on March 24, the states wrote in a Tuesday filing requesting the court block the move. McElroy indicated at least part of her decision was based on the broadness of the Trump administration’s argument. The administration was hampered from fighting the case after receiving the states’ motion for a temporary restraining order and “4,000 pages of exhibits” mere days ago, Leslie Kane, who represented HHS, said. “Given the time limitation … it really significantly limits any substantive argument I can make at this time,” Kane said. She still offered a general objection to the “extraordinary emergency relief” she said the states were seeking. But McElroy, whom Trump appointed during his first presidency, ruled that the “voluminous” record provided by the states weighed in favor of granting the order. “Given that the government really hasn’t had time to make any kind of objection except a broad objection, I don’t see how I can deny the temporary restraining order on the record that’s before the court, which, again: quite voluminous,” McElroy said. States scrambling The rescissions of grant funding in late March from COVID-19-era laws surprised state health departments and led to rapid layoffs and pauses in contract work while states scrambled to understand what other cuts they would need to make. Sarah Rice, an assistant attorney general in Rhode Island who argued for the Democratic states, listed several effects already or soon to be felt by the states. In Minnesota, 170 employees had already been laid off, with hundreds more at risk of job loss. Rhode Island employees with extensive training on vaccine storage might be laid off. Subcontractors in Wisconsin were told to pause their work, and Washington state may be unable to move substance abuse and mental health patients from a “high-acuity” treatment setting to community treatment, Rice said. “These are just exemplars from the very many declarations that the state employees put together,” she said. States had no advance warning their funding would be pulled, and were especially shocked by the reversal of funding because HHS had told them how to continue to use COVID-19 funding, Rice said. “This was quite a surprising turn because HHS had prior issued guidance that instructed the states how to modify these programs to comply with the appropriations statutes after the public health emergency related to COVID-19 had ended,” Rice said. The department had even granted states extensions for various grants as late as June 2027, Rice added. The attorneys general of Colorado, Rhode Island, California, Minnesota, Washington, Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon and Wisconsin and Govs. Andy Beshear of Kentucky and Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania brought the case.

[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics, $11 billion, Federal judge, Health and Human Services, health grants, RFK JR, Trump]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/3/25 4:08pm
New Nissan cars are driven onto a rail car to be transported from an automobile processing terminal located at the Port of Los Angeles on April 3, 2025 in Wilmington, California. The Japanese automotive maker is being impacted by President Trump’s new 25 percent imported automobile tariffs. (Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)WASHINGTON — Markets and business owners in the United States and around the world reeled Thursday following President Donald Trump’s announcement of sweeping and steep tariffs that are not “reciprocal” but rather punish many countries that U.S. importers heavily rely on, experts say. U.S. stocks plummeted to their lowest levels since June 2020, financial media reported at the closing bell Thursday. Business groups issued criticisms, experts predicted increases in household spending and even a conservative Republican senator pushed legislation that would increase congressional power over tariffs. Trump unveiled the tariffs Wednesday during a White House Rose Garden event billed as “Liberation Day,” where he told the crowd that trading partners and allies have “torn apart our once beautiful American dream.” His answer: Signing a “historic executive order instituting reciprocal tariffs on countries throughout the world. Reciprocal. That means they do it to us, and we do it to them. Very simple.” But economists say the new U.S. tariffs Trump revealed Wednesday — illustrated on a large display table — do not match one-for-one other countries’ levies, as Trump said during his remarks. Trump held in his hands a chart that claimed to show a list of other countries’ taxes on American imports. But it was wrong. The problem with the chart Vietnam does not charge a 90% tariff on American imports, as the chart said. Rather its rate for imported U.S. goods was on average 9.4% in 2023, according to the World Trade Organization. “The actual calculation (circulated by the White House) doesn’t factor in other countries’ tariffs,” said Brad Setser, senior fellow on global trade at the Council on Foreign Relations, a think tank focused on international affairs. In other words, Setser told States Newsroom Thursday, “It’s a tariff on big bilateral trade deficits.” And so, what does that mean? And why did the president’s chart say that the U.S. would now be charging a 46% tax on every imported good from Vietnam? Vietnam is a small country, but a competitive exporter, particularly in broadcasting equipment, microchips and computers. And the U.S. is a big customer. In 2023, the U.S. imported $118 billion in goods from Vietnam, while Vietnam imported about $9.6 billion in U.S. products that year, according to the Observatory of Economic Complexity, a trade data project with roots at MIT. The White House claimed on the chart that Vietnam applies a 90% tariff on the U.S. — when actually that percentage is roughly the dollar amount of the U.S. trade deficit divided by the dollar amount of how much the U.S. imports from the country. So, $120B – $10B = $110B, then divide that by $120B, and you get roughly 91%. Trump said he would be “kind” and give trading partners “discounted” tariff rates by about half, and that’s how Vietnam landed at a 46% tax on its imports into the U.S. “So Vietnam got hit with a huge tariff. It is literally that simple,” Setser said. Economists and journalists almost immediately took to social media to question the glaring inaccuracy. ‘Bombshell’ tariffs The new rates are a “bombshell” on U.S. allies and trading partners, said Jack Zhang, a professor of political science who runs the Trade War Lab at the University of Kansas. Vietnam tried to head off Trump’s announcement in March by cutting levies on U.S. imports and signing “big purchase agreements,” Zhang said, but it didn’t work. Historically countries have negotiated tariffs product by product in “laborious” talks, Zhang said. “You know, ‘You reduce tariffs on your stuff, I will reduce tariffs on maybe some other stuff.’ And it nets out to be fair. This sort of lazy, back-of-the-envelope kind of calculation based on the trade deficit, it makes it really hard to negotiate in those terms,” he said. Products from the European Union will now be taxed at 20%, Japan’s new rate is 24%, and South Korea’s 25% — all significant U.S. allies and trading partners. The EU has already threatened to retaliate if the U.S. does not come to the negotiating table. Countries carrying a trade surplus with the U.S. — meaning they import more American goods than they sell back to the U.S. — did not escape the policy, as Trump imposed a universal 10% tariff on every nation. The United Kingdom, which runs a trade surplus with the U.S. and in 2023 charged an average of 3.8% on imported American products, will now see a 10% tax on its items headed to U.S. buyers. Australia, whose Prime Minister Anthony Albanese called the tariffs “totally unwarranted,” faces the same situation. Trump’s informational table falsely stated that the U.K., Australia and a host of other countries — including the Heard and McDonald Islands, inhabited by penguins and seals — have been charging a 10% tax on American goods. ‘Damage to their own people’ Trump did not include Canada and Mexico in his announcement Wednesday. But those countries are already subject to up to 25% taxes on steel, aluminum and other imports that the administration enacted in March, after declaring emergencies over illicit fentanyl and immigrants crossing the northern and southern borders. Additionally Trump’s 25% foreign car tax launched Thursday.  The neighboring countries factor big into the automobile supply chain. “Given the prospective damage to their own people, the American administration should eventually change course, but I don’t want to give false hope. The president believes that what he is doing is best for the American economy,” Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said Thursday in remarks that streamed on C-SPAN. Carney said he and Trump have agreed to economic and security negotiations next month. The proposed tariffs will amount to an average $2,100 tax increase per American household, according to an analysis released Thursday by the center-right Tax Foundation, which advocates for lower taxes. The average levy on all imports will reach 18.8%, compared to 2.5% in 2024, according to the foundation’s modeling. Numerous trade and advocacy groups spoke out against the tariffs. The National Association of Manufacturers urged the Trump administration to “minimize tariff costs for manufacturers that are investing and expanding in the U.S.” The center-right Taxpayers Protection Alliance issued a scathing statement Thursday. “​​American consumers and taxpayers should be appalled by this executive overreach,” said its president David Williams. States Newsroom spoke to small business owners from around the country who expressed fear about the cost of day-to-day supplies. One Arizona coffee shop owner told the news outlet that he purchased a year’s supply of disposable coffee cups from China last year in anticipation of Trump igniting a trade war. Trump announced a 34% tax on Chinese imports Wednesday, and some experts say that will stack on top of the existing 20% tariffs Trump imposed during his first administration that were kept in place by former President Joe Biden. Senators want more control over tariffs A bipartisan pair of senators introduced on Thursday what they’ve titled the “American Trade Review Act of 2025,” aiming to claw back congressional power over the president’s near unilateral decision-making on U.S. tariffs. “Inflation and high costs are a threat to the stability and prosperity of American businesses of all sizes, to our farmers and to our consumers,” Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington state said on the Senate floor. She and Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa are co-sponsoring the legislation. “We live now in an interconnected world, a global economy, and advances in technology and transportation have brought that world closer and closer together. We have a global economy,” Cantwell continued. States Newsroom sent a list of questions to the White House regarding their informational table of tariffs presented Wednesday and an opportunity to respond to criticism. In a statement, White House spokesperson Kush Desai said, “Trillions in historic investment commitments from industry leaders ranging from Apple to Hyundai to TSMC are indicative of how this administration is working with the private sector while implementing President Trump’s pro-growth, pro-worker America First agenda of tariffs, deregulation, tax cuts, and the unleashing of American energy. “These America First economic policies delivered historic job, wage, and investment growth in his first term, and everyone from Main Street to Wall Street is again going to thrive as President Trump secures our nation’s economic future,” the statement continued. TSMC, a Taiwanese mega semiconductor producer, received $6.6 billion in direct funding from the U.S., plus $5 billion in cheap loans, under Biden’s administration after he signed the CHIPS and Science Act, according to an analysis by the Council on Foreign Relations. The country announced an additional $100 billion investment in early March. Trump announced a 32% tariff on the island nation.

[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics, economists, tariffs, Trump]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/3/25 3:32pm
A child wearing a top hat advertises registration for New Mexico National History Day Contest, an event supported by the New Mexico Humanities Council. The council learned late Wednesday that it would have to close due to cuts at the National Endowment for the Humanities. (Photo Courtesy NMHC website)An organization that provides small grants to uplift and explain New Mexico culture and history will have to close its doors, following deep cuts to the National Endowment for the Humanities and local humanities councils across the country. The New Mexico Humanities Council has been around since 1972 and has provided schools, tribes, colleges, cultural centers, libraries and others grants to engage “New Mexicans with history, culture and humanities topics.”  Recent events that credit the council include a Taos exhibition honoring Hispanic stories of northern New Mexico; a youth history competition; and virtual learning experiences at the New Mexico Farm & Ranch Heritage Museum in Las Cruces. “Those will essentially go away,” said Brandon Johnson, executive director of the humanities council, in a phone interview Thursday with Source New Mexico.  Johnson received two letters around 11 p.m. Wednesday from Michael McDonald, the acting director of the National Endowment for the Humanities, related to two NEH grants the council received. About $500,000 had not been awarded to the council, Johnson said, from what online records show were initially $11.3 million contracts. “NEH has reasonable cause to terminate your grant in light of the fact that the NEH is repurposing its funding allocations in a new direction in furtherance of the President’s agenda,” McDonald wrote in the letter dated April 2, citing a February Trump executive order seeking to reduce the federal bureaucracy.  Federal government to preserve history of Indian boarding schools “Your grant’s immediate termination is necessary to safeguard the interests of the federal government, including its fiscal priorities. The termination of your grant represents an urgent priority for the administration,” McDonald wrote. The letter goes on to note that an audit may still occur, even though the grants were terminated, and provides a Microsoft email address to contact “with only urgent questions.” An unnamed official told NPR that McDonald recently told senior staff of the so-called “Department of Government Efficiency” team that he wants to “claw back” $175 million in grant money that has not been disbursed. A large number of NEH employees will soon be fired, as well, according to the New York Times.  Johnson said the news came as a shock and called the cuts “very disappointing,” though he acknowledged he’d withheld much stronger words he wanted to say about the abrupt cancellation of the program. He noted that the NEH has enjoyed bipartisan support for decades and that the council here has done great work across the state.  Social Security commissioner nominee advances to U.S. Senate floor amid DOGE questions “Thats money that wont go to our New Mexico communities,” he said.  A statement from the National Alliance for the Humanities, an advocacy group, called on members of the public to fight back against the cuts, noting that the spending was already approved by Congress.  “We condemn these actions in the strongest possible terms,” the alliance wrote. “We support the mission of the National Endowment for the Humanities and the agency staff who make that mission possible, and we call upon Members of Congress to ensure that this crucial government agency fulfills the mandate set by Congress.”

[Category: Gov & Politics]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/3/25 2:56pm
Dr. Mehmet Oz speaks during a confirmation hearing with the Senate Finance Committee in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on March 14, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Oz has been confirmed as President Donald Trump’s nominee to be administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate on Thursday confirmed former television personality and onetime Pennsylvania political candidate Mehmet Oz as director of the Centers for Medicare Medicaid Services. The 53-45 party-line vote places Oz at the helm of the federal agency responsible for administering health care programs relied on by 1 in 4 Americans, including children, seniors and lower-income people. His confirmation comes as Republicans in Congress look to Medicaid, a state-federal partnership that covers medical expenses for some low-income and older Americans, as a source for hundreds of billions in spending cuts to help pay for extending the 2017 GOP tax law. Oz testified during his confirmation hearing in mid-March that there are several “painful truths” confronting federal programs within CMS. “Health care expenditures are growing 2 to 3% faster than our economy; not sustainable. The Medicare trust fund will be insolvent within a decade, that’s the 2.9% taken out of your paycheck,” Oz said. “Medicaid is the number one expense item in most states, consuming 30% of those state budgets, and that’s crowding out essential services like schools and public safety that many of you spent your careers trying to develop. Our health care cost per person in this country is twice that of other developed nations.” Oz said that chronic disease, which he argued is “linked to poor lifestyle choices,” drives much of the federal spending on health care. He singled out obesity as a central issue. Oz testified he intended to “empower beneficiaries with better tools and more transparency,” “incentivize health care providers to optimize care with real-time information” in part by using artificial intelligence to “liberate doctors and nurses from paperwork,” and modernize efforts that track waste, fraud and abuse. ‘Ludicrous wellness grifting’ Finance Committee ranking member Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said during the hearing that Oz’s comments during a failed Senate campaign about privatizing Medicare were unacceptable. Wyden also criticized Oz for promoting products on this daytime television show that had no scientific research supporting their claims of improving people’s health or preventing disease.   “Dr. Oz has used his program to promote some of the most ludicrous wellness grifting that I’ve heard about to date,” Wyden said. Idaho Republican Sen. Mike Crapo, chairman of the committee, said during a floor speech Thursday that Oz was well qualified to run CMS. “At his hearing, Dr. Oz spoke strongly about his desire to modernize the CMS and encourage a healthy lifestyle for all Americans,” Crapo said. “His vision for treating the underlying causes of chronic disease and equipping providers with innovative technologies to serve patients will also be a much- needed sea change at CMS.” CMS scope The agency manages several federal health programs, including Medicare, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program and the health insurance marketplaces established by the Affordable Care Act. The agency spent more than $1.5 trillion during the last full fiscal year, about 22% of all federal spending. The more than 6,000 people who work at CMS as well as contractors “process over one billion Medicare claims annually, monitor quality of care, provide the states with matching funds for Medicaid benefits, and develop policies and procedures designed to give the best possible service to beneficiaries,” according to the latest financial report. CMS is one of many agencies housed in the Department of Health and Human Services that is subject to restructuring plans from Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Oz background Oz received his undergraduate degree from Harvard University before earning a joint M.D. and MBA from the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine and Wharton Business School. He starred in the daytime show “Dr. Oz,” which ran from 2009 until 2022. He won the Republican primary in the 2022 Pennsylvania U.S. Senate race but was defeated during the general election by Democratic Sen. John Fetterman. When President Donald Trump announced in November he intended to nominate Oz to lead CMS, he wrote that Oz would “cut waste and fraud within our Country’s most expensive Government Agency, which is a third of our Nation’s Healthcare spend, and a quarter of our entire National Budget.”

[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Dr. Oz, Mehmet Oz, U.S. Senate]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/3/25 2:47pm
Attorney General Raúl Torrez announces a lawsuit against a Las Cruces-based consulting business allegedly defrauding veterans on Thursday, April 3, 2025. (Photo by Leah Romero / Source NM)Attorney General Raúl Torrez is seeking restitution for veterans he alleges were defrauded by a consulting company based in Las Cruces. Torrez filed a civil suit against Disabled Veterans Consultants, Inc. Thursday claiming the company violated the Unfair Practices Act by using unfair and deceptive trade practices and unconscionable trade practices. During a press conference in Las Cruces, Torrez said the company offers consulting services to veterans to help access their benefits. However, the company is not accredited with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs as they are required to be to charge for services. And such services are provided to veterans for free through various agencies, including Veterans of Foreign Wars, American Legion and Disabled American Veterans. Torrez described the company as a “claimshark,” or “organizations who prey upon our veterans in their moment of need when they’re trying to access the disability benefits that they’re entitled to as a result of their service to our country.” He said such companies often offer to process claims on behalf of veterans for large fees or percentages of the person’s benefits. “Sadly, this country has not invested enough in supporting our veterans. This country, indeed, this state, has not invested enough in supporting our veterans,” Torrez said. “We have men and women who have honorably served this country who have disabilities as a result of their service who don’t realize or may not have access to free services to help.” Court documents also state that payments the company received from veterans were not made to the company itself, but to Zeplin Global Group, LLC; MJJL Holdings, LLC; and GTM Bookkeeping, LLC – codefendants in the suit and all based out of Chula Vista, California.  Torrez is asking the court to grant an injunction to prohibit the company from continuing to operate in such a manner. According to court documents, Torrez is asking that the company issue full refunds to the impacted veterans, cancel all contracts and pay fines of up to $5,000 per violation. “The action that we have taken today is intended to send a very clear signal to claimsharks, both in this community in Las Cruces, but around the state, that this kind of conduct will not be tolerated by my office,” Torrez said. “We will be aggressively investigating anyone who is engaged in this conduct.” Brian Ravak, state commander of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, told members of the media during Thursday’s press conference that state and federal legislation should be passed to further protect veterans from bad actors. “The VFW, along with the American Legion and [Disabled American Veterans], have actively urged Congress to pass legislation that would prohibit the exploitation of veterans and survivors of unscrupulous claimsharks and strengthen the accreditation system,” Ravak said. “Each of our organizations have accredited veteran service officers who file VA claims for free – not one dime of a veterans benefits goes to a veteran service organization.” He also mentioned House Bill 245, legislation introduced during the recent session that died in the House Judiciary Committee, which would have prohibited companies or individuals from asking for payment for helping a veteran obtain their benefits, unless they were permitted to ask for compensation under federal law. Ravak said he will “demand” the bill be reintroduced in a future legislative session. At least three states have passed such legislation, while Louisiana passed a law last year that would allow consulting companies to charge veterans up to $12,500 in fees for benefit services. Torrez said the case against the Las Cruces company is still in the early stages and it is unclear at this point how many veterans may have been taken advantage of.  “I can tell you that while this is the first action that weve taken against a claimshark in this space, it almost certainly won’t be the last,” he said.  He added that the state and federal government have expanded eligibility for benefit claims, but have not increased capacity for processing the higher number of claims, creating an “opportunity for businesses like this, and unethical and unscrupulous people, to step into that space and take advantage of folks.” Torrez said veterans are encouraged to reach out to his office if they have a complaint about how their benefits were processed, particularly if they were asked to sign over a portion of their benefits to a consultant. GET THE MORNING HEADLINES. SUBSCRIBE

[Category: Gov & Politics, 2025 New Mexico Legislature, American Legion, Attorney General Raúl Torrez, claimsharks, Department of Veterans Affairs, Disabled American Veterans, New Mexico Department of Justice, veteran benefits, veterans, Veterans of Foreign Wars]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/3/25 2:07pm
Quality control expert inspecting milk in the laboratory. (Getty Images) Veterinary experts nationwide have a variety of hypotheses for new and puzzling test results from cow milk being analyzed for avian influenza — including in New Mexico. March marked one year since officials first reported Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza — H5N1 — among dairy cattle. Since then, bird flu has infected 996 herds across the country, including 19 cases in the last month in California and Idaho. New Mexico reported nine dairy herds in Curry County tested positive last April, and began milk testing its cattle in February following the rollout of a federal program. The most recent results from milk-testing programs revealed that while more than 95% of the 93 cow herds in the state tested negative, a small set of inconsistent positives — all from three Curry County herds infected last year — remain, according to New Mexico State Veterinarian Samantha Holeck. Enter the mystery: The cows themselves do not test positive, nor do they demonstrate the symptoms documented in the earlier avian flu outbreak, she said, such as huge drops in milk production. “It’s been a real challenge to try to understand how it continues to circulate in some of these herds,” Holeck said. New Mexico is partnering up with veterinarians in the U.S. Department of Agriculture to research the viral fragments found in the milk and sent samples to the federal National Veterinary Services Laboratories in Ames, Iowa. I know were a year into this situation now,” Holeck said, “but it seems like theres still just so much to try to understand.” New Mexico isn’t alone in experiencing the viral fragments, said Michael Payne, a food animal veterinarian at University of California, Davis, who noted there have been reports of similar persistent positives in quarantined herds there. “I wouldn’t diminish the importance of it being small,” Payne said. “Yes, were talking about low levels of virus and yes, were talking about cows not getting sick, but it’s important that we’re not exactly sure where it’s coming from, and that in and of itself merits examination.” He said more than $2 million dollars of research is being conducted in California on avian flu transmission across a dozen projects; including examining if its transmitted by flies; blowing in from dust storms; or carried by birds outside of waterfowl. “It will be critical that we figure out how the disease is moving and how its changing,” Payne said. ‘Science is still very much in its infancy’ While scientists need to perform more research, Payne posited some possibilities for the detection of viral fragments: they could signify a different and less potent version of the virus; cooler weather might allow more viral fragments to survive in the bulk tanks, compared to the triple-digit temperatures in the fall; cows may have developed “herd immunity” against the virus. “It could be that much smaller numbers of cattle are being exposed and are becoming infected, which has resulted in a much, much lower level of virus thats being detected inside the bulk tanks,” Payne said. “It’s an area of active research.” Veterinarian Andrew Bowman, a molecular epidemiologist at Ohio State University, said laboratory tests’ sensitivity could also be a factor: They may be picking up positives from environmental contamination in the tanks or on the farms. “It doesn’t take much; we’re talking a few copies of the viral genome to be present in a sample to send it positive,” Bowman said. “We can pick up a positive that’s likely not a viable virus.” Since the development of HPAI in cows is so new, as is the method of transmission — where the virus replicates in the mammary glands that produce milk — he said the basic questions of the interactions between the virus, the host and the environment still need answers. “Science is still very much in the infancy of what we know about avian influenza in cattle,” Bowman said. Offering reassurances While scientists say it’s important to unravel the mystery of the viral fragments to better understand how the virus might change or spread in dairy cows, they also emphasize that risk to the public from avian influenza remains low. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports transmission of avian flu can occur from contact with milk from infected cows; eating, drinking or inhaling droplets contaminated with live virus; touching the live or dead bodies of infected animals. Thus far, the CDC has no documented human-to-human transmission. As of April 1, 70 people had contracted H5N1, mostly California farmworkers. Most milk sold in the U.S. is heated to a temperature to kill bacteria and viruses, called pasteurization. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration tested milk products in 17 states and, finding no live viruses, reported that “pasteurization is effective at inactivating H5N1, and that the commercial, pasteurized milk supply is safe.” Federal officials, however, warn that unpasteurized milk, also called raw milk, is unsafe to drink. Research from the National Institutes of Health in June using infected raw milk from New Mexico found that the H5N1 virus had survived for at least five weeks in refrigerated conditions. Further, mice that consumed the raw milk showed signs of illness, which  researchers suggest indicates drinking raw milk can transmit the virus to other organisms. Holeck emphasized that New Mexico milk is safe. “For dairies, it’s standard routine if they have sick cows for any reason, not just [avian flu], that milk is always diverted out from the milk supply, it doesn’t enter commerce,” she said. GET THE MORNING HEADLINES. SUBSCRIBE

[Category: Health, avian flu, avian influenza, bird flu, Curry County, dairy cows, Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/3/25 1:44pm
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth speaks during his Senate Armed Services Committee confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill on Jan. 14, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)WASHINGTON — The Defense Department’s Office of the Inspector General announced Thursday it has opened an investigation into Secretary Pete Hegseth’s highly criticized use of the Signal messaging app to communicate about plans to bomb Yemen. The evaluation stems from a letter the chairman and ranking member of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, Republican Roger Wicker of Mississippi and Democrat Jack Reed of Rhode Island, sent last week, asking the watchdog agency to look into the matter.  Acting Defense Department Inspector General Steven A. Stebbins wrote in a memo announcing the investigation that the Inspector General Act of 1978 “authorizes us to have access to personnel and materials as we determine necessary to perform our oversight in a timely manner.” The purpose of the evaluation, he wrote, “is to determine the extent to which the Secretary of Defense and other DoD personnel complied with DoD policies and procedures for the use of a commercial messaging application for official business. Additionally, we will review compliance with classification and records retention requirements.” The investigation will take place in Washington, D.C., as well as U.S. Central Command Headquarters in Tampa, Florida. Concerns about the use of Signal, an encrypted messaging app available commercially, began after The Atlantic published an article detailing how its editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, was inadvertently added to a group chat exchanging messages about national security plans. The ensuing controversy has been dubbed “Signalgate.” Vice President J.D. Vance, Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, National Security Advisor Michael Waltz and others were all in the group. They were discussing plans for U.S. troops to bomb Houthi rebels in Yemen, which has raised significant concerns about how senior Trump administration officials are communicating and handling classified information. 

[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics, Defense Department, investigation, pete hegseth, Signalgate, yemen]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/3/25 1:35pm
A workers' compensation lawyer and bill expert told lawmakers there is a shortage of doctors in New Mexico who want to treat injured workers in part because they “are not paid commensurate with doctors who do private insurance or are paid in other ways to treat workers.” (Photo via Getty Images)Starting on June 20, a new state law may help workers in New Mexico who are hurt on the job have an easier time finding a lawyer to handle their workers’ compensation claims. State law previously capped the fees an attorney could collect for representing a worker making an accidental injury claim at $22,500. New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham on March 21 signed into law House Bill 66, which raised the cap on attorney’s fees in workers’ compensation cases to $30,000, and will raise it again to $32,000 in 2027, and then $34,000 in 2029. Ben Sherman, a workers’ compensation attorney and an expert witness on HB66, told the House Labor, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee on Jan. 28 that many workers don’t have attorneys and litigate their cases on their own. Sherman said there is a “huge shortage” of lawyers practicing workers’ compensation in New Mexico, especially in rural areas. “It can be almost impossible — if you’re not in Albuquerque or Santa Fe — to find an attorney to represent you if you’re injured on the job,” he said. The new law also allows insurance companies to advance a greater share of the injured worker’s legal costs for discovery, which is the process of gathering evidence in a case and could include testimony from the doctor who treated the injured worker. Previously, the law capped this advance at $3,000. Workers only get the money back if they win, Sherman said. HB66 increased the discovery cost advances to $3,500 and will raise it again to $4,000 in 2027, and then $4,500 in 2029. Workers’ Compensation Administration rules allow doctors and other health care providers to charge up to $400 for the first hour of being deposed; up to $360 per hour for the second and subsequent hours; up to $200 per hour for the first hour of preparing to be deposed and up to $120 per hour for the second hour of preparation and subsequent hours. Sherman told the committee there is a shortage of doctors in New Mexico who want to treat injured workers in part because they “are not paid commensurate with doctors who do private insurance or are paid in other ways to treat workers.” He said some pending rules from the WCA would increase how much doctors can charge for their time preparing for and participating in depositions. Stephanie Welch, workers’ rights director with the New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty, told the committee that her organization supported the bill because workers’ compensation offers a vital safety net that protects workers from the economic hardships created by medical bills and lost wages after they experience a workplace injury. Welch said many workers who suffer workplace injuries, and who paid into the workers’ compensation system, never obtain the benefits in part because of the lack of incentive for private attorneys to take their cases. “This bill helps level the playing field between workers and employers, and offsets some of the advantage that employers often have because they have more financial resources,” Welch said. “This bill is good for New Mexico’s workers and ensures a more equitable workers compensation system.” Lawmakers in 2023 asked the state Workers’ Compensation Administration to create a task force to study attorney’s fee caps. Rep. Pamelya Herndon (D-Albuquerque) sponsored HB66 and the 2023 memorial that created the task force. Source NM left a voicemail for Herndon on Thursday seeking comment on the bill’s enactment but had not heard back as of publication time. Sherman, a member of the New Mexico Trial Lawyers Association and of the task force, told the committee that lawmakers last set the attorney fee cap at $22,500 in 2013. He said if the cap had followed inflation, it would be $32,750 today. The new law also directs the Advisory Council on Workers’ Compensation and Occupational Disease Disablement to review the caps and make recommendations to the Legislature in 2029. GET THE MORNING HEADLINES. SUBSCRIBE

[Category: Economy, Gov & Politics, Health, labor, workers compensation, workplace accidents, workplace injury]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/3/25 12:43pm
This story was updated at 1:47 p.m. EDT. WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Education demanded in a letter to state education leaders on Thursday that they certify all K-12 schools in their states are complying with an earlier Dear Colleague letter banning diversity, equity and inclusion practices if they want to keep receiving federal financial assistance. The department’s sweeping order gives K-12 state education agencies 10 days to collect the certifications of compliance from local school governing bodies, and then sign them and return them to the federal department. The new demand stems from a February letter threatening to rescind federal funds for schools that use DEI, or race-conscious practices, in admissions, programming, training, hiring, scholarships and other aspects of student life. Craig Trainor, the department’s acting assistant secretary for civil rights, said “federal financial assistance is a privilege, not a right,” in a statement Thursday. “When state education commissioners accept federal funds, they agree to abide by federal antidiscrimination requirements,” Trainor said. He added that “unfortunately, we have seen too many schools flout or outright violate these obligations, including by using (diversity, equity and inclusion) programs to discriminate against one group of Americans to favor another based on identity characteristics in clear violation of Title VI.” He did not cite examples in the statement. Trainor said the department “is taking an important step toward ensuring that states understand — and comply with — their existing obligations under civil rights laws and Students v. Harvard.” In the February letter, Trainor offered a wide-ranging interpretation of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2023 involving Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. The nation’s highest court struck down the use of affirmative action in college admissions. Trainor wrote that though the ruling “addressed admissions decisions, the Supreme Court’s holding applies more broadly.” The four-page letter raised a slew of questions for schools — from pre-K through college — over what exactly falls within the requirements.  The department later released a Frequently Asked Questions document on the letter in an attempt to provide more guidance. In the document, the department noted that it’s prohibited from “exercising control over the content of school curricula” and “nothing in Title VI, its implementing regulations, or the Dear Colleague Letter requires or authorizes a school to restrict any rights otherwise protected by the First Amendment.” The agency also clarified that “programs focused on interests in particular cultures, heritages, and areas of the world” are allowed as long as “they are open to all students regardless of race.” Meanwhile, legal challenges are already underway against the Dear Colleague letter, including one spearheaded by the American Federation of Teachers and another from the National Education Association. 

[Category: Dear Colleague, DEI, diversity, U.S. Department of Education]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/3/25 9:02am
Frank Bisignano, Social Security commissioner nominee, at his Senate Finance Committee confirmation hearing on March 25, 2025. (Senate webcast)WASHINGTON — A Senate panel voted Wednesday to send Frank Bisignano’s nomination as Social Security commissioner to the floor, despite allegations from Democrats that he was dishonest in his testimony before the committee about his relationship with Elon Musk’s DOGE cost-cutting operation. The 14-13 party-line vote took place one day later than originally scheduled in an ornate room just steps from the Senate floor, instead of the committee hearing room. Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, said Tuesday morning that he supported Bisignano’s commitment to improve customer service and reduce improper payments. Crapo also committed to looking into an anonymous whistleblower letter that was sent to the committee’s Democrats, though he declined to delay the panel’s vote until after that process concluded. “Even though the timing of the anonymous letter suggests a political effort to delay the committee vote on this nominee, my staff have told Sen. Wyden’s staff — and we have discussed this just now — we are open to meeting with the author of the letter and keeping the individual anonymous,” Crapo said. “However, any information provided by the individual must be thoroughly vetted, including allowing the nominee the opportunity to respond.” Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden, ranking member on the panel, urged Crapo to delay the vote until after a committee investigation, alleging Bisignano was untruthful during his testimony.   “This nominee lied multiple times to every member of this committee, including the bipartisan Finance staff and the nominee’s actions and communications with DOGE remain very much at the heart of my objection here,” Wyden said. “My office received an account from a whistleblower about the ways the nominee was deeply involved in and aware of DOGE’s activities at the agency.” Wyden said that Bisignano, though not confirmed and with no official role yet at the agency, intervened at the Social Security Administration to ensure that staff from U.S. DOGE Services had “immediate access to Social Security systems.” DOGE, or Department of Government Efficiency, is a temporary Trump administration entity aimed at slashing the federal workforce and spending. Wyden also argued that Bisignano’s history in corporate America wasn’t a good fit for running the Social Security Administration, saying he “has made a career of swooping in, firing workers, selling off pieces of the company and merging with a competitor.” “These practices may be good for shareholders, but they hurt American families,” Wyden said. “So we, Senate Democrats, are not going to stand by idly while Trump’s cronies take a sledgehammer to Social Security and deprive seniors of their earned benefits under the false manner of fighting fraud.” Bisignano hearing Bisignano, of New Jersey, testified before the committee for nearly three hours in late March, fielding questions on several issues, including overpayments and customer service. He pledged to reduce the 1% overpayment rate significantly and said he could bring down the average wait time for customer service phone calls from about 20 minutes to less than one minute. “If you look at the Social Security website, and you look at the statistics, taking 20-plus minutes to answer the phone is not really acceptable,” Bisignano said during his confirmation hearing. “And that’s the reason why only 46% of the phone calls get answered, because people get discouraged and hang up.” Bisignano promised senators he would ensure Americans’ personal information would be kept secure. If confirmed by the full Senate, Bisignano testified he would “ensure that every beneficiary receives their payments on time, that disability claims are processed in the manner they should be.” “So my first actions are going to be to get organized around delivering the services,” Bisignano said. “And I’ve only been given one order, which is to run the agency in the right fashion.” He also rejected the possibility of privatizing Social Security. “I’ve never thought about privatizing. It’s not a word that anybody’s ever talked to me about,” Bisignano said. “And I don’t see this institution as anything other than a government agency that gets run to the benefit of the American public.” Bisignano works as chairman of the board and chief executive officer at Fiserv, Inc., which “enables money movement for thousands of financial institutions and millions of people and businesses,” according to its website. The company is based in Wisconsin. He previously worked as co-chief operating officer and chief executive officer of Mortgage Banking at JPMorgan Chase Co.

[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics, democrats, DOGE, Elon Musk, Frank Bisignano, social security, U.S. Senate]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/2/25 4:46pm
Only 34.8% of people in New Mexico with private insurance were able to get mental health care in 2021, along with about half of people on Medicaid, according to a review of data collected by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (Stock illustration by stellalevi via Getty Images)New Mexico’s health care and safety net agency on Wednesday announced that the federal government had selected it along with seven other state agencies to take part in a “national learning collaborative” to share the best ways to do community-led behavioral health care. The New Mexico Health Care Authority said in a news release the collaborative is “designed to improve mental health services, reduce disparities and strengthen access to behavioral health across communities.” Lessons learned from the initiative by New Mexico officials will “help promote and support community engagement, identify and address barriers preventing meaningful participation.” State lawmakers put a focus on behavioral health treatment during the first half of New Mexico’s legislative session that ended March 22, and Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham signed two pieces of legislation into law that will create a “behavioral health executive committee” to coordinate treatment statewide by assessing local needs and make it easier for providers to pay for treatment using Medicaid. Under the new law, the HCA is responsible for administering the funding that will pay for behavioral health programs. Source NM has a pending inquiry to the HCA if the new collaborative will connect with the agency’s responsibilities under the new law.  The collaborative is being organized by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the federal agency devoted to addressing addiction and mental health issues which oversees the 988 Lifeline and conducts the annual National Survey on Drug Use and Health. Only 34.8% of people in New Mexico with private insurance were able to get mental health care in 2021, along with about half of people on Medicaid, according to a review of data collected by SAMHSA. SAMHSA is among the federal agencies that is facing mass layoffs and cutting grants to states as part of the Trump administration’s “realigning” of the federal Department of Health and Human Services. Nick Boukas, director of Health Care Authority’s Behavioral Health Services Division, said in the news release that improving behavioral health systems starts with listening to communities. “By engaging our staff in opportunities like this, we create solutions that are not only effective but rooted in the realities and needs of the people we serve,” Boukas said in a statement. GET THE MORNING HEADLINES. SUBSCRIBE

[Category: Gov & Politics, Health, behavioral health, mental health]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/2/25 4:41pm
A NOAA NO-XP radar antenna prior to operations in VORTEX 2 in Norman, Oklahoma, on Oct. 5, 2010.  (Photo credit NOAA)Democrats on the U.S. House Natural Resources Committee and a panel of experts on Wednesday blasted the Trump administration’s reduction to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s budget and workforce, citing consequences for everyday weather data, national security and affected industries. Virtually every American interacts with NOAA’s weather data, which supplies forecasting services across the country. The agency’s climate and oceanic research supports the U.S. Navy’s operations and even the commercial fishing industry – described during the forum as having “a love-hate relationship” with the agency – depends on NOAA to open and close fisheries, the lawmakers and experts said. But those missions were imperiled in February by the firings of 7% of NOAA’s staff of scientists and others overseeing federal research and monitoring of weather and oceans, the group of Democrats said. “These critical functions are being dismantled by the sweeping, indiscriminate layoffs of nonpartisan public servants and facility closures,” U.S. Rep. Seth Magaziner, a Rhode Island Democrat who led the forum, said. The reductions in force at NOAA, which houses agencies including the National Weather Service, National Ocean Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service and the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, were part of across-the-board cuts to the federal workforce sought by President Donald Trump and billionaire White House adviser Elon Musk. The group of Democrats, who met without involvement of the committee’s Republican majority, said the cuts would hurt a wide range of Americans who depend on the agency’s data collection and rulemaking. Data collection and dissemination One of NOAA’s core missions is collecting and publishing weather data across the country used in forecasting apps and other common sources of weather information. “There is no weather forecast that’s produced in this country that isn’t dependent on NOAA, none” Mary Glackin, a former deputy under secretary for operations at the agency under presidents of both parties, said. The availability of federal data made possible the creation of companies like Accuweather, which started by collecting data in a garage, Glackin said. U.S. Navy Rear Admiral Jon White told the panel NOAA’s extensive forecasting data was also critical to naval operations, saying reductions in that data would hurt the military’s readiness, both shipping out of domestic stations and in potential conflict zones. “Hurricane forecasting and typhoon forecasting rely on the data from NOAA, whether it’s satellite data,” White said. “Reductions in that data and that information provide critical threats to our military infrastructure. Ships that (start) out of Norfolk and San Diego rely on that information about upcoming storms, especially hurricanes on the East Coast. … It’s not just billions of dollars of ship damage: It’s lives that are at stake.” Industry needs NOAA Magaziner was the one who called the commercial fishing industry’s connection with NOAA “a love-hate relationship,” but he and witnesses noted that the agency oversees the most basic functions the industry needs to operate. Sarah Schumann, a fisherman with operations in Rhode Island and Alaska, criticized President Joe Biden’s administration for allying too strongly with offshore wind developers, but said the new administration’s actions were also detrimental to the industry. “These cuts will bog down the agency’s ability to serve the public for fishermen,” Schumann said. “Because of climate change, we desperately need faster, more nimble and more collaborative data collection and decision-making, and there is a very slim chance we’re going to get that with this.” Trump’s slowdown of regulations – requiring federal agencies to withdraw 10 regulations for every one new regulation put into place – has also hampered commercial fishing operations. Opening and closing fisheries for a season are done through NOAA rulemaking, environmental attorney Lizzie Lewis told the panel. Bluefin tuna fisheries were not closed on time and were overfished by 125% and fisheries in New England are unlikely to open on time, she said. Efficiency? The cuts, part of Musk’s initiative to make government more efficient, are not having their intended effect in streamlining government, Magaziner and others on the panel, including New Mexico’s Melanie Stansbury, said. “The assertion that mass layoffs will somehow improve efficiency is not only misleading, it is outright dangerous,” Magaziner said. “Real people, real jobs and real lives are on the line. Without NOAA’s real-time data,  emergency responders are left without the critical information they need to respond to impending disasters like wildfires, hurricanes, floods and severe storms putting millions at risk.” The layoffs also decimated morale at the agency and made attracting qualified young people to its public service mission more difficult, Lewis told the panel. “We are losing an entire generation of scientists and leaders who can help this country,” Lewis said. “We can keep its people safe and can grow its economy. And that to me is the devastating human cost.”

[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics, forecast, NOAA, Trump, weather]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/2/25 4:38pm
The U.S. Capitol. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Republicans released an updated budget resolution Wednesday that sets a May 9 deadline for more than a dozen committees to approve their slice of the massive package that will permanently extend the GOP tax cuts and make significant reductions in spending. The 70-page budget resolution, however, includes different guidelines for the House and Senate committees, allowing GOP leaders to sidestep their differences on policy for the moment, but not the long haul. The budget resolution also sets the stage for the House to raise the debt limit by $4 trillion and the Senate to lift it by not more than $5 trillion in the reconciliation package. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., wrote in a statement that final approval of the budget resolution would “unlock the ability for the appropriate Senate committees to fully fund our border needs for four years, provide much-needed financial relief to our military at a time of great danger, make the 2017 tax cuts permanent to energize the economy, and do what has been promised for decades: go through every line item of the budget to cut wasteful and unnecessary spending — hopefully by the trillions.” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., released a statement of his own, saying the “parliamentarian has reviewed the Budget Committee’s substitute amendment and deemed it appropriate for consideration under the Budget Act.” “It is now time for the Senate to move forward with this budget resolution in order to further advance our shared Republican agenda in Congress,” Thune wrote. The Senate parliamentarian is the nonpartisan scorekeeper who ensures everything included in a reconciliation bill meets the chamber’s strict rules. Here comes the vote-a-rama The complicated reconciliation process will allow the GOP to approve its core policy goals without needing support from Democrats in the Senate, where 60 votes are usually needed to advance legislation. Reconciliation does, however, come with several hoops to jump through. One of those hurdles will come later this week when the Senate endures the dreaded vote-a-rama; a marathon amendment voting session that typically lasts overnight. After that, senators will be able to send the budget resolution to the House for final approval. The tax-and-spending blueprint released Wednesday will send a dozen House committees instructions on how to draft their pieces of the package, while 10 Senate committees will write bills. Typically, the committee instructions, which just include a budget target, are similar, if not identical, for the House and Senate. But differences of opinion between Republican leaders about how much to cut federal spending, as well as other disagreements, led to differing instructions. The House has a significantly higher threshold for cutting government spending than the Senate. The Agriculture Committee needs to slice at least $230 billion; Education and Workforce must reduce spending by a minimum of $330 billion; Energy and Commerce needs to cut no less than $880 billion; Financial Services must find at least $1 billion in savings; Natural Resources has a minimum of $1 billion; Oversight and Government Reform has a floor of $50 billion; and the Transportation Committee needs to reduce deficits by $10 billion or more. House committees that can increase the federal deficit include the Armed Services Committee with a cap of $100 billion in new spending, Homeland Security with a $90 billion ceiling for new funding for programs it oversees, Judiciary with a maximum of $110 billion and Ways and Means, which can increase deficits up to $4.5 trillion for tax cuts. Spending cuts in Senate Senators set a much lower bar for themselves in terms of spending cuts, though the way the reconciliation instructions are written, as a floor and not a ceiling, will give leeway for those committees to cut much more. Four Senate committees — Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry; Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs; Energy and Natural Resources; and Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, or HELP — must each find at least $1 billion in spending cuts over the 10-year budget window. Senate committees also got instructions for increasing the deficit, which will allow them to spend up to the dollar amount outlined in the budget resolution. Those committees include Armed Services at $150 billion; Commerce, Science and Transportation with $20 billion; Environment and Public Works at $1 billion; Finance with $1.5 trillion in new deficits, likely for tax cuts; Homeland Security at $175 billion and Judiciary with $175 billion. Once the House and Senate both vote to adopt the same budget resolution, the committees can formally begin drafting and marking up their bills. Those bills, according to the instructions, must be sent to the Budget committees before May 9. That panel will then bundle all of the various pieces together into one reconciliation package and send it to the floor. The House and Senate must vote to approve the same reconciliation package before it can go to President Donald Trump for his signature and become law. Republicans have a paper-thin majority in the House and will need to ensure that lawmakers from across the party support all of the elements going into the reconciliation package. Even a few defectors in that chamber could block the bill from moving forward. Senate GOP leaders have a bit more wiggle room, but cannot lose more than three of their members and pass a reconciliation bill. 

[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics, budget, Republicans]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/2/25 4:03pm
Western New Mexico University campus pictured in Silver City, New Mexico. (Photo courtesy Western New Mexico University)Western New Mexico University’s new board of regents will meet for the first time next week, taking the first steps in getting the university “back on track” following claims of misuse of funds and violation of fiduciary responsibilities. The state Senate confirmed four regents for the Silver City university during the recent 60-day session, including former state Sen. Steven Neville, attorney John Wertheim, WNMU alumnus J. Dean Reed and student regent Keana Huerta. The fifth regent seat remains empty. A spokesperson for Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham told Source NM that they did not have any updates about when the governor might announce a fifth regent nomination. The terms of two members of the previous board of regents expired at the end of December and the other three regents submitted their resignations in January, about a year after the New Mexico Office of the State Auditor reported finding university leadership had misused hundreds of thousands of public funds on lavish trips and other spending.  The board voted in December to terminate former university President Joseph Shepard’s contract and then authorized a $1.9 million severance package. Attorney General Raúl Torrez filed a civil suit against Shepard and the board in January, alleging they had violated fiduciary duties, New Mexico’s anti-donation clause, the Open Meetings Act and laws pertaining to unjust enrichment, not fulfilling contractual obligations and acting on an unenforceable contract. Shepard filed a motion in March to dismiss the case against him, which Torrez opposes. A hearing on the motion is scheduled for June 16, according to court records. Huerta told Source NM in a statement that the new board intends to keep the university’s students at the forefront of “our discussions and work diligently to ensure that any issues are addressed appropriately.” Keana Huerta, a Western New Mexico University student, joins the schools board of regents. (Photo courtesy Keana Huerta) “We as the board are committed to doing the right thing in this situation,” Huerta told Source in a written statement. “Ensuring transparency and accountability while upholding the integrity of the institution are our priorities.” Huerta is originally from the Silver City area and a third-year student at WNMU, which she said makes her uniquely qualified to “understand the needs and challenges of our local students, faculty, and staff,” she said. Neville, a former state senator who represented Senate District 2 in San Juan County, told Source he does not want to make a judgement on the ongoing investigation and litigation until he has more facts and that he will leave the legal action to the attorney general and the state auditor.  Steven Neville, a former state senator representing parts of San Juan County, joins the Western New Mexico University board of regents. (Photo courtesy Steven Neville) “My job is to try to get us a new president, try to get things back on track, make sure that the books are balanced and go from there,” he said, noting that ensuring students’ experiences remain positive and quality education is provided are a priority. “Western’s a very good university so we want to make sure that that focus continues.” Neville added that he has spoken to his fellow regents and said they are all working on gaining more knowledge of the university’s situation and are thinking along similar lines in regard to their next steps. Legislators introduced four pieces of legislation addressing the role of university regents and how they are chosen during the recent 60-day session, but only one bill passed and awaits the governor’s signature. Senate Bill 19 would require new regents to complete 10 hours of training within six months of being appointed.  House Joint Resolution 12, supported by the attorney general, died in a Senate committee, and proposed asking voters to approve a constitutional amendment codifying regents’ fiduciary duties, moving proceedings to remove regents from the state Supreme Court to district courts and allow the attorney general or majority of the board to initiate removal of a regent. Senate Joint Resolution 7 also died in a Senate committee. The resolution proposed an amendment to the state Constitution requiring the governor to select regents from a vetted list provided by a nominating committee.  Senate Bill 266 would have required regents to submit certain employment contracts to the State Board of Finance for approval, adding a level of oversight to boards of regents. GET THE MORNING HEADLINES. SUBSCRIBE

[Category: Education, Gov & Politics, 2025 New Mexico Legislature, Attorney General Raúl Torrez, board of regents, fiduciary duties, financial malfeasance, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, New Mexico Office of the State Auditor, Silver City, Steven Neville, western new mexico university]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/2/25 3:54pm
Opponents of President Donald Trump’s executive order indefinitely halting refugee resettlement in the U.S. rally on the steps of the federal courthouse in Seattle on Feb. 25, 2025, after a judge issued a ruling blocking the president’s order. (Photo by Jake Goldstein-Street/Washington State Standard)WASHINGTON — Amid dozens of injunctions placed against the Trump administration, Republicans on the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary discussed a bill Wednesday to curb the nationwide effects of those orders from federal judges. The bill, sponsored by GOP Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, who leads the committee, would prohibit district court judges from issuing injunctions that have nationwide effects. “We all have to agree to give up the universal injunction as a weapon against policies we disagree with,” Grassley said. “The damage it causes to the judicial system and to our democracy is too great.” As of Friday, 39 judges who were appointed across “five different presidents and sitting in 11 different district courts across seven circuits” have ruled against the Trump administration, said one of the witnesses, Stephen Vladeck of Georgetown University Law Center. President Donald Trump and Republican allies in Congress have complained that such injunctions give judges in single districts too much power to stymie the administration’s agenda. Trump has also taken to social media to attack the judges, especially one who temporarily barred use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to quickly deport Venezuelan nationals. Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota said Tuesday that Republicans are considering Grassley’s bill, but did not commit to bringing it to the floor for a vote. House Republicans have introduced a similar bill. Senate Democrats criticized the hearing and argued that the reason there are so many injunctions against the president’s executive orders is because they are unconstitutional. The top Democrat on the committee, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, pointed to the several nationwide injunctions against Trump’s executive order to end the constitutional right to birthright citizenship, which the administration has asked the U.S. Supreme Court in an emergency request to reverse. Republicans see abuse Republicans characterized the flurry of injunctions against administration actions as judicial activism. Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri said the injunctions were unprecedented. Hawley called the rulings from district courts a “pattern of abuse.” He added that it’s not only being done with nationwide injunctions, but with temporary restraining orders. Florida Sen. Ashley Moody also took issue with temporary restraining orders, which generally are not appealable. “There is keen interest in making sure our judiciary system remains impartial and that it is making rulings only in terms of relief to the parties before it and that we are encouraging expeditious resolution of these extraordinary important matters,” Moody said. Criticism sparks threats, Dems say Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island raised concerns about the increased threats of violence aimed at judges. Whitehouse said the reaction from Republicans about preliminary injunctions against the Trump administration puts those judges and their families at risk. “The discomfort to fury…about decisions against the Trump administration may actually have a lot to do with the unprecedented lawlessness and lawbreaking of the Trump administration rather than a weird cabal of judges trying to intrude,” Whitehouse said. Klobuchar said that Trump has attacked judges on social media and has posted images of himself wearing a crown. “We do not live in a kingdom,” she said. “It is important that we not lose sight of the underlying cause of these injunctions. It is not that these judges are ‘crooked’ or ‘lunatics’ or ‘evil.’ Those are words used by the president, it is because the administration is violating the constitution.    Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts on March 18 issued a rare statement, pushing back against Trump’s suggestion that a judge who issued an injunction against an administration order face impeachment. “For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Roberts said. “The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.” Jennifer Shutt contributed to this story. 

[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics, Congress, injunctions, Republicans, Trump]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/2/25 3:06pm
U.S. President Donald Trump holds up a chart while speaking during a “Make America Wealthy Again” trade announcement event in the Rose Garden at the White House on April 2, 2025 in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)This story was updated at 6:16 p.m. EDT. WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump rolled out sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs Wednesday on trading partners and allies across the globe. Declaring that foreign trade practices have created a “national emergency,” the president unveiled a baseline 10% levy on all international imports, plus what he described as additional “kind” and “discounted” tariff rates that will increase but not match the rates other countries apply to American imports. The levies will hit U.S. industries from agriculture to manufacturing to fashion. The 10% universal tariffs become effective April 5, with higher levies set for April 9, according to Trump’s executive order. Trump’s remarks Wednesday about the start dates varied from the order’s language. Trump is the first president to enact tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act — something he already did in March when slapping levies on China, Canada and Mexico over the production and smuggling of illicit fentanyl. According to a table distributed at Trump’s speech, U.S. tariffs will reach 34% on imports from China, 46% on products from Vietnam and 20% on European Union imports, among other increases. Countries that levy a 10% tax on American goods — including Brazil and the United Kingdom — will only see a 10% match. The increased levies come as 25% tariffs on foreign cars kick in at midnight. It’s unclear whether the tariffs will stack.   Business owners who purchase goods from outside the U.S. will have to pay the increased duty rates to bring the products over the border, unless Trump carves out exceptions for certain industries. The president did not mention carve-outs in his remarks. Trump introduced the taxes on imports with fanfare Wednesday in the White House Rose Garden, where he said, “This is Liberation Day.” “April 2, 2025, will forever be remembered as the day American industry was reborn,” Trump said. “For decades, our country has been looted, pillaged, raped and plundered by nations near and far, both friend and foe alike,” Trump said. Republican lawmakers, including House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana and Georgia U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, attended the event alongside several of Trump’s Cabinet members and representatives from the United Auto Workers. Not all Republicans have signaled support for tariffs. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said at an event in his home state of South Dakota in August 2024 that Trump’s trade policy is a “recipe for increased inflation.” The White House has circulated figures claiming the U.S. will raise up to $600 billion in revenue per year as a result of the tariffs. The figure was met with skepticism by economists because the amount of imports will likely change under higher levies. The U.S. is the largest importer of goods in the world, according to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. The country’s top suppliers in 2022 included China, Mexico, Canada, Japan and Germany. Economists: Americans will pay Since Trump began campaigning on tariffs, economists have warned that increased costs for businesses will be passed onto consumers. Rising prices under Trump’s “reciprocal” tariff scenario are likely to cost an extra $2,400 to $3,400 per family, according to the Yale Budget Lab, with most of the financial burden falling on the lowest-income households. An analysis from the Peterson Institute on International Economics estimated the typical American household would lose over $1,200, just from the 25% tariffs already imposed on China, Canada and Mexico. Several small business owners told States Newsroom Tuesday they’re worried about increasing production costs and whether higher prices will chase away customer demand. Erica York, of the center-right Tax Foundation that advocates for lower taxes, said in an interview with States Newsroom Tuesday that the levies will be “the largest peacetime tax increase we’ve seen in history.” State officials worry over impact Democratic state officials sounded the alarm Wednesday over losses for key industries that drive their local economies. New Mexico State Treasurer Laura Montoya said her state’s energy and agriculture sectors would be victims in a trade war. “New Mexico is a key player in this conversation, because the non-negotiable reality is that New Mexico is, like the United States as a whole, dependent on trade with our international partners particularly Mexico,” Montoya said on a virtual press briefing hosted by the state economic advocacy group Americans for Responsible Growth. Montoya said oil and gas production accounts for 35% of the state’s budget and that the industry relies on machinery imported from Mexico. Additionally, New Mexico, a largely rural state, relies heavily on agricultural trade. It processes a third of the cattle coming across the southwest border, and Montoya said farmers and ranchers will “face blows as tariffs on cattle and produce will result in slow food production.” Washington state, a top U.S. agricultural exporter, sources 90% of its fertilizer from Canada. Treasurer Mike Pellicciotti said the state would be “completely squeezed” by “reckless economic decisions.” “He is crushing the free exchange of goods, and making it much more difficult and much more burdensome on working families. So of course, he needs to call it ‘Liberation Day,’ because he knows hes doing the complete opposite, and he is trying to frame it in a way that is completely the opposite of what is being accomplished today,” Pellicciotti said. Dems predict consumer stress Democrats on Capitol Hill seized on Trump’s new trade policy as a way to push their message that the president is abandoning middle and working class households. Sen. Angela Alsobrooks of Maryland said the White House is “tone-deaf” in dubbing the tariff announcement as “Liberation Day.” Trump has said in media interviews, “‘You know, theres going to be a little pain, some minor pain and disruption.’ But the people that I represent dont regard increasing costs of groceries, increasing costs of owning a home, increasing costs of owning an automobile, as a minor disruption,” Alsobrooks said. In back-to-back Democratic press conferences Wednesday, Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia slammed Trump’s use of emergency powers in March to justify a 10% duty on Canadian energy and 25% on all other imports. Kaine warned about the effect on his state’s sizable shipbuilding industry. Approximately 35% of steel and aluminum used to build U.S. ships and submarines comes from Canada, he said. Senators were poised to force a vote Wednesday evening on a bill, sponsored by Kaine, that would undo Trump’s tariffs on Canadian imports triggered by an emergency declaration targeting illicit fentanyl coming over the northern border. Trump’s action under the International Emergency Economics Power Act marked the first time a president ever used the law to impose tariffs. Kaine pointed to a report Wednesday in Canadian news outlet The Globe and Mail that found the White House grossly overstated the amount of fentanyl smuggled through the northern border. “Canada stood with us on 9/11, Canada has stood side-by-side with U.S. troops in every war we have been in. They have fought with our troops. Theyve bled with our troops. Theyve died with our troops in every war since the war of 1812, and yet were going to treat them like an enemy,” Kaine said. Kaine’s bill, co-signed by eight Democratic and independent senators, drew one Republican co-sponsor, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky. The bill has gained statements of support from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and former Vice President Mike Pence’s advocacy group Advancing American Freedom, among numerous organizations across the political spectrum. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries criticized Trump’s anticipated tariff announcement Wednesday morning at his weekly press conference. “We were told that grocery costs were going to go down on day one of the Trump presidency. Costs aren’t going down in America. They’re going up, and the Trump tariffs are going to make things more costly,” Jeffries, of New York, said.

[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics, tariffs, Trump]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/2/25 3:02pm
From left, U.S. Reps. Frederica Wilson of Florida and Gwen Moore of Wisconsin, U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon and U.S. Rep. Mark Takano of California, at a press conference outside the U.S. Department of Education organized by House Democrats. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)WASHINGTON — A press conference by a dozen U.S. House Democrats outside the U.S. Department of Education took an unusual turn on Wednesday when the subject of their criticism — Education Secretary Linda McMahon —  unexpectedly joined them. The Democrats had met with the Trump administration appointee a few minutes earlier to press her about the sweeping shifts at the U.S. Department of Education, where she and President Donald Trump are seeking to dismantle the agency.  The lawmakers told reporters that at the scheduled meeting, they questioned McMahon on how the department could carry out its primary responsibilities when the agency continues to see dramatic changes. That includes mass layoffs that hit core units and an executive order from Trump calling on the secretary to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure” of the department to the maximum extent she legally can. Only Congress, which established the 45-year-old department, has the power to abolish it. The Democrats said they were grateful that McMahon met with them but dissatisfied with and even alarmed by the secretary’s responses, especially on a timeline for closing the agency. “It’s very apparent that the secretary is treating this as a corporate restructuring, and we want to be clear that the education of our children is not a corporate enterprise — it is how we move this country forward,” Rep. Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico said. “It’s very clear that the (reduction in force), the firing of probationary staff, the so-called restructuring that’s happening — when we asked for a plan multiple times in this meeting, we were told there is not a plan yet,” she added. The secretary arrives, and leaves As the Democrats spoke, McMahon emerged from the building, accompanied by aides, and joined them at their lectern emblazoned with a U.S. House of Representatives logo. She reiterated that “funding from the United States government will continue through the programs that have already been established” and said she looked forward to continuing to work with members of Congress on both sides of the aisle.  After her remarks, Rep. Mark Takano pressed McMahon on when she would close the department. “Well, we’ve had our discussions already, so thank you all very, very much for coming,” McMahon replied, proceeding to walk back into the building. “You see, she’s not answering the question when she’s going to shut down the department,” Takano, of California, said as the secretary walked away. Barred from building Wednesday’s meeting came after Takano and other Democratic lawmakers were blocked from entering the building in February while trying to meet with Denise Carter, acting Education secretary at the time, over Trump’s plans to dismantle the agency. The California Democrat had led dozens of others in writing a letter to Carter and requesting a meeting over those efforts. A day after Trump signed the executive order surrounding the department, he announced that special education services would be transferred to the Department of Health and Human Services and that the Small Business Administration would be handling the student loan portfolio. The department has not taken any steps to move either — both of which would require acts of Congress and raise a slew of logistical questions. U.S. Rep. Mark Takano, a California Democrat, speaks at a press conference outside the U.S. Department of Education headquarters on Wednesday, April 2, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom) Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland said “the idea of dismembering the department and then parceling it out to other agencies and departments does not give us a lot of confidence or hope in what’s happening.” The lawmakers said McMahon repeatedly stressed during the meeting that she plans to abide by federal law and would look carefully at what she’s legally allowed to do before moving any functions of the department. Yet Rep. Greg Casar of Texas said he and the group “became more and more alarmed as the meeting went on,” noting that “current law won by so many Americans in this democracy, is that all kids deserve a decent education, that the money goes to your kid if they’re in need, the money goes to your kid no matter their race or their background or their neighborhood, and they want to change that.” The lawmakers who met with McMahon included: U.S. Reps. Terri Sewell of Alabama; Takano; Frederica Wilson of Florida; Raskin and Sarah Elfreth of Maryland; Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire; Stansbury; Casar, Julie Johnson and Veronica Escobar of Texas; Don Beyer of Virginia; and Gwen Moore of Wisconsin.

[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics, education, Linda McMahon, Melanie Stansbury, Trump, U.S. Department of Education]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/2/25 1:49pm
Demonstrators protest outside the KI Convention Center before the start of a town hall meeting with Elon Musk on March 30, 2025 in Green Bay, Wisconsin. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)WASHINGTON — Democrats and Republicans both claimed victory and the support of voters nationwide following closely watched elections on Tuesday in Wisconsin and two Florida congressional districts. Dane County Judge Susan Crawford securing a seat on Wisconsin’s highest court over a challenger backed by billionaire Elon Musk was broadly cheered by Democrats as a clear sign voters have rejected GOP policies just months after that party secured control of Congress and the White House. Republicans, meanwhile, pointed to their candidates’ wins in special elections in two Florida U.S. House seats as proof Americans back the party’s policy goals and leaders. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said during a floor speech Wednesday the Wisconsin Supreme Court results were a signal from the American people that they are not happy with how President Donald Trump and other Republicans are running the country. “Yesterday was a sign Democrats’ message is resonating,” Schumer said. “When Democrats shine a light on the fact that Republicans are taking vital programs away from the middle class simply to cut taxes for the ultrarich, the public doesn’t like it. When we shine a light on Republican attacks on Medicaid, on Social Security, on veterans’ health care, simply to cut taxes for the rich, Americans listen and they’re aghast of what they see. “That is one of the main reasons that the results in Wisconsin came in as resoundingly as they did.” Schumer didn’t mention Republicans winning two U.S. House special elections in Florida. Ticket splitting in Wisconsin Wisconsin voters have a history of ticket splitting, including during November’s presidential election, when the state favored Trump, but also voted to send Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin back to Washington. Trump won the state by less than 30,000 votes out of more than 3.3 million cast. Baldwin secured another six-year term by roughly the same margin. Crawford received 55% of the vote in this election, winning by about 238,000 votes out of nearly 2.4 million votes cast, according to data from The Associated Press. GOP Sen. Rick Scott of Florida told reporters Tuesday evening shortly after the results came in that he’s not reading too much into the narrower margin of victory for the two newly elected Republicans in his home state and he doesn’t believe it tells lawmakers anything about what might happen in the 2026 midterm elections. “Remember, they’re special elections. It’s hard, you know … when there’s a presidential race, everybody knows to vote, even a governor’s race,” Scott said inside the U.S. Capitol. “But when there’s a special election, it’s hard for people to go out and vote.” Former Florida Chief Financial Officer Jimmy Patronis defeated the Democratic candidate in the state’s 1st Congressional District after receiving 56.9% of the vote, according to the Board of Elections’ unofficial results. The GOP lawmaker who won that district in November did so with 66% of the vote. In the 6th Congressional District, former state Sen. Randy Fine secured election with 56.6% of the vote, a smaller margin of victory than the 66.5% the former Republican congressman who occupied the seat received in November. Trump focuses on Florida Trump hailed the GOP wins in Florida in a social media post, but didn’t mention Wisconsin, where special government employee and close political ally Musk campaigned late last month. “BOTH FLORIDA HOUSE SEATS HAVE BEEN WON, BIG, BY THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE,” Trump wrote. “THE TRUMP ENDORSEMENT, AS ALWAYS, PROVED FAR GREATER THAN THE DEMOCRATS FORCES OF EVIL. CONGRATULATIONS TO AMERICA!!!” DNC Chair Ken Martin wrote in a statement the Wisconsin Supreme Court election results show voters in the state “squarely rejected the influence of Elon Musk, Donald Trump, and billionaire special interests.” “Democrats are overperforming, winning races, and building momentum,” Martin wrote. “We’re working hard to continue the trend in the Virginia, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey elections this year and then — with the people on our side — to take back the House in 2026.” Martin, similar to Schumer, didn’t mention the Florida congressional district races won by GOP politicians. National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman Mike Marinella released a statement pointing to Florida as solid evidence the party is on the right track. “Florida’s resounding Republican victories send a clear message: Americans are fired up to elect leaders who will fight for President Trump’s agenda and reject the Democrats’ failed policies,” Marinella wrote. “While Democrats set their cash ablaze, House Republicans will keep hammering them for being out of touch — and we’ll crush them again in 2026.” Jeffries targets 60 districts U.S. House Democrats’ campaign arm, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, didn’t release any statements on the Florida election results. But House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said during a press conference Wednesday that the Democratic candidates in the Sunshine State “dramatically overperformed” how Trump did in those areas in November. “There are 60 House Republicans who hold districts right now that Donald Trump won by 15 points or less in November. Every single one of those Republicans should be concerned,” Jeffries said. “The American people have rejected their extreme brand and their do-nothing agenda and they’re going to be held accountable next November.”

[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics, Churck Schumer, democrats, Florida, Republicans, Susan Crawford, Trump, Wisconsin]

[*] [+] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/2/25 11:43am
Crews work to secure containment lines on the Mogote Hill Fire near Wagon Mound in mid-March. Wildfire potential will be above normal in most of the state this month, according to a new outlook. (Photo courtesy NM Forestry)National fire weather forecasters warn that most of New Mexico will face above-normal fire potential this month, and those conditions will worsen until at least until the monsoon season begins in July. The National Interagency Fire Center issued its April wildfire outlook Tuesday, presenting a series of maps showing New Mexico with snow pack far below normal, along with severe drought and above normal average temperatures expected throughout the summer.  Those factors combine to make the state, particularly the western two-thirds, at high risk of wildfires beginning in May, according to forecasters.  ‘It’s bad’: How drought, lack of snowpack and federal cuts could spell wildfire disaster in NM So far in New Mexico this year, 222 wildfires have started, affecting 31,675 acres. Humans caused the vast majority of those fires, according to the Southwest Coordination Center. The Mogote Hill Fire near Wagon Mound, which burned an estimated 15,000 acres, ranks as the biggest New Mexico fire so far this year.  Last week, New Mexico State Forestry released daily wildfire awareness tips, including how and when to safely burn debris.  The above-normal wildfire potential occurs amid federal cuts to the United States Forest Service, including probationary employees who often had wildfire suppression training. Proposed federal lease terminations also include two New Mexico wildfire dispatch centers covering one-third of the state, though U.S. Sen. Martin Heinrich’s office recently told Source New Mexico that he had received “assurances” that the dispatch centers would stay open.  A Heinrich spokesperson noted, however, that his office was still awaiting  official confirmation about the dispatch centers from the General Services Administration. The Heinrich spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday as to whether that official confirmation had yet arrived.  !function(){"use strict";window.addEventListener("message",(function(a){if(void 0!==a.data["datawrapper-height"]){var e=document.querySelectorAll("iframe");for(var t in a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var r,i=0;r=e[i];i++)if(r.contentWindow===a.source){var d=a.data["datawrapper-height"][t]+"px";r.style.height=d}}}))}();  

[Category: Environment & Climate Change, forecast, heinrich, Mogote Hill Fire, New Mexico, new mexico forestry, wildfire]

As of 4/4/25 9:24am. Last new 4/4/25 7:50am.

First feed in category: Source NM