Primary election 2025 results: Reading City Council
Here are the results of the contested races.
All vote totals are incomplete and unofficial. Incumbents are denoted by an asterisk.
Council President
(Vote for one)
Democrats
*Donna Reed 967
Jaime Baez Jr. 961
Vanessa Campos 449
City Council District 1
(Vote for one)
Democrats
*Vanessa Campos 372
Denise Johnson
City Council District 4
(Vote for one)
Democrats
Ray Baker 358
Emmanuel Rodriguez 126
City Council District 5
(Vote for one)
Democrats
*Rafael A. Nunez 215
Sheila Perez 203
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Vox
9 minutes ago
- Vox
Why crime is still Trump's best issue
is a senior politics correspondent at Vox, covering the White House, elections, and political scandals and investigations. He's worked at Vox since the site's launch in 2014, and before that, he worked as a research assistant at the New Yorker's Washington, DC, bureau. President Donald Trump shows crime statistics as he delivers remarks during a press conference in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room of the White House August 11, 2025, in Washington, Trump's federal takeover of Washington, DC's police force — which looks like something between an authoritarian power grab and an empty stunt — doesn't look like a political winner at first glance. A poll from YouGov last week showed little support for Trump's move; 34 percent of respondents approved of the idea, and 47 percent disapproved. Yet the pushback from Democrats — which often focused on pointing out that DC crime was trending downward, or arguing it wasn't such a serious problem — shows why the larger crime issue remains perilous for them, and advantageous for Trump. Though Trump is unpopular, crime remains one of his strongest issues, and one of the Democratic Party's worst. That sticks in Democrats' craw. Trump's recitation of DC crime statistics was filled with blatant misrepresentations. Furthermore, Trump himself was indicted four times, and he notably pardoned even the violent rioters of January 6, 2025. How could they be losing the law and order issue to this guy? Yet the polling says very clearly that they are. Polls consistently show the public prefers Republicans to Democrats on crime In May, separate polls from both CNN and YouGov asked respondents about which party they trusted more on over a dozen different issues, and both found that crime was the Democrats' worst of all. (The GOP had a 13-point advantage in one poll, and a 12-point advantage in the other.) It hasn't always been this way. Even as recently as 2021, the two parties were about evenly matched in polling from Langer Research. But in 2022, the GOP's advantage on crime surged to its highest in decades of the firm's polling — and it hasn't gone away since. That's for a pretty straightforward reason: A large majority of the public became convinced, due to very real rising crime rates, that crime in cities had become a very serious problem and that tougher policies are necessary — but Democrats often don't seem like they feel the same way. The crime rates have since declined, but voter concerns haven't gone away. In last week's YouGov poll, a large majority — 67 percent — believed crime was a major problem in US cities, and only 23 percent thought it was a minor problem. And back in April 2024, the Pew Research Center asked registered voters whether they believed the US criminal justice system was generally too tough on criminals, or not tough enough. It wasn't even close. A mere 13 percent chose 'too tough,' while 61 percent said 'not tough enough.' Notably, even a plurality of Biden supporters (40 percent of them) believed the system was 'not tough enough,' while just 21 percent of them thought it was too tough. Among the public, the belief that the criminal justice system is overly harsh on criminals is a fringe view. But among progressive activists, it's a core belief. Democrats have a crime problem For the past decade, the intellectual and organizing energy among progressive criminal justice activists has been around preventing police violence and making sentencing of criminals more lenient. In these circles, distrust of police and law enforcement and disdain for mass incarceration were widespread, and concern about crime in cities became viewed as racially coded. Responding to these pressures, Democratic politicians struck an increasingly awkward balance on crime issues. They've tried to disavow 'defund the police,' and big city mayors who have crime-concerned constituents have tried to get tough. But it hasn't been enough to change the party's brand. Why not? Another YouGov poll — taken in September 2024 — asked respondents about several of then-presidential candidate Kamala Harris's criminal justice policy proposals and Trump's. Harris's specific proposals were generally more popular. But on the question of who would do a better job handling crime? Trump had an 8-point advantage. That's because voters don't make up their minds by tallying a policy laundry list. They look for signals about 'whose side are you on?' And Trump has signaled in many ways that he's on the 'tough on crime' side. Democrats' signals have been more mixed. So when Democrats are tempted to say anyone worried about DC's crime level is ignorant, a scaredy-cat, or a demagogue, they should be aware they're going out on a limb. While voters may think Trump is going too far or mishandling certain cases, the broader crime issue remains favorable to him. It will take some serious work for Democrats to change that perception. Crime remains one of the party's most glaring political weaknesses.
The Hill
9 minutes ago
- The Hill
Republican civil war erupts over earmarks in funding bills
The return of earmarks to the annual appropriations bills has sparked a battle among Republicans on Capitol Hill, pitting fiscal hawks against members of the Appropriations Committees and their allies. It's a serious battle and one that could scuttle the chances of passing appropriations bills ahead of the Sept. 30 government funding deadline. Republican responsibility for the huge federal deficit has become a hot political issue after President Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which is projected to add $3.4 trillion to the debt over the next decade, into law. Conservatives are deeply disappointed that Trump's bill did not make deeper cuts to federal spending, and they want to make a statement with significant reductions in the annual appropriations bills for fiscal 2026. Adding to the frustrations of fiscal hawks, those bills are already loaded with earmarks directing the Trump administration how to spend funds. Conservatives view the return of earmarks as a return to the days of pork-barrel spending and a bad look for Republicans when the party is taking fire from Democrats for exploding future deficits. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), a leading conservative, argued that earmarks are still prohibited by Senate Republican conference rules, even though some members of the conference choose not to follow them. 'It's still prohibited by conference policy, and I think we need to stick to that,' Lee told The Hill. Lee said the proliferation of earmarks in the spending bills are 'incompatible with our approach as Republicans, and it's also incompatible with having $37 trillion in debt.' Some conservatives are pushing for Congress to pass a yearlong stop-gap spending measure that would freeze federal funding levels as a strategy to keep spending in check and the next wave of earmarks in limbo. Senate Republicans voted for a 'permanent ban' on earmarks in May 2019, when the proposal passed by a 28-12 vote after a heated debate behind closed doors. But earmarks have since made a big comeback. The House, then controlled by Democrats, voted in March 2021 to reverse an internal ban on earmarks. Senate Republicans, who were in the minority at the time, decided in April 2021 to stick with their conference pro forma ban on earmarks but left open a big loophole by allowing individual GOP senators to request money for home-state projects. That decision still rankles some Republicans years later. They believe they're in a position to change the rising tide of earmarks now that their party controls the White House and both chambers of Congress. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) called the earmarks buried in the spending bills 'offensive.' 'It is offensive that I don't know what they are yet,' he said of earmarks. 'I'm asking my staff and we don't have the specifics on this. 'That's the problem. This stuff is all secret until you're ready to vote on it,' he added. Johnson has a proposal that would automatically rescind earmarks if lawmakers 'brag' about the millions of dollars in federal funding they're steering to projects back home in any kind of political context. Under his proposal, 'the only time members can talk about the earmarks, their congressionally directed spending, is as part of official Senate business — a hearing, a subcommittee hearing and on the floor,' he said. 'They can't then go out and brag about it in the media … if they do that, if they issue a press release, if they put it in a campaign ad, that spending gets automatically rescinded,' Johnson explained. Twenty-one Republican senators voted for Johnson's amendment when he offered it to the appropriations bill funding military construction and the Department of Veterans Affairs, a bill that was expanded to fund the Department of Agriculture and the legislative branch. Senate Finance Committee Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) and Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio), Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Lee were among the Republicans who voted for Johnson's proposal. The conservatives' backlash against earmarks in the package came after Punchbowl News reported that Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) loaded more than $810 million in earmarks and directed spending for Maine in the fiscal 2026 spending bills crafted by her committee. Collins, who faces a tough reelection battle next year, argues she has a better sense of her state's funding needs than unelected bureaucrats in Washington who otherwise would get to decide how to dole out federal funds without congressional guidance. Other Republicans are working hard behind the scenes to steer more money to their home states. More Republican senators have requested congressionally directed spending, aka earmarks, for the fiscal 2026 spending bills compared to last year. And earmarks have exploded in the Republican-controlled House. One Republican source familiar with the details of the spending bills noted House Republicans are also requesting more earmarks than they did last year and pointed out that Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris (R-Md.), an outspoken House conservative, has requested more than $55 million for his district. An analysis by Roll Call found House Republicans have packed the appropriations bills for next year with nearly $8 billion in earmarks. Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) — the chair of the Senate Steering Committee who voted for Johnson's proposal to rescind earmarks if senators use them to score political points — said conservatives will make additional efforts to pull earmarks out of the spending bills and find other ways to reduce federal spending. 'Hopefully we have time to review the bills [and] not get rushed into votes on these things,' he said. 'We've got to understand we have a $2 trillion [annual] deficit, so we've got to get spending under control. That's what I'm going to try to do, and there are a lot of people in the same camp that I am.' Scott indicated he sees the battle against earmarks as part of a broader effort to curb federal spending after conservatives failed to include bigger spending reforms in Trump's megabill. 'People are doing everything they can to try to get spending under control,' he said. Lee, Johnson and Scott pushed an amendment to Trump's bill in June to reduce Medicaid spending by another $313 billion by preventing new enrollees in Medicaid expansion states from receiving the 9-to-1 enhanced Federal Medical Assistance Percentage if they are not disabled or don't have dependent children. They delayed a key procedural vote to advance the bill in hopes of gaining Republican support for the proposal, but despite assurances of help from Senate GOP leaders and Vice President Vance, the amendment didn't receive a vote.
The Hill
9 minutes ago
- The Hill
Texas Democrats fear incumbent-vs.-incumbent brawl after redistricting
Texas Democrats are fretting over a likely primary battle between Reps. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) and Greg Casar (D-Texas) as Republicans move toward passing a new congressional map that pits the two incumbents against each other. The proposed map, which gives Texas Republicans five congressional seats, draws the two Democratic lawmakers into one Austin-area district. A matchup would pit the 78-year-old Doggett, who was the first House Democrat to call on former President Biden to drop his presidential bid last year, against the 36-year-old Casar, who chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus. But in what many Democrats call an ironic twist, Doggett is pushing for Casar to run in the newly redrawn 35th district. The move was perceived by some Texas Democrats as Doggett waving the white flag in the redistricting battle before the new map was officially passed by the state legislature. Additionally, Democrats are voicing concerns that an ugly primary would only seek to benefit Republicans and drain resources that Democrats could be using elsewhere in the state next year. In an interview with The Hill on Friday, Doggett called on Casar to 'explain to voters why I should be ousted and why he is surrendering the district to Trump.' 'It's certainly a battle that is unfortunate to divide Democrats at a time when we need to be united against Trump,' Doggett said. 'But I don't see it as having to be a particularly mean race.' However, when asked whether he plans to spend the $6.2 million he has in the bank, Dogget said he plans to use the resources he has and to be 'victorious.' 'That money was raised for my reelection and I plan to use it as necessary,' he said. The back and forth ensued earlier this week when Doggett argued in an email to supporters that the new 35th district would be based in San Antonio, rather than Austin. Doggett is also claiming that Casar could help sway San Antonio's 57 percent Hispanic population. But in an email to Casar's supporters obtained by The Hill, his chief of staff Stephanie Trinh wrote that Casar's 'focus right now is on fighting the maps and supporting our state legislators who have bravely left the state to slow down Republicans' and that Doggett sent his email to supporters without consulting Casar or his team. 'Other than the fact that Republicans arbitrarily assigned this seat the same number as Greg's current one, there's no reason it would make sense for Greg to run in that district,' Trinh wrote, noting that the merged Austin-based 37th district would include nearly 250,000 of Casar's current constituents and his former city council seat. Casar currently represents the state's 35th congressional district, which includes parts of the San Antonio metro area, as well as parts of Austin. Doggett represents the 37th district, which includes the majority of the city of Austin and some of its suburbs. Under the proposed new maps, the 37th congressional district would become more Democratic while the new 35th district would become more conservative and include less than 10 percent of Casar's current constituents. The new 37th district would include roughly two-thirds of Doggett's constituents, while the rest would come from Casar's Austin-area constituency, including his former city council seat that he held from 2015 to 2022. Casar's supporters note that Doggett has been in Congress for 30 years, having represented the 10th, 25th, 35th and 37th districts throughout his tenure. Veteran Democratic strategist Chuck Rocha called Doggett's insistence on running in the newly redrawn 37th district and pushing for Casar to run in the new 35th district 'so ironic,' given Doggett's calls last year for Biden to drop his presidential bid amid questions about his age and fitness to serve in office. 'There's been frustration, especially after what we lived through after the last election cycle, with candidates not knowing the time to open the door to the next generation,' Rocha told The Hill. 'This would be an easy way for Lloyd to step down,' he added. These frustrations come as Democrats as a party grapple with the issue of age following Biden's decision to step down last year and the death of a number of Democratic lawmakers, who have recently died in office. Democratic activist David Hogg, whose group Leaders We Deserve is dedicated to electing young Democrats, said Doggett should 'take his own advice and pass the torch.' 'Thanks to Governor Abbott being a feckless Trump lackey, two incredible progressives might have to fight over the Austin seat,' Hogg said in a statement to The Hill. 'Greg Casar is 36 and Lloyd Doggett is 78. This isn't complicated, Lloyd should take his own advice and pass the torch instead of tearing down the youngest-ever Chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.' But Doggett said his issue with Biden running in 2024 did not have to do with the former president's age, but 'an electability problem' and a poor debate performance against Trump. 'There were many people who were more worried about their careers and offending the Democratic Party establishment who didn't say a word,' the congressman said. 'The fact that I was not starting a career was, I think, an asset in being able to speak truth to power even within my own party.' Doggett is also arguing that the new 35th district presents an opportunity for Casar, given its large Latino population. '[The new district] is a district that is much more Hispanic than the one he has today, 57 percent Hispanic,' Doggett said. 'He is the incumbent. He has the power to bring all of his talent and his resources to bear on this district and demonstrate that we don't have to surrender it to Trump.' But Casar's allies in the Latino and Hispanic community, including in the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, are ready to defend him. 2024 Election Coverage 'Suggesting Greg Casar abandon Austin for another district just because of its Hispanic population is insulting and out of touch,' one Latino Democratic strategist told The Hill. 'Lloyd Doggett should be fighting Republican gerrymandering, not telling one of Congress's most effective progressive Latinos to step aside from the community he was elected to serve.' Rocha said the subject has been 'a hot topic in the Latino leaders group chat.'
