NH Sen. Maggie Hassan blasts RFK Jr.'s false vaccine views in emotional speech: Watch
NH Sen. Maggie Hassan blasts RFK Jr.'s false vaccine views in emotional speech: Watch
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Doctors, scientists object to RFK Jr. nomination
Doctors and scientists gathered to object Robert Kennedy Jr.'s confirmation as health secretary, citing his anti-vaccine stance.
U.S. Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-New Hampshire, challenged Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on his false vaccine views in an emotional speech Thursday, bringing up her son's struggle with cerebral palsy.
Kennedy's bid to become President Donald Trump's health secretary has been controversial, in part because he has a history of opposition to vaccines.
On Thursday, he faced members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee in his second confirmation hearing to determine whether he is fit to be the head of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
What did Hassan say to RFK Jr. about her son?
Hassan's questioning of Kennedy got personal when she brought up her experience as a mother of a child with severe cerebral palsy.
'A day does not go by when I don't think about what did I do when I was pregnant with him that might have caused the hydrocephalus that has so impacted his life,' she said, fighting tears.
She criticized his belief in a link between autism and vaccines.
'That first autism study rocked my world. And like every mother, I worried about whether, in fact, the vaccine had done something to my son,' she said. 'Over time, the scientific community studied and studied and studied and found that it was wrong, and the journal retracted the study, because sometimes science is wrong. We make progress, we build on the work, and we become more successful. And when you continue to sow doubt about settled science, it makes it impossible for us to move forward.'
Often a more stoic senator, Hassan's emotional testimony Thursday made waves on social media.
What is cerebral palsy and hydrocephalus?
Cerebral palsy is a group of neurological conditions that affect body movement and muscle coordination.
It is caused by damage that occurs to the developing brain, usually before birth. Hassan said that her son's cerebral palsy was caused by hydrocephalus, which is a buildup of fluid in the brain that can cause brain injuries that lead to conditions such as cerebral palsy.
People with severe cerebral palsy sometimes need special equipment or lifelong care, according to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.
Will RFK Jr. be confirmed as Health Secretary?
Thursday's hearing was the second of two confirmation hearings for Kennedy. On Wednesday, he faced questioning from the Senate Finance Committee.
With widespread opposition from Democrats and potential objections from some Republicans, Kennedy is one of Trump's Cabinet nominees expected to face the most difficulty being confirmed.
More: Sens. Bernie Sanders and Peter Welch grills RFK Jr. on vaccines in confirmation hearings
However, it is unclear yet how all the senators will vote. Fifty-one senators would be needed to reject Kennedy's position.
It's also yet uncertain when the senators will hold the vote.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Big Tech's AI Takeover? Amazon, Google, and Microsoft Push for 10-Year Regulatory Freeze
Big Tech is making a big betand investors are watching. Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN), Google (NASDAQ:GOOG), Meta (NASDAQ:META), and Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT) are pushing for a 10-year nationwide ban that would block U.S. states from regulating artificial intelligence. The proposal, already tucked into the House version of Trump's budget bill, is being sold as a way to avoid a messy patchwork of state-level rules that could slow innovation and leave the U.S. trailing China. Their message: keep regulation federal, uniform, and minimalfor now. The lobbying effort is backed by INCOMPAS, a trade group representing tech heavyweights, which launched the AI Competition Center this year to drive home that point. Chip Pickering, INCOMPAS CEO, said the move is about safeguarding America's lead in AI. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 3 Warning Sign with AMZN. But not everyone's buying that narrative. Criticsincluding academics, policy analysts, and even some in Silicon Valleyargue this could be less about innovation and more about locking in dominance. MIT's Max Tegmark called it a power grab, while voices from the Vanderbilt Policy Accelerator warned that defanging state oversight now could make AI's societal risks harder to manage later. Even within the GOP, there's friction. Some Republicans like Thom Tillis see the merit in avoiding 50 conflicting rulebooks. Others, like Marjorie Taylor Greene and Josh Hawley, say tying states' hands for a decadewhen no one knows where AI is headedcould backfire hard. The Senate is now weighing how to fit this moratorium into a budget reconciliation bill, which bypasses the need for Democratic votes. Senator Ted Cruz has floated a workaround: cut broadband funding to states that refuse to comply. But the clock is ticking, and the political ground is far from firm. For investors, the outcome could reshape how U.S. AI leaders operateand whether they face a smooth runway or a patchwork of speed bumps. This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Iran, Israel trade fresh air attacks as Trump weighs US involvement
By Steve Holland, Parisa Hafezi and Alexander Cornwell WASHINGTON/DUBAI/JERUSALEM (Reuters) -Iran and Israel traded further air attacks on Thursday as President Donald Trump kept the world guessing about whether the United States would join Israel's bombardment of Iranian nuclear and missile facilities. A week of Israeli air and missile strikes against its major rival has wiped out the top echelon of Iran's military command, damaged its nuclear capabilities and killed hundreds of people, while Iranian retaliatory strikes have killed two dozen civilians in Israel. The worst-ever conflict between the two regional powers has raised fears that it will draw in world powers and deliver another blow to the Middle East, where the spillover effects of the Gaza war have undermined stability. Speaking to reporters outside the White House on Wednesday, Trump declined to say if he had made any decision on whether to join Israel's air campaign. "I may do it. I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do," he said. Trump in later remarks said Iranian officials wanted to come to Washington for a meeting. "We may do that" he said, adding "it's a little late" for such talks. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei rebuked Trump's earlier call for Iran to surrender in a recorded speech played on television, his first appearance since Friday. "Any U.S. military intervention will undoubtedly be accompanied by irreparable damage," he said. "The Iranian nation will not surrender." Iran denies it is seeking nuclear weapons and says its program is for peaceful purposes only. The International Atomic Energy Agency said last week Tehran was in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for the first time in 20 years. The foreign ministers of Germany, France and Britain plan to hold nuclear talks with their Iranian counterpart on Friday in Geneva to urge Iran to return to the negotiating table, a German diplomatic source told Reuters. But while diplomatic efforts continue, some residents of Tehran, a city of 10 million people, on Wednesday jammed highways out of the city. Arezou, a 31-year-old Tehran resident, told Reuters by phone that she had made it to the nearby resort town of Lavasan. "My friend's house in Tehran was attacked and her brother was injured. They are civilians," she said. "Why are we paying the price for the regime's decision to pursue a nuclear programme?' A source familiar with internal discussions said Trump and his team were considering options that included joining Israel in strikes against Iranian nuclear installations. But the prospect of a U.S. strike against Iran has exposed divisions in the coalition of supporters that brought Trump to power, with some of his base urging him not to get the country involved in a new Middle East war. Senior U.S. Senate Democrats urged Trump to prioritise diplomacy and seek a binding agreement to prevent Iran from attaining nuclear weapons, while expressing concern about his administration's approach. "We are alarmed by the Trump administration's failure to provide answers to fundamental questions. By law, the president must consult Congress and seek authorization if he is considering taking the country to war," they said in a statement. "He owes Congress and the American people a strategy for U.S. engagement in the region." DRONE ATTACKS On Thursday morning, a missile warning was issued by Israel's military and explosions were heard over Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. The Israeli military said several civilian areas, including a hospital, were hit by Iranian missile strikes. In Iran, the ISNA news agency reported that an area near the heavy water facility of the Khondab nuclear facility was targeted by Israel. Earlier, air defences were activated in Tehran, intercepting drones on the outskirts of the capital, the semi-official SNN news agency reported. Iranian news agencies also reported it had arrested 18 "enemy agents" who were building drones for Israeli attacks in the northeastern city of Mashhad. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in a video released by his office on Wednesday, said Israel was "progressing step by step" towards eliminating threats posed by Iran's nuclear sites and ballistic missile arsenal. "We are hitting the nuclear sites, the missiles, the headquarters, the symbols of the regime," Netanyahu said. Israel, which is not a party to the international Non-Proliferation Treaty, is the only country in the Middle East believed to have nuclear weapons. Israel does not deny or confirm that. Netanyahu also thanked Trump, "a great friend of the state of Israel," for standing by its side in the conflict, saying the two were in continuous contact. Trump has veered from proposing a swift diplomatic end to the war to suggesting the United States might join it. In social media posts on Tuesday, he mused about killing Khamenei. Russian President Vladimir Putin, asked what his reaction would be if Israel did kill Iran's Supreme Leader with the assistance of the United States, said on Thursday: "I do not even want to discuss this possibility. I do not want to." Putin said all sides should look for ways to end hostilities in a way that ensured both Iran's right to peaceful nuclear power and Israel's right to the unconditional security of the Jewish state. Since Friday, Iran has fired around 400 missiles at Israel, some 40 of which have pierced air defences, killing 24 people, all of them civilians, according to Israeli authorities. The Iranian missile salvoes mark the first time in decades of shadow war and proxy conflict that a significant number of projectiles fired from Iran have penetrated defences, killing Israelis in their homes. Iran has reported at least 224 deaths in Israeli attacks, mostly civilians, but has not updated that toll for days. U.S.-based Iranian activist news agency HRANA said 639 people had been killed in the Israeli attacks and 1,329 injured as of June 18. Reuters could not independently verify the report.
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
We Need to Fix the So-Called GENIUS Bill
A bipartisan majority in the Senate has just passed the GENIUS Act to provide a regulatory framework for stablecoins. A similar bill, the STABLE Act, is working its way through the House. President Trump wants to sign a stablecoin bill into law this year, so it looks like we are well on our way to a long overdue regulatory regime for stablecoins. Or are we? We shouldn't count our chickens before they hatch. The proposed legislation is flawed and can and should be fixed promptly to eliminate needless duplication that will impose excess costs on the industry and the taxpayer. Fortunately, the legislation can easily be fixed. The House and Senate bills, although broadly similar, have some differences, and the two chambers will have to come to an agreement. Will the resulting bill be known as the STABLE GENIUS Act? There is still time to avoid problems like the choice of 55 different regulators, or keeping interest-bearing stablecoins out of the regulatory framework. The problems in our obsolete regulatory framework have contributed to the sorry state of crypto regulation in the U.S. We have literally hundreds of different financial regulatory agencies at the state and federal levels, and they don't play nicely together. The regulators engage in turf battles to extend their domains, while other important issues fall into the neglected cracks. FTX was regulated by state money transmitter regulators, of all people. Whose bright idea was that? This fragmentation of our regulatory system was one of the contributing factors to the financial crisis of 2008. Congress's response in the Dodd-Frank legislation was to add yet another layer of bureaucracy, the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC). The idea behind the FSOC is that the dukes and earls in charge of the regulatory fiefdoms would get together in a committee and cooperate more than they had before. Congress is about to repeat this mistake by requiring joint rulemaking from the alphabet soup agencies. This byzantine bureaucracy has slowed a sound approach to digital assets. A case in point is the battle over whether a particular digital asset is a Security under the infamous Howey test, and thus subject to the whims of the SEC, or a Something Else, and thus subject to the different dictates of the Something Else Regulators (CFTC? CFPB? state banking or money transmitter regulator?). We are all familiar with the contortions that issuers of digital assets have gone through to avoid the Kafka-esque SEC experience. Even TradFi issuers of securities do their best to take advantage of the many exceptions to SEC registration whenever they can. SEC oversight is an overly expensive and cumbersome process, especially for newer and smaller companies. The SEC has been spectacularly unsuccessful over the years in properly scaling registration requirements to the size of scope of newer and smaller enterprises. The proposed bills would permit issuers to choose from 55 different regulators by establishing themselves in the right jurisdiction with the right kind of charter. In addition to the alphabet soup at the federal level (FDIC, OCC, Fed, NCUA, and, for security-stablecoins, the SEC), stablecoin issuers could also choose a state regulator. With a choice of 55 different regulators, what could go wrong? Lots of things. First, there is the danger of a race to the bottom. Stablecoin issuers will be tempted to choose the regulator with the laxest and least costly oversight. This increases the chances that the regulators will miss something important. To remedy this, the bills require that the Secretary of the Treasury certify that a state's regulation is 'substantially similar' to the federal regulation. If it is 'substantially similar,' why bother with such redundancy? Also, the Secretary of the Treasury has to go through a formal rulemaking process to come up with principles for establishing substantial similarity. Talk about a duplicative waste of resources! But wait, like in a good infomercial, there is more! More waste and redundancy, that is. The House bill requires the OCC, FDIC, and Fed to engage in a joint rulemaking in consultation with the state regulators on capital requirements for stablecoins. Any veteran of joint rulemaking can attest to what a long and painful process it is for different federal agencies to work together on a joint rulemaking. Joint rulemakings proceed very slowly as getting agreement between agencies is a long, slow, and often contentious process. One survivor of such joint rulemaking related to me an incident in which a shouting match between staffers in the different agencies almost led to a fist fight. Congress can set deadlines for rulemaking, but there is usually no punishment if an agency dawdles for years past a deadline. Speaking of turf battles, stablecoins that pay interest are not covered. Who regulates those? A stablecoin that is a 'security' is also not covered by the bills. Such coins are presumably regulated by the SEC. We can expect regulators and the courts to wrangle incessantly over whether a future stablecoin-like product is regulated by one of the 55 stablecoin regulators, or by the SEC or CFTC, or CFPB or someone else. At a time when the DOGE administration is eviscerating government agencies in its bungling attempts to eliminate waste and redundancy, constructing a regulatory regime in which overlapping regulators jockey for position and duel in joint rulemakings is an absurd contradiction. Congress needs to pick a single regulator and get rid of the joint rulemakings and state loopholes. Of course, before we talk about who and how we should regulate stablecoins, we need to be clear about why we are regulating stablecoins. This will help to figure out the best approach to regulating stablecoins. In general, financial regulation has some common-sense objectives: The economy won't die when something bad happens. Customers are protected when an intermediary fails. The economy can grow and be stable. Market participants have the information they need to make good decisions. Fraudsters aren't selling bogus instruments. Intermediaries who hold customer assets can be trusted. Prices are fair and not manipulated. Stablecoins are an important innovation in the global payment system. They help to cement the role of the dollar in the global economy. They are likely to grow substantially from their current size and become systemically important. The failure of a very large stablecoin could transmit distress throughout the economy. Those losing funds in such a failure could in turn default on their obligations, threatening to bring down still other entities with no direct holdings of stablecoins. A run on a stablecoin would cause it to dump its holdings of U.S. Treasuries, causing distress in the Treasury market. This is the epitome of systemic risk, and it needs to be monitored and managed by our de facto systemic risk regulator, the Fed. Congress can and should fix the flaws in the STABLE GENIUS bills. Congress should pick the Fed as the single regulator for stablecoins. Interest-bearing stablecoins should be brought into the stablecoin regulatory regime. These fixes can be done simply and promptly to the existing texts. Congress should also begin giving serious thought to how to later fix our dysfunctional regulatory structure. A more intelligent and nimble regulatory structure would have more quickly grasped the many benefits of blockchain technology and come up with appropriate ways to promote innovation safely and ensure American leadership. We need to begin the discussion on how best to do this. Financial technology will continue to evolve, and our obsolete regulatory structure will hamper that innovation unless we fix it and soon.
