Sens Cruz, Lujan introduce bill to expedite permits for international bridges and ports of entry
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, has put forth legislation amending the International Bridge Act of 1972 that would expedite the presidential permitting process for all international bridges and land ports of entry.
The bipartisan bill from Cruz and Sen. Ben Ray Lujan, D-N.M., will expand on legislation previously written by Cruz and passed into law that streamlined permits for international bridges in Eagle Pass, Laredo and Brownsville.
The new bill will streamline all permits for international bridges and ports of entry for Mexico and Canada.
Ted Cruz Mocks 'Crazy Town' Dems, As Maryland Senator Gets Defensive About Advocacy For Alleged Ms-13 Member
In a news release, Cruz discussed how this new bill has been a top priority for him.
"This bill builds on and expands our success in securing presidential permits for four major international bridge projects in South Texas by streamlining the approval process for all future international bridges along the Texas–Mexico border," Cruz said in a news release.
Read On The Fox News App
Cruz strongly urged his colleagues "to pass this bill so it can be sent to the President for signature."
Bipartisan Senate Bill Targets Border Human, Drug Trafficking With Innovative Technology
Lujan said in a news release that he was proud to introduce bipartisan legislation that would deliver real investments to New Mexico.
"Ports of entry and international bridges are vital to the economic success of our border communities, supporting trade, business, and tourism," Lujan said. "Yet, new border crossings are too often held up by the presidential permit process."
Dr. Victor Treviño, Mayor of the City of Laredo, thanked both senators for putting this bipartisan bill together that strengthens the northern and southern border.
"This bill marks a critical step toward modernizing the development and expansion of cross-border infrastructure by bringing much-needed efficiency and predictability to the presidential permitting process—an essential reform for communities like Laredo, which continues to be on the front lines of international commerce as the #1 Port of Entry in the United States," Trevino said in a news release.
Trevino also urged Congress to pass this bill so that President Donald Trump can sign it.
The bill also includes a bar on future administrations from considering environmental documents, including documents created as part of the National Environmental Policy Act.
Fox News Digital has reached out to Cruz's office for comment.Original article source: Sens Cruz, Lujan introduce bill to expedite permits for international bridges and ports of entry
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
31 minutes ago
- CNN
The Millers: Washington power couple straddles Trump-Musk feud
They're the Washington couple at the center of power in the Trump administration. They're also straddling opposing sides of an explosive breakup between President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk. CNN reported last week that Katie Miller, the wife of Stephen Miller, Trump's deputy chief of staff, would be departing her senior role at the White House as a top spokesperson and adviser for Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency. She was on her way to work for Musk as he went back to running his companies, helping the tech titan manage and arrange interviews unrelated to his time in government. But days later, amid the smoldering ruin of Musk and Trump's epic meltdown on Thursday over social media, that job suddenly took on a whole new layer. Among the attacks both men lobbed at each other was Musk endorsing the possibility of impeaching Trump and installing Vice President JD Vance in his place. Trump, in turn, raised the possibility of terminating federal contracts for Musk's companies. The episode has left the Millers on conflicting sides of the biggest breakup of Trump's second term, spawning gossip among White House aides and rounds of speculation about how the fallout could impact the political fortunes of one of the most powerful couples in Trump's Washington, where loyalty reigns. 'Everyone is talking about it,' a former Trump staffer told CNN. Katie Miller was in Texas last week for the series of interviews Musk held with space and technology journalists as SpaceX's Starship had its ninth test flight. It was there that Musk first delicately expressed he was 'disappointed' in the Republican's domestic policy bill in an interview with CBS News. Her X account is now a steady stream of laudatory posts about Musk and his companies, with a banner photo of a SpaceX rocket launching into space and a biography that says, 'wife of @stephenm.' Her only social media post on Friday was a reply with laughing emojis to an altered photo of her husband as a Home Depot employee attached to a post about immigration raids on the chain's stores. One former colleague told CNN that she will ultimately need to make a choice. 'She has a choice between Elon and Trump, but it can't be both,' the administration official said. Musk unfollowed Stephen Miller on X on Thursday, although both Millers continued following Musk on the platform into Friday. There are divided views on how the situation will impact Stephen Miller's ascendance. Among Trump's closest advisers, many believe he is surpassed in power only by Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, fueling speculation among some over whether he could take over should Wiles decide to move on. 'This whole thing will definitely make that more complicated,' one senior White House official told CNN. 'Katie being paid by Elon is not good for Stephen.' Another senior White House official strongly pushed back on the idea that this episode with Musk would impact Miller in any way with the President. 'Next to Susie, Trump trusts and relies on Stephen the most,' the official said, adding that the President and top brass were understanding that his wife working for Musk had nothing to do with Stephen or the current state of events. Katie Miller declined to comment for this story. Deeply connected and influential in Republican circles and at the highest levels of government, Stephen Miller and Katie Miller (née Waldman) met during Trump's first term in 2018. He was a senior adviser and speechwriter at the White House; she was on the Department of Homeland Security's public affairs team and on her way to becoming then-Vice President Mike Pence's communications director. He developed a reputation as the architect of some of the administration's most hardline immigration policies, becoming an influential and trusted aide in the Trump orbit. She developed her own reputation as a staunch supporter of those policies, once reflecting on a trip to the US-Mexico border as the administration came under fire for its child separation policy. 'My family and colleagues told me that when I have kids I'll think about the separations differently. But I don't think so … DHS sent me to the border to see the separations for myself — to try to make me more compassionate — but it didn't work,' Miller told NBC News journalist Jacob Soboroff in an interview for his book, 'Separated.' The pair married at Trump's Washington, DC, hotel in February 2020. Trump attended the wedding. In the four years after Trump left office, both set their sights on a Trump return to the White House. Stephen Miller launched a conservative nonprofit group, America First Legal Foundation, that served in part as a prelude to the policy of Trump's second term. Katie Miller headed to the private sector, where she consulted a number of major companies, including Apple. They were also raising three young children. Stephen Miller returned to the White House in January with a vast mandate, deeply involved in many of the president's signature policy initiatives and further empowered from the first term. Katie Miller joined the administration as well, working on behalf of DOGE and Musk, who had become a new figure in the Trump orbit after being an active campaign surrogate and 2024 megadonor. Like Musk, Katie Miller was working at the White House as a 'Special Government Employee,' which limits the number of days one can work within the administration. As their professional lives intertwined, the couple also became personally close with Musk, socializing outside of work. In the heat of the Thursday afternoon social media showdown, Stephen Miller had been scheduled to appear on Larry Kudlow's show on Fox Business Network – an appearance that was canceled. 'We lost Mr. Miller to a meeting in the Oval Office. Perfectly understandable. When I was in government, it would happen all the time. We'd have to kill a TV show. You're at the president's beck and call,' Kudlow said during his eponymous broadcast. This is not the first time Trump has divided a marital relationship. During his first term, Trump lashed out at the husband of one of his top advisers, Kellyanne Conway. Her husband, George Conway, had been intensely critical of Trump on social media. 'He's a whack job. There's no question about it. But I really don't know him,' Trump said at the time of George Conway. 'I think he's doing a tremendous disservice to a wonderful wife.' In 2023, the couple announced they were filing for divorce. George Conway, a prolific user of Musk's X platform and ardent anti-Trump figure, posted dozens of times about the Trump-Musk spat. 'Does anyone have any updates on Katie Miller?' he asked Thursday evening.
CNET
3 hours ago
- CNET
Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill': The Huge Tax and Medicaid Implications You Need to Know
President Donald Trump made extending his tax cuts a central plank of his election campaign. Getty Images President Donald Trump has made the extension of the 2017 tax cuts one of his major second-term economic goals -- you know, aside from all those tariffs -- but as the so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill" has moved forward, it's faced major pushback. Some of this opposition might lead to significant changes to the bill and how it might ultimately impact you, especially when it comes to taxes and services like Medicaid. After much back-and-forth, negotiation and failed votes, the bill passed in the House of Representatives by the thinnest margin possible, 215-214-1. The bill is now moving through the Senate, where it is expected to face more alterations before getting across the finish line. While the GOP has been attempting to use the reconciliation process to avoid the bill being filibustered by Democrats, it is still expected to face intra-party dissent similar to what it went through in the House over its cuts either being too severe or not severe enough. Elon Musk, the Tesla CEO and one-time Trump adviser who led the "DOGE" government consolidation efforts, spoke out against the bill in an unsparing fashion in a Tuesday post to X, decrying it as too heavy on spending. This disagreement with Trump and his agenda led to a prolonged public spat between the president and his one-time senior advisor. "This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination," Musk wrote. "Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it." Despite the broad nature of the bill, one of its central goals remains the extension of the 2017 Trump tax cuts. Passed for the first time early in his first term, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, as it was officially known, was one of Trump's signature legislative accomplishments and has generally become known as the "Trump tax cuts." Given the nature of how that bill was passed initially, a lot of its provisions are set to expire next year if a new extension isn't passed, so doing just that has unsurprisingly emerged as a major priority for Trump and the GOP-led houses of Congress. The president and his allies have also tried to claim that his aggressive tariff agenda could help offset the extension of the tax cuts, although, as we've touched on before at CNET, that is just one of the often-contradictory stated goals for the tariffs. Details about the budget bill Republicans have emerged in the past few weeks as it moved through the House Ways and Means Committee approval process. The Congressional Budget Office, an agency that provides estimates about the economic impacts of budgetary bills that is not affiliated with any party, estimated that the cuts called for in this bill would cost millions of people their health insurance and food benefits. The proposal initially failed to pass a vote in the House, leading to its cuts for Medicaid becoming even heavier. All this comes in addition to the longstanding criticism from Democrats and other critics that Trump's tax cuts disproportionately help the wealthiest Americans more than the working class. While there is truth to that argument, and to the Republican counter that the tax cuts would provide some help to taxpayers at all incomes, the new proposed cuts unveiled this week have given more weight to the notion that they will be more harmful for the least wealthy Americans. For all the details about what extending the tax cuts will actually mean and what the current terms mean for things like Medicaid, keep reading. For more, find out if Trump could actually abolish the Department of Education. How will the budget bill impact Medicaid? According to the estimates from the Congressional Budget Office mentioned at the start of this piece, at least 7.6 million Americans would lose Medicaid health insurance under the provisions in the budget proposal. That's nearly 11% of the 70 million Americans who are currently insured by Medicaid. The proposal would, among other things, require people without dependent children or a disability to meet an 80-hour-a-month work requirement to qualify for Medicaid and increase the frequency with which people will need to confirm their continued eligibility. These new requirements were originally set to take effect in 2029 under the bill's failed House version, but they were moved forward to 2026 in the bill's passed version. What would extending the Trump tax cuts mean? While the phrase "Trump tax cuts" has become a common media shorthand for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the current conversation around it might suggest that new cuts could be on the way. Although Trump has floated ideas for additional cuts, it's important to note that extending the 2017 provisions would, for the most part, keep tax rates and programs at the levels they've been at since then. So while it may be a better option than having the provisions expire -- which would increase certain tax rates and decrease certain credits -- extending the tax cuts most likely won't change how you've been taxed the past eight years. However, some estimates have predicted that extending the cuts would boost income in 2026, with the conservative-leaning Tax Foundation in particular predicting a 2.9% rise on average, based on a combination of other economic predictions combined with tax rates staying where they are. What would change if the Trump tax cuts expire? Republicans contend that the tax cuts helped a wide swath of Americans, and the Tax Foundation predicted that 60% of tax filers would see higher rates in 2026 without an extension. A big part of that has to do with tax bracket changes. The 2017 provisions lowered the income tax rates across the seven brackets, aside from the first (10%) and the sixth (35%). If the current law expires, those rates would go up by between 1% and 3%. Income limits for each bracket would also revert to pre-2017 levels. Lending credence to the Democrats' counterarguments, these shifts under the Trump tax cuts appeared to be more beneficial to individuals and couples at higher income levels than to those making closer to the average US income. If you're interested in the nitty-gritty numbers, you can check out the Tax Foundation's full breakdown. Another point in Democrats' favor? The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act also cut corporate tax rates from 35% to 21%, and unlike many of its other provisions, this one was permanent and won't expire in 2026. What would happen to the standard deduction? This is another area in which a lot of people would be hit hard. The standard deduction lets taxpayers lower their taxable income, as long as they forgo itemizing any deductions. For the 2025 tax year, the standard deduction is $15,000 for individual filers and $30,000 for joint filers. If the tax cuts expire, these numbers will drop by nearly half, down to $8,350 for individuals and $16,700 for joint filers. Under the current reconciliation bill, the deduction would increase to $16,000 for individuals and $32,000 for joint filers, but only through 2028. What would happen to the child tax credit? The child tax credit is one of the most popular credits. Its current levels -- $2,000 per qualifying child, which phases out starting at a gross income of $200,000 for single filers and $400,000 for joint filers -- were actually set by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. If an extension or new bill isn't passed, next year the child tax credit would revert to its old levels: $1,000 per child, which starts phasing out at $75,000 for single filers and $110,000 for joint filers. If the current budget bill is implemented, the credit will be upped to $2,500 per child through 2028, before dropping to $2,000 as its new permanent rate. Do the Trump tax cuts really favor the wealthy? Higher-income individuals and couples fared notably better with the changes the Trump tax cuts made to tax brackets. An estimate from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a left-leaning think tank, found that the poorest 20% of Americans would see only about 1% of the bill's net tax cuts. Numerous similar estimates agree that these small benefits for the poorest taxpayers would be outweighed by rising costs caused by tariffs. Conversely, ITEP's estimate found that the richest 20% of US taxpayers would benefit from around 67% of the bill's net tax cuts, with the richest 5% benefitting from half of them. How much would extending the tax cuts cost? Both the Congressional Budget Office and the Tax Foundation have estimated that the reconciliation bill's tax cut extension would raise the US deficit by $4.5 trillion over the course of 10 years. The Tax Foundation also estimated that it could raise the country's GDP to offset that number, but only by about $710 billion, or about 16% of the deficit increase. For more, see how Trump's tariffs might be affecting the prices of several key products in our daily tracker.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Granderson: Voters who don't vote? This is one way democracy can die, by 20 million cuts
During China's imperial age, those deemed guilty of the worst offenses were sometimes sentenced to death in a public square by a brutal form of execution known as lingchi. Soldiers — using sharp blades — would slice away pieces of flesh from the accused until they died. Translated, lingchi means 'death by a thousand cuts.' Maybe democracy does die in darkness, as journalist Bob Woodward often suggests. Or maybe democracy's demise comes in the light of day, in a public forum, where everyone can bear witness. Sometimes those holding the knives are the oligarchs or elected officials drenched in corruption. And sometimes there's blood on the hands of the people. On Saturday, voters in San Antonio — the seventh-largest city in the country — are headed to the polls to decide the first open mayoral race since President Obama's first term. Or at least some voters will be. In November 2024, nearly 60% of the 1.3 million registered voters in the county cast a ballot in the general election. However, in the local election held last month, barely 10% showed up to the polls. Before anyone starts throwing shade at San Antonio, in Dallas the turnout was even lower. Lackluster participation in an 'off year' election is not new. However, the mayoral race in San Antonio has increased national interest because the outcome is being viewed as a litmus test for both the strength of the Democrats' resistance and the public's appetite for the White House's policies. Like other big blue cities nestled in legislatively red states, San Antonio's progressive policies have been under constant assault from the governor's mansion. And with neither the progressive candidate, Gina Ortiz Jones, or her MAGA-leaning opponent, Rolando Pablos, eclipsing 50% of the vote in May, the runoff has drawn more than $1 million in campaign spending from outside conservative groups looking to flip the traditionally blue stronghold. The outcome could provide a possible glimpse into the 2026 mayoral race in Los Angeles, should the formerly Republican Rick Caruso decide to run against Mayor Karen Bass, a Democrat. When the two faced off in 2022, around 44% of the city's registered voters went to the polls. Caruso lost by less than 90,000 votes in a city with 2.1 million registered voters — most of whom didn't submit a ballot. It is rather astonishing how little we actually participate in democracy, given the amount of tax dollars we have spent trying to convince other nations that our government system is the best on the planet. Capitulating to President Trump's unsubstantiated claims of mass voter fraud, many local conservative elected officials have tried to ram through a litany of 'voter integrity' policies under the guise of protecting democracy. However, democracy is not a delicate flower in need of protection. It's a muscle in need of exercise. 'Some people find voting to be a chore,' Michele Carew, the elections administrator for Bexar County — which includes San Antonio — told me. 'We need to make voting easier and quite frankly, fun. And we need to get those who don't feel like their vote counts to see that it does. That means getting out and talking to people in our neighborhood, in our churches, in our grocery stores … about when elections are coming up and what's at stake locally.' Carew said that the added outside interest in the city's election has driven up early voting a tick and that she expects to see roughly a 15% turnout, which is an increase over previous years. It could be worse. The city once elected a mayor with 7% turnout back in 2013. Carew also expressed concern about outside influence on local governing. 'One of the first times I saw these nonpartisan races become more political was in 2020, and so as time goes by it's gotten even more so. I would like to think once the candidate is elected mayor they remain nonpartisan and do what's best for the city and not their party.' In 2024, a presidential election year when you'd expect the highest turnout, 1 in 3 registered voters across this country — roughly 20 million people — took a look around and said, 'Nah, I'm good.' Or something like that. The highest turnout was in Washington, D.C., where nearly 80% showed up. Too bad it's not a state. Among the lowest turnout rates? Texas — which has the second-greatest number of voters, behind only California. And therein lies the problem with trying to extrapolate national trends from local elections. Maybe Ortiz Jones will win in San Antonio this weekend. Maybe Caruso will win in L.A. next year. None of this tells us how the vast majority of Americans are really feeling. Sure, it's good fodder to debate around the table or on cable news shows, but ultimately the sample size of a mayoral election belies any claims about a result's meaning. Turnout during an off year is just too low. One thing we know for certain is most voters in America exercise their right to vote only once every four years. Oligarchs and corrupt officials are not great, but it's hard for democracy to stay healthy and strong if that's all the exercise it's getting. @LZGranderson If it's in the news right now, the L.A. Times' Opinion section covers it. Sign up for our weekly opinion newsletter. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
