Jason Carter rules out 2026 bid for governor as wife battles brain cancer
Jason Carter, grandson of former President Jimmy Carter, says he will not seek office in 2026 due to his wife Kate's diagnosis of glioblastoma.
Kate Carter, a teacher and entrepreneur, is undergoing treatment for the aggressive brain cancer; the couple has two teenage sons.
Jason Carter, a former state senator and 2014 gubernatorial candidate, now leads The Carter Center and practices law in Atlanta.
ATLANTA - Former Georgia state Sen. Jason Carter said he has no plans to seek the 2026 nomination because of his wife's cancer diagnosis.
"For all intents and purposes, I can't imagine making a decision to run because it's the wrong time for my family," Carter, 49, told The Associated Press on Monday.
What we know
Carter also told The Associated Press that he is "not going to endorse anybody," but that he was "very excited" that Sen. Jason Esteves has announced that he is in the running for governor in 2026.
RELATED: Sen. Jason Esteves announces campaign for governor of Georgia
Katharine "Kate" Lewis Carter has glioblastoma, a highly malignant and aggressive form of brain cancer. Treatment typically involves surgery to remove as much of the tumor as possible, followed by radiation therapy and chemotherapy. Jason Carter did not reveal any additional details about his wife's condition.
Jason Carter is the grandson of former President Jimmy Carter, who died at the age of 100 on Dec. 29, 2024, and first lady Rosalynn Carter, who passed away on Nov. 19, 2023, at the age of 96. Carter, who served in the Georgia State Senate from 2010 to 2015, was the Democratic Party nominee for governor in Georgia in 2014. He lost to incumbent Nathan Deal by 7.9%, receiving 44% of the vote.
In November 2015, Jason became Chair of the Board of Trustees of The Carter Center, the nonprofit organization founded in 1982 by his grandparents to fight for human rights and the alleviation of human suffering, prevent and resolve conflicts, improve health care, and enhance freedom and democracy. He had previously served on the board since 2009.
Jason is also a lawyer and has represented clients in high-stakes trial and appellate business litigation, including breach of contract, class actions, business torts, and other complex commercial cases, according to Bondurant Mixson & Elmore. He has received numerous awards for his legal work and community service. He also wrote a book published by National Geographic titled Power Lines, which detailed the racial divides he experienced in South Africa while serving in the Peace Corps.
Kate Carter is a high school teacher and former journalist with the Athens Banner-Herald. She also launched a nutmilk brand, Treehouse Naturals, with a friend in 2016. The couple has two teenage sons.
What they're saying
Before his announcement about his decision not to run, Jason Carter had been mentioned as a centrist candidate with high name identification who could run as a bridge between the Democrats' base and voters who might be up for grabs if President Donald Trump's popularity and the Republican brand take a dip heading into 2026, according to The Associated Press.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
18 minutes ago
- UPI
3 reasons Republicans' redistricting power grab might backfire
Texas state Democratic representatives, shown at a rally in Washington, previously left the state in 2021 to try to prevent the state's Republicans from reaching a quorum and passing new voting restrictions legislation. File Photo by Michael Reynolds/EPA The gerrymandering drama in Texas -- and beyond -- has continued to unfold after Democratic state legislators fled the state. The Democrats want to prevent the Republican-controlled government from enacting a mid-decade gerrymander aimed at giving Republicans several more seats in Congress. The Texas GOP move was pushed by President Donald Trump, who's aiming to ensure he has a GOP-controlled Congress to work with after the 2026 midterm elections. Other Republican states such as Missouri and Ohio may also follow the Texas playbook; and Democratic states such as California and Illinois seem open to responding in kind. But there are a few factors that make this process more complicated than just grabbing a few House seats. They may even make Republicans regret their hardball gerrymandering tactics, if the party ends up with districts that political scientists like me call "dummymandered." Democrats can finally fight back Unlike at the federal level, where Democrats are almost completely shut out of power, Republicans are already facing potentially consequential retaliation for their gerrymandering attempts from Democratic leaders in other states. Democrats in California, led by Gov. Gavin Newsom, are pushing for a special election later this year, in which the voters could vote on new congressional maps in that state, aiming to balance out Democrats' losses in Texas. If successful, these changes would take effect prior to next year's midterm elections. Other large Democratic-controlled states, such as Illinois and New York -- led by Gov. J.B. Pritzker and Gov. Kathy Hochul, respectively -- have also indicated openness to enacting their own new gerrymanders to pick up seats on the Democratic side. New York and California both currently use nonpartisan redistricting commissions to draw their boundaries. But Hochul recently said she is "sick and tired of being pushed around" while other states refuse to adopt redistricting reforms and gerrymander to their full advantage. Hochul said she'd even be open to amending the state constitution to eliminate the nonpartisan redistricting commission. It's unclear whether these blue states will be successful in their efforts to fight fire with fire; but in the meantime, governors like Hochul and Pritzker have welcomed the protesting Democratic legislators from Texas, in many cases arranging for their housing during their self-imposed exile. Dummymandering Another possible problem for either party looking to gain some seats in this process stems from greediness. In responding to Democrats' continued absence from Texas, Gov. Greg Abbott threatened even more drastic gerrymanders. "If they don't start showing up, I may start expanding," Abbott said. "We may make it six or seven or eight new seats we're going to be adding on the Republican side." But Abbott might think twice about this strategy. Parties that gerrymander their states' districts are drawing lines to maximize their own advantage, either in state legislatures or, in this case, congressional delegations. When parties gerrymander districts, they don't usually try to make them all as lopsided as possible for their own side. Instead, they try to make as many districts as possible that they are likely to win. They do this by spreading groups of supportive voters across several districts so they can help the party win more of these districts. But sometimes the effort backfires: In trying to maximize their seats, a party spreads its voters too thin and fails to make some districts safe enough. These vulnerable districts can then flip to the other party in future elections, and the opposing party ends up winning more seats than expected. This phenomenon, commonly referred to as "dummymandering," has happened before. It even happened in Texas, where Republicans lost a large handful of poorly drawn state legislative districts in the Dallas suburbs in 2018, a strong year for Democrats nationwide. With Democrats poised for a strong 2026 midterm election against an unpopular president, this is a lesson Republicans might need to pay attention to. There's not much left to gerrymander One of the main reasons dummymandering happens is that there has been so much gerrymandering that there are few remaining districts competitive enough for a controlling party to pick off for themselves. This important development has unfolded for two big reasons. First, in terms of gerrymandering, the low-hanging fruit is already picked over. States controlled by either Democrats or Republicans have already undertaken pretty egregious gerrymanders during previous regular redistricting processes, particularly following the 2010 and 2020 censuses. Republicans have generally been more adept at the process, particularly in maximizing their seat shares in relatively competitive states such as Wisconsin and North Carolina that they happen to control. But Democrats have also been successful in states such as Maryland, where only one Republican serves out of nine seats, despite the party winning 35% of the presidential vote in 2024. In Massachusetts, where Democrats hold all eight seats, Republicans won 37% of the presidential vote in 2024. There's also the fact that over the past half-century, "gerrymanderable" territory has become more difficult to find regardless of how you draw the boundaries. That's because the voting electorate is more geographically sorted between the parties. This means that Democratic and Republican voters are segregated from each other geographically, with Democrats tending toward big cities and suburbs, and Republicans occupying rural areas. As a result, it's become less geographically possible than ever to draw reasonable-looking districts that split up the other party's voters in order to diminish the opponents' ability to elect one of their own. Regardless of how far either party is willing to go, today's clash over Texas redistricting represents largely uncharted territory. Mid-decade redistricting does sometimes happen, either at the hands of legislatures or the courts, but not usually in such a brazen fashion. And this time, the Texas attempt could spark chaos and a race to the bottom, where every state picks up the challenge and tries to rewrite their electoral maps - not in the usual once-a-decade manner, but whenever they're unsatisfied with the odds in the next election. Charlie Hunt is an associate professor of political science at Boise State University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. The views and opinions in this commentary are solely those of the author.
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
FBI Agrees To Help Texas GOP Locate Democrats Who Fled To Block Quorum
The political standoff in Texas continues to escalate. GOP U.S. Senator John Cornyn announced that FBI Director Kash Patel has agreed to assist in locating House Democrats who fled the state to deny Republicans a quorum during a special session on congressional redistricting. As previously reported by The Dallas Express, Gov. Greg Abbott criticized the walkout, accusing Democrats of abandoning their elected duties. The walkout prevented the Texas House from reaching quorum during a session called to pass legislation on election integrity and border security. Abbott has vowed to call special sessions every 30 days and has initiated removal proceedings against at least one absent lawmaker. The Texas House has issued civil arrest warrants, suspended pay and per diems, approved budget cuts for offices of members participating in the walkout, and the state's Attorney General is investigating a Democratic PAC that may have funded the effort. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has also joined calls for the Democrats' return. 'In a representative democracy, we resolve our differences by debating and voting, not by running away,' Cornyn wrote in his letter to the FBI, according to The Hill. 'I request the FBI's assistance, as federal resources are necessary to locate the out-of-state Texas legislators who are potentially acting in violation of the law. The FBI has tools to aid state law enforcement when parties cross state lines, including to avoid testifying or fleeing a scene of a crime.' Legal observers caution that the FBI's involvement—with no clear statutory basis in this purely state-level dispute—raises serious concerns. Breaking a quorum is not a crime, and the bureau has yet to confirm any active operational role. 'I don't see why the FBI would be involved in this at all. I mean this is Texas politics and the FBI has no business trying to enforce Texas state law,' said Richard Painter, former associate counsel to President George W. Bush. The stalemate has left the legislative agenda frozen, with both sides showing no sign of backing down.
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Medicare Update: Lawmakers Sound Alarm About Major Change to Program
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. More than a dozen House Democrats pressed Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Mehmet Oz in a letter last week over CMS's announced plans to expand prior authorization requirements to traditional Medicare through a pilot program. The new model incorporates artificial intelligence to help make decisions and is being tested in six states beginning in January. "Let's call it what it is: profit-driven healthcare," a financial expert told Newsweek, "And profit motive and patient care mix about as well as oil and water. Lawmakers are sounding the alarm, because this directly affects many of their constituents." Why It Matters The pushback highlights a growing partisan debate over how to reduce Medicare spending without restricting beneficiaries' access to care. It also underscores tensions between the Biden-era expansion of oversight and the Trump administration's stated aim to cut waste while modernizing CMS operations. House Democrats argued the new prior authorization pilot would create administrative burdens for providers and patients, while some Senate Republicans believe the Medicare reforms are necessary for rooting out fraud and overpayments. Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-WA) speaks at a news conference after a meeting with the House Democratic Caucus at the U.S. Capitol Building on September 19, 2023 in Washington, DC. Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-WA) speaks at a news conference after a meeting with the House Democratic Caucus at the U.S. Capitol Building on September 19, 2023 in Washington, To Know More than a dozen House Democrats, led by Democratic Representatives Suzan DelBene of Washington and Ami Bera of California, sent a letter to CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz on Thursday, requesting information and urging cancellation of a planned prior authorization pilot for traditional Medicare. The lawmakers wrote that "traditional Medicare has rarely required prior authorization," and said that, while prior authorization is "often described as a cost-containment strategy, in practice it increases provider burden, takes time away from patients, limits patients' access to life-saving care, and creates unnecessary administrative burden." The letter asked CMS for details on the pilot's scope, implementation plan and safeguards for beneficiaries. "Prior authorization is often seen as a roadblock to timely, even life-saving care—replacing the doctor's judgment with an algorithm," Kevin Thompson, the CEO of 9i Capital Group and the host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek. "Let's call it what it is: profit-driven healthcare. And profit motive and patient care mix about as well as oil and water. Lawmakers are sounding the alarm, because this directly affects many of their constituents." CMS has planned to roll out the prior authorization program in six states starting in January. The Trump administration previously announced a voluntary pledge from major insurers to simplify prior authorization in Medicare Advantage. Lawmakers said that prior voluntary pledges showed public recognition of the harms of prior authorization, and they urged CMS to reconsider extending similar rules to traditional Medicare. Separately, Senate Republicans discussed broader Medicare changes as part of proposals to reduce waste, fraud and abuse and to modernize CMS operations. Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina said lawmakers were examining CMS contracting practices, duplicate payments and upcoding as potential savings sources, according to The Hill. The Hill also reported that legislation from Louisiana Republican Senator Bill Cassidy and Democratic Senator of Oregon Jeff Merkley to reduce Medicare Advantage overpayments had bipartisan interest and might be folded into larger budget measures considered by Senate Republicans. Idaho Republican Senator Mike Crapo said his committee was "evaluating" Cassidy's proposal. Newsweek reached out to CMS for comment via email. What People Are Saying Lawmakers wrote in their letter to CMS administrator, Dr. Mehmet Oz: "Prior authorization has long been abused, and it is bad for patients and providers. The American Medical Association notes, 'Among America's physicians, more than nine in 10 surveyed say that prior authorization has a negative impact on patient clinical outcomes." We urge you to put patients and providers first by cancelling the WISeR model and exploring other ways to limit fraud, waste, and abuse in the Medicare program." Kevin Thompson, the CEO of 9i Capital Group and the host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek: "Will the letter change things? I doubt it. They'll probably get an answer, but expect the same vague, carefully worded response. The current administration is clear on its intent: privatize more of Medicare and crack down on what they label "waste, fraud, and abuse." Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek: "Few Americans would be in disagreement that services like Medicare and Medicaid should have strong oversight to ensure funding is being properly used, but the concern with the WISeR model being employed is the use of prior authorization for some Medicare services. Medicare Advantage has a history of requiring prior authorization, and while not all uses have been a source of criticism, it is viewed by some beneficiaries as one of several reasons why Advantage has garnered more negative reactions in recent years." What Happens Next CMS faced requests from House Democrats to provide documentation and to cancel the planned prior authorization pilot. Lawmakers in the Senate continue to debate broader Medicare reforms, and committee deliberations could determine whether proposals addressing Medicare Advantage payments or CMS operational changes move into larger legislative packages. "For the time being, the model isn't nationwide and will be piloted in select states," Beene said. "It's difficult to say if this will eventually be implemented nationwide and will largely depend on how this pilot program goes."
