Deeply unpopular Peruvian president calls for general elections in April 2026
LIMA, Peru (AP) — Peruvian President Dina Boluarte said Tuesday the country will hold general elections one year from now in an effort to end years of instability.
The deeply unpopular Boularte said the April 2026 polls will elect a new president, 130 deputies and 60 senators. The bicameral election system has not been used since the early 1990s.
In a brief nationwide television address, Boularte did not say if she would be a contender. Boluarte assumed power in Peru in 2022 to complete the term of then-President Pedro Castillo, who was removed from office just two years into his five-year term after attempting to dissolve the legislature to avoid his own removal.
She said the upcoming elections will be 'democratic, clean, transparent and orderly.'
Boluarte has a 93% disapproval rating, according to a national poll conducted by Datum Internacional in March. Her term ends on July 28, 2026.
Last week, Peru's Congress voted to remove the interior minister from office after deciding that he had failed to adequately handle rising violent crime in the Andean country.
Public outrage has surged over an increase in killings and other violence, especially the recent killing of Paul Flores, the 39-year-old lead singer of the cumbia band Armonia 10. He was fatally shot when assailants attacked his band's tour bus after a concert in Lima.
In reaction to the Flores killing, Boluarte on March 19 declared a state of emergency in the capital and ordered the deployment of soldiers to help police address the surge of violence. That same day, opposition lawmakers requested a vote of no confidence against the interior minister.
Boluarte's government previously had decreed a state of emergency from September to December in an attempt to stem the violence.
Authorities reported 2,057 killings in 2024, up from 1,506 in 2023.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
27 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Minnesota killings spread fear in country riven by violence against politicians
Daniel Hernandez, whose life has been shaped by violence directed at politicians, woke up Saturday morning to missed calls and messages from loved ones who had seen the news that two state legislators had been shot in Minnesota and immediately worried about his safety. Hernandez, a former Democratic state lawmaker who is now running in a special election to represent Arizona's 7th Congressional District, began his political career as an intern for former Rep. Gabby Giffords and was credited with helping to save her from a mass shooter in 2011. Last week, a bullet struck the car window of one of his campaign staffers outside his family home, which doubles as his campaign headquarters. His mother and staffers were inside, he said.
CBS News
2 hours ago
- CBS News
Will Texas lawmakers have a special session to redraw Congressional districts?
Members of Congress and state lawmakers have been all abuzz this past week ever since the New York Times reported on a plan to have Texas legislators redraw the state's Congressional districts to help Republicans gain more seats in the Lone Star State. The Times report said President Trump's advisers want Governor Greg Abbott to call lawmakers into a special session to come up with a new map of Congressional districts. If Republicans could gain more seats in Texas, the thought is that it would blunt any potential gains by Democrats in U.S. House seats in other states during the midterm elections next year. Most of the 38 Congressional districts in Texas are considered safe for the Republicans and Democrats who represent them. A federal judge in El Paso is now holding a trial to determine if these Congressional districts that were drawn and approved in 2021 are constitutional. In an interview for Eye On Politics, Texas Representative Jeff Leach, R-Allen, told CBS News Texas he's heard about this issue. "I have read the story and have seen all the news that's been going around and have been in communication with our counterparts in Washington and with Governor's office and the Speaker's office, Lieutenant Governor. We're going to do what's right for Texas and we're going to do what's lawful," said Leach. "We're going to see what happens over the next few weeks. If the Governor calls us back into special session, whether it's on redistricting or any other matter, when we'll show back up to Austin and we'll do our jobs." U.S. Representative Marc Veasey, D-Fort Worth, told CBS News Texas that he saw the story and that he doesn't know much else about it. "Even a lot of our Republican colleagues don't know much about this. I know they're supposed to meet and talk about this. If the courts don't demand a redraw, it seems very communistic. I think that it's wrong. I think that it's absolutely nuts." In an interview for Eye On Politics, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said he has not been involved in the conversations pertaining to this story. "I saw the same report you referenced. It's clear the state has the authority to do this, to redistrict mid-decade. You'll remember back 20 years ago, in 2003, I was the Solicitor General of Texas, the chief lawyer for the state in front of the U.S. Supreme Court and Texas did this back in the early 2000's, and it was challenged in court. I defended it in court. It ended up going to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the argument that the Democrat plaintiffs brought was that the state could not redistrict in the middle of the decade. We won in the U.S. Supreme Court. I argued the case and we won. The State has the authority to do so. That's a decision for the state legislature, and for the Governor to make." Governor Abbott has not commented on the New York Times story. Watch the full interview with Rep. Leach below: Watch the full interview with Rep. Veasey below: Watch the full interview with Senator Cruz below:
Newsweek
2 hours ago
- Newsweek
Denmark Raises Retirement Age to 70 - Could The US Do The Same?
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Workers in Denmark have been rocked by the news that the government has approved raising the retirement age to 70 - the highest in Europe. For now, the Danish can retire with their public pension at 67, but that threshold will gradually climb to 70 by 2040. Reports indicate that some Danes are unhappy with the decision, with protests taking place in the capital, Copenhagen, in the lead-up to the vote in May. Across the world, retirement ages increase because people live longer, placing strain on pension systems. Fewer workers support more retirees, prompting reforms to ensure financial sustainability. Longer work lives boost productivity and tax revenue. However, this shift can disadvantage those in physically demanding jobs or with health issues who can't delay retirement, experts have explained to Newsweek. Retirement in the U.S. The news from Denmark comes as the U.S. full retirement age (FRA) also changes, albeit to 67, for those born in 1960 and after. The FRA has been steadily rising since legislation was passed by Congress in 1983, a move made to help shore up the Social Security trust funds that pay benefits to more than 70 million Americans in 2025. This means that anyone claiming benefits before reaching this age will face a permanent financial penalty, reducing their Social Security payments for the rest of their life. If retiring at 67, older Americans can get their full insurance amount, and if they retire later, they can get even more. Even as the U.S. retirement age has already crept up, some lawmakers have indicated they want it raised even further. The Republican Study Committee, comprising 170 GOP lawmakers, published a budget proposal in 2024 that advocated for "modest adjustments to the retirement age for future retirees, to account for increases in life expectancy"—raising the retirement age to 69. In December, Senator Rand Paul introduced an amendment to the Social Security Fairness Act to raise the full retirement age all the way to 70, proposing three-month annual increases until reaching that threshold, but it was not adopted. These have been touted as solutions to the looming Social Security funding issue. As it stands, in 2035, the funds that help pay for benefits along with payroll taxes will run dry, forcing a 17 percent across-the-board cut in benefit payments unless Congress acts to shore up the system by increasing its revenue, reducing benefits or a combination of both. Other options include raising payroll taxes, cutting benefits for future recipients, or a combination of all three. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that increasing the FRA to 70 would address roughly half of the system's 75-year shortfall. "Raising the retirement age is part of the solution, but not a standalone fix," Jeremy Clerc, co-founder and CEO of Assists and a contributing writer at Assisted Living Magazine, told Newsweek, given the huge impact it could have on future retirees. Steep, Dangerous and Complex Regardless of whether raising the retirement age is chosen as the path to helping Social Security toward longstanding solvency, a later FRA could see different types of workers face potentially unfair disparities. "Not everyone reaches their late 60s in the same shape — physically, financially, or emotionally," Clerc said. "In senior living, we see the disparities up close. For some, two extra years of work is manageable; for others, it's a steep, even dangerous, climb. Reform needs to reflect that complexity." For Clerc, the answer is clear. "Absolutely—and significantly so," Clerc said when asked whether lower-income and blue-collar workers would suffer disproportionately. "They live shorter lives, reducing their years to collect benefits. They're also more likely to perform physically demanding, manual labor, which limits the ability to work longer." Jonathan Price, senior vice president and retirement practice leader at benefits consultancy Segal, agrees. "Delaying Social Security's retirement age will put additional stress on those in physically demanding roles," he explained to Newsweek. "They will likely need to drop out of the labor force and claim Social Security prior to the new retirement age. "Delaying Social Security normal retirement age would likely have an oversized impact," particularly on those who are forced to retire and claim benefits earlier than 67 - or in a raised FRA scenario, 69. IMAGE TO BE REPLACED. IMAGE TO BE REPLACED. Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty Clerc said that raising the FRA could slash average lifetime benefits by nearly 20 percent, according to research from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. "It's hard to justify asking a warehouse worker or home health aide to stay on the job into their late 60s or 70s," he said. "These are the same people who burn out early, face chronic pain, and often die younger—yet they'd be the ones asked to wait longer for benefits they've paid into their whole lives." Price warns that policy changes could also ripple through the workforce in unexpected ways. "If SSA's retirement ages were to be delayed, then Americans may need to work longer," he said. "What impact will that have on their employers, opportunities for colleagues moving up through the ranks, and overall labor participation? People and organizations will need time to prepare for those types of changes. It's going to be a big adjustment." How Do Americans Feel? Despite repeated calls from some policymakers to raise the retirement age, most Americans aren't buying it. Polls conducted in recent years indicate strong opposition to a higher FRA. A Data For Progress survey from 2023 found that only 8 percent of voters supported the idea of raising the FRA over 67. Clerc said that if it were to happen, it requires being done with care and that raising the retirement age "must be implemented gradually, equitably, and as part of a holistic reform package." "If we push people to work longer, we need to think about what that means—for them, for their families, and for the economy," Price said.
