St. Paul mayoral race heats up as Kaohly Vang Her announces run
Why it matters: Her's campaign launch wakes up what had been a sleepy mayoral race.
Carter has boasted runaway advantages in cash, name recognition and key endorsements — but Her is likely to draw notable support from organized labor.
The big picture: A vigorous mayor's race will stir more debate about the challenges St. Paul faces, including rising property taxes, lagging housing development and a struggling downtown.
State of play: Two other candidates have already stepped forward to challenge Carter, who has announced his intention to seek a third term but has not officially launched a campaign yet.
Biochemist Yan Chen filed to run for the seat on Tuesday. She previously ran for the Ward 1 City Council seat.
Small business owner Mike Hilborn has launched a campaign one year after unsuccessfully challenging state Rep. María Isa Pérez-Vega as a Republican in a heavily Democratic district.
Zoom in: Her, 52, was born in Laos to parents who arrived in the U.S. as refugees when she was 4. She became a naturalized citizen while in junior high school.
The intrigue: Her is running against her former boss; Carter hired her as policy director after first taking office in 2018.
Later that year, Her won a seat representing neighborhoods along St. Paul's Summit Avenue in the Minnesota House.
In this year's legislative session, Her served as the top DFLer on the House Commerce Finance and Policy committee.
Flashback: Her stirred a firestorm on right-wing media earlier this year when she attempted to solicit sympathy for undocumented immigrants by declaring during a floor speech that she and her parents were "illegal" when they came to the U.S.
Her later clarified that neither she nor her parents were ever undocumented, but that her father — who worked in the U.S. consulate during the Vietnam War era — had "technically" broken the law by telling a white lie on their refugee application. Her's parents are now citizens.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
11 minutes ago
- USA Today
House Oversight Committee subpoenas top Dems, DOJ and FBI officials in 'RussiaGate' probe
The subpoenas order former President Bill Clinton, Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, top FBI and DOJ leaders to testify about Russia election probe. WASHINGTON −The House Oversight Committee announced Aug. 5 it has issued subpoenas to a host of former attorneys general and top Democrats, including former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to appear for depositions in its expanding "RussiaGate" investigation, committee Chairman James Comer said. Comer, a Kentucky Republican, did not specify what the subpoenas are for, but has suggested in recent days that they are part of a sprawling probe into GOP accusations that Democrats "weaponized" the government against President Donald Trump, including investigating him for allegedly colluding with Russia in the 2016 election in which Trump defeated Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. 'We knew it was a Russia hoax. ... Now it's time for the Comeys, the Brennans—those guys—to pay a price. It's illegal. It's wrong. And they need to be held accountable," Comer said in a July 30 Fox News appearance. "@FBIDirectorKash, @CIADirector Ratcliffe, @DNIGabbard, and President Trump's entire administration are exposing the darkest corners of our federal government. Americans deserve the truth: Democrats have weaponized the government for political gain," Comer added in an Aug. 1 post on X. The Oversight Committee also voted July 23 to subpoena the Justice Department for files related to Jeffrey Epstein, answering calls from lawmakers and voters alike for more information on the disgraced financier and sex offender. Here's a list of those subpoenaed and the dates they are instructed to appear, according to Comer: Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: October 9 Former President Bill Clinton: October 14 Former U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland: October 2 Former FBI Director James Comey: October 7 Former U.S. Attorney General William Barr: August 18 Former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales: August 26 Former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions: August 28 Former FBI Director Robert Mueller: September 2 Former U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch: September 9 Former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder: September 30
The Hill
11 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump says GOP ‘entitled' to five more House seats in Texas
President Trump argued that Republicans are 'entitled' to pick up five additional House seats in Texas as state GOP officials try to advance a new congressional district map ahead of the midterms next year. Trump said during an interview on CNBC's 'Squawk Box' Tuesday that other Democratic states like California, Illinois and Massachusetts are already significantly gerrymandered, giving Republicans much less representation in Congress than the percentage of the vote that he won there during the 2024 election. 'We should have many more seats in California. It's all gerrymandered,' he said. 'And we have an opportunity in Texas to pick up five seats. We have a really good governor, and we have good people in Texas. And I won Texas. I got the highest vote in the history of Texas, as you probably know, and we are entitled to five more seats.' Trump's comments come as Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R), following a push from the president, and state Republicans are seeking to redraw the state's congressional map mid-way through the decade. If passed, it could eliminate five currently Democratic-held seats and allow the GOP to pick them up next year. Abbott called a special legislative session to approve the map, but Texas state House Democrats left the state on Sunday ahead of the session to deny the body quorum and prevent it from being able to conduct business. They traveled to three Democratic states — Illinois, New York and Massachusetts. Trump noted that no Republicans currently represent any part of Massachusetts in the House, despite him receiving more than a third of its votes in November, and only a few serve in the House in Illinois despite him receiving a higher percentage of votes there as well. 'You notice they go to Illinois for safety, but that's all gerrymandered,' the president said. Texas state law penalizes state lawmakers with a $500 fine per day if they intentionally avoid attending a session to deny quorum. Abbott also ordered their arrests and directed the Texas Rangers to investigate the Democrats over possible bribery related to donations they've received to cover the fines. But the state lawmakers vowed to continue with their efforts, arguing it's necessary to fight back against what they view as a 'blatant racism.' In response to the moves from Texas and other possible Republican-led states, Democratic-led states like California and New York have pledged to advance with their own redistricting plans to add more Democratic seats to their congressional delegations.
The Hill
11 minutes ago
- The Hill
Are you ready for ‘Hawley Bucks'?
There is no public policy idea so dumb to preclude some member of Congress from whole-heartedly supporting it. And the latest example is a proposal to hand out billions of taxpayer dollars to taxpayers to offset taxpayers paying billions of dollars in taxes — that is, tariffs. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) has just introduced the American Worker Rebate Act. Consider it a plan to rob Peter in order to pay … Peter. President Trump's tariffs are forcing American businesses and consumers to pay billions of dollars in tariffs, which are taxes. So far this year, the U.S. government has collected about $150 billion in tariffs. Normally, the federal government collects between $75 billion and $80 billion for the whole year. The White House is ecstatic about all this increased revenue. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said, 'In reality, tariffs are a source of massive revenue.' But that 'massive revenue' is a result of new taxes coming from Americans. In years past, Republicans went to great lengths to avoid passing anything that could be construed as a tax increase. And, in fairness, no Republican currently in Congress voted for these tariffs. They exist because one Republican, Trump, has unilaterally imposed, then unimposed, then reimposed, then delayed, then reimposed the tariffs. And while many Republicans quietly grumble about Trump's tariffs, they hedge their public remarks so as not to 'poke the bear.' Now that Trump's tariffs are extracting billions of taxpayer dollars from Americans, Hawley proposes to have the government hand out checks to most Americans. Let's call them Hawley Bucks. According to The Hill, Hawley's proposal would offer $600 'tariff rebates.' Children are included, meaning that it 'would give a family of four $2,400.' The senator says, 'Like President Trump proposed, my legislation would allow hard-working Americans to benefit from the wealth that Trump's tariffs are returning to this country.' What a stupid statement. That 'wealth' Hawley's referring to belonged to Americans, and the money isn't 'returning' to America because it was already here. Trump's tariffs took that wealth away from Americans by forcing them to pay the tariffs. Why does the government need to return the money? The Hill reporter nails it: 'The payments are designed to offset higher prices resulting from tariffs.' Just consider some of the many problems with this proposal. First, the renewed inflationary pressure leading to higher prices is self-imposed by Trump's tariffs. Bizarrely, Hawley is modeling his rebates on the COVID-19 stimulus checks, which helped ignite a years-long inflation battle that consumers are still feeling and the Federal Reserve Bank is still fighting. Second, tariffs, like sales taxes, are regressive. They tend to hit lower-income families harder than higher-income families. So, Hawley plans to means-test the rebates. 'The payments would be reduced for households that earn $150,000 or more, a head of household who earns more than $112,500 and individuals who earn more than $75,000.' That's a form of income redistribution. Everyone pays the tariffs, but higher-income families won't get the rebates. There was a time when Republicans strongly opposed income redistribution, while progressives like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) strongly supported it. Now a Republican, with Trump's backing, is proposing income redistribution. Third, some tariff supporters claim the increased revenue will help reduce the current federal budget deficit, which the Congressional Budget Office projects will be $1.9 trillion for 2025. But the tariffs won't reduce the budget deficit if the government is rebating the tariff revenue to Americans. Fourth, the tariff revenue will vary, in part because Trump keeps shifting the tariff rates on various countries. But Hawley's rebates aren't variable. So, if tariff revenue comes in low and the rebates remain the same, the rebates could add to the federal deficit. Finally, progressives have long supported a universal basic income (UBI), in which the government hands out checks to everyone — a guaranteed income for every American. Republicans have opposed proposals that would create a new entitlement program. But Hawley's tariff rebate takes us very close to a UBI. Of course, a new president entering office in 2029 may repeal the tariffs. Or the U.S. Supreme Court may decide that Congress never gave the president the power to impose sweeping new tariffs on any and all countries for whatever reason or for no reason. In that case, tariff revenue would decline sharply. Yet the public would be very reluctant to see their Hawley Bucks eliminated. Although Hawley's proposal is terrible policy, you can appreciate its politics. He is trying to limit the negative consequences of another terrible policy. But rather than create a new entitlement program, Republicans should take steps to eliminate the cause of the problem: Trump's tariffs.
