Trump's nominee for Labor secretary walks back support for PRO Act, embraces Republican Right-to-Work laws
Lori Chavez-DeRemer, the pro-union Republican tapped by President Donald Trump for Labor secretary, testified before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) on Wednesday, fielding questions from senators about her support for the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act.
Chavez-DeRemer supported the PRO Act as a representative for Oregon's 5th congressional district. She told senators on Wednesday she no longer supports the aspect of the PRO Act that would have overturned Republican-backed Right-to-Work laws, which could earn her the favor of some Republican senators who were reluctant to confirm her nomination.
The PRO Act would effectively kill state-level laws that prevent employers and unions from requiring workers to pay union dues as a condition of their employment. Republicans, including Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., opposed the PRO Act for overturning Right-to-Work laws. Paul said he would not support her if she continued to support the PRO Act.
"If she wanted to make a public statement saying that her support for the PRO Act was incorrect and she no longer does, then I'd think about her nomination," Paul told Fox News Digital in a statement ahead of Chavez-DeRemer's hearing.
Pro-union Trump Nominee Faces Senate Grilling As At Least One Republican Vows To Oppose Her
As a member of the HELP committee, Paul had the opportunity to question Chavez-DeRemer about the PRO Act on Wednesday.
Read On The Fox News App
Senate Advances Nomination Of Kash Patel, Trump's Pick For Fbi Director
"So you no longer support the aspect of the PRO Act that would have overturned state Right-to-Work laws?" Paul asked during the hearing.
Chavez-DeRemer agreed she no longer supports the aspect of the PRO Act that would have overturned the state's Right-to-Work laws, replying, "Yes, sir."
"Like President Trump, I believe our labor laws need to be updated and modernized to reflect today's workforce and the business environment," Chavez-DeRemer said on Wednesday. "As a member of Congress, the PRO Act was the bill to have those conversations that mattered deeply to the people of Oregon's 5th congressional district. I recognize that that bill was imperfect, and I also recognize that I am no longer representing Oregon as a lawmaker."
Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., also queried Chavez-DeRemer about the PRO Act, questioning if she would change Alabama's Right-to-Work laws.
"My constituents at home want to know that. Are you going to try to change our status as Right-to-Work?" Tuberville asked during the hearing.
"I respect the fact that you are from a Right-to-Work state, and I respect the fact that you can continue to be a Right-to-Work state," Chavez-DeRemer said.
Chavez-DeRemer highlighted the distinction between representing Oregon as a congresswoman and representing Trump's agenda as Labor secretary.
"I signed on to the PRO Act because I was representing Oregon's 5th district, but I also signed on to the PRO Act because I wanted to be at that table and have those conversations. I fully, fairly support states who want to protect their Right-to-Work," Chavez-DeRemer said.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-V.T.) began the hearing by questioning if Chavez-DeRemer would stand by her pro-union values or bend the knee to Trump's "authoritarian" rule.
"You will have to make a choice. Will you be a rubber stamp for the anti-worker agenda of Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and other multi-billionaires who are blatantly anti-union?" Sanders asked.
"Or will you stand with working families all over the country? So that is really the main issue. It's not just your record. This is a very unusual administration. In my view, we are moving toward an authoritarian society where one person has enormous power," Sanders added.
Chavez-DeRemer was joined by her husband, Dr. Shawn DeRemer, father Richard Chavez, mother Patricia Chavez, daughter Annie DeRemer and other extended family members.
In her opening statement, Chavez-DeRemer thanked Trump and credited him with the "single greatest political achievement of our time" – a new coalition of working-class Americans.
"President Trump has united a new coalition of working-class Americans like never before. With 59.6% of Teamsters backing him, historic support from African American and Latino voters, and record-breaking turnout in once-solid blue cities and states—Americans are speaking loud and clear. They are calling for action, progress, and leadership that puts the American worker first," Chavez-DeRemer said.
Chavez-DeRemer advocated for trade school investments to expand "educational pathways beyond the traditional four-year degree" programs that will strengthen the American workforce. She committed to leveling the playing field for American businesses, workers and unions.
"My record of collaboration demonstrates a shared belief that, under President Trump's leadership, we can deliver real solutions. Putting American Workers First is not just a vision but a promise to fight for every working mom, single dad, small business owner, and every American striving for their fair shot at the American Dream," Chavez-DeRemer said.
Less than three weeks after he was elected president, Trump nominated Chavez-DeRemer for U.S. secretary of Labor.
"Lori has worked tirelessly with both Business and Labor to build America's workforce, and support the hardworking men and women of America," Trump said. "I look forward to working with her to create tremendous opportunity for American Workers, to expand training and apprenticeships, to grow wages and improve working conditions, to bring back our manufacturing jobs. Together, we will achieve historic cooperation between Business and Labor that will restore the American Dream for Working Families."Original article source: Trump's nominee for Labor secretary walks back support for PRO Act, embraces Republican Right-to-Work laws
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
24 minutes ago
- Axios
Amid backlash, Tesla remained resilient in Texas
Even as Tesla deliveries plunged nationally this year amid Elon Musk's very visible (if short-lived) alliance with President Trump, there was at least one state where Tesla registrations were up: Texas. Why it matters: The registration data, obtained by Axios through public information requests, indicates loyalty to the brand in its home base, including Texas' large urban and suburban counties. The depth of conservatives' enthusiasm for Musk's automobiles now faces a major test amid the absolute meltdown last week between the Tesla CEO and the president. By the numbers: Texans registered 12,918 new Teslas in the first three months of 2025, a period when Musk, who contributed more than $250 million to a pro-Trump super PAC during the 2024 election campaign, was enmeshed in the Trump administration as the overseer of DOGE, the president's cost-cutting initiative. Over the same period in 2024, Texans registered 10,679 Teslas. That's a 21% increase year over year. The intrigue: The spike in Texas registrations came as Tesla was flailing elsewhere. Tesla's vehicle deliveries plunged 13% globally in the first quarter of 2025 (336,681 electric vehicles) compared with Q1 2024 (386,810). Tesla vehicles were torched at showrooms and the brand's reputation cratered. Zoom in: Tesla saw year-over-year improvements in its sales in some of the most populous Texas counties. In Travis County, new Tesla registrations grew from 1,369 in the first quarter of 2024 to 1,424 during the first quarter of 2025. In Harris County, they grew from 1,526 to 1,837 during the same period. Tesla registration grew from 1,316 to 1,546 in Collin County and from 990 to 1,146 in Dallas County. In Bexar County, registrations grew from 631 to 664. What they're saying:"It's homegrown pride," is how Matt Holm, president and founder of the Tesla Owners Club of Austin, explains the car company's resilience to Axios. "And regardless of all the drama going on these days, people can differentiate between the product and everything else going on, and it's just a great product." "Elon has absolutely and irreversibly blown up bridges to some potential customers," says Alexander Edwards, president of California-based research firm Strategic Vision, which has long surveyed the motivations of car buyers. "People who bought Teslas for environmental friendliness, that's pretty much gone," Edwards tells Axios. Yes, but: The company had been enjoying an increasingly positive reputation among more conservative consumers. Musk was viewed favorably by 80% of Texas Republicans polled by the Texas Politics Project in April — and unfavorably by 83% of Democrats. In what now feels like a political lifetime ago, Trump himself even promoted Teslas by promising to buy one in support of Musk earlier this year. "In some pockets, like Austin, you have that tech group that loves what Tesla has to offer, can do some mental gymnastics about Musk, and looks at Rivian and says that's not what I want or might be priced out," Edwards says. Between the lines:"Being in the state of Texas, you're naturally conditioned to think you're better than everyone else in the U.S. And when you buy a Tesla" — a status symbol — "that's what you're saying. It doesn't surprise me that there's an increase in sales" in Texas, Edwards says. Plus: Tesla's resilience in Texas could have practical reasons as well, Edwards says. Texas homes — as opposed to, say, apartments in cities on the East Coast — are more likely to have a garage to charge a car in, he adds. What's next: Musk said late last month that Tesla was experiencing a "major rebound in demand" — without providing specifics. But that was before things went absolutely haywire with Trump and Tesla stock took a bath last week.
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Colombian presidential candidate in a critical condition following assassination attempt
BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) — Miguel Uribe, a conservative Colombian presidential hopeful, was in critical condition on Monday after being shot in the head from close range during a rally at the weekend. In a statement, doctors said the 39-year-old senator had 'barely' responded to medical interventions, that included brain surgery, following the assassination attempt that has had a chilling effect on the South American nation. Uribe was shot on Saturday as he addressed a small crowd of people who had gathered in a park in Bogota's Modelia neighborhood. On Sunday hundreds of people gathered outside the hospital where Uribe is being treated to pray for his recovery. Some carried rosaries in their hands, while others chanted slogans against President Gustavo Petro. 'This is terrible' said Walter Jimenez a lawyer who showed up outside the hospital, with a sign calling for Petro's removal. 'It feels like we are going back to the 1990's,' he said, referring to a decade during which drug cartels and rebel groups murdered judges, presidential candidates and journalists with impunity. Petro has condemned the attack and urged his opponents to not use it for political ends. But some Colombians have also asked the president to tone down his rhetoric against opposition leaders. The assassination attempt has stunned the nation, with many politicians describing it as the latest sign of how security has deteriorated in Colombia, where the government is struggling to control violence in rural and urban areas, despite a 2016 peace deal with the nation's largest rebel group. The attack on Uribe comes amid growing animosity between Petro and the Senate over blocked reforms to the nation's labor laws. Petro has organized protests in favor of the reforms, where he has delivered fiery speeches referring to opposition leaders as 'oligarchs' and 'enemies of the people." 'There is no way to argue that the president… who describes his opponents as enemies of the people, paramilitaries and assassins has no responsibility in this' Andres Mejia, a prominent political analyst, wrote on X. The Attorney General's office said a 15-year-old boy was arrested at the scene of the attack against Uribe. Videos captured on social media show a suspect shooting at Uribe from close range. The suspect was injured in the leg and was recovering at another clinic, authorities said. Defense Minister Pedro Sánchez added that over 100 officers are investigating the attack. On Monday, Colombia's Attorney General Luz Adriana Camargo said that minors in Colombia face sentences of up to eight years in detention for committing murders. Camargo acknowledged that lenient sentences have encouraged armed groups to recruit minors to commit crimes. However, she said that Colombian law also considers that minors who are recruited by armed groups are victims, and is trying to protect them. 'As a society we need to reflect on why a minor is getting caught up in a network of assassins, and what we can do to stop this from happening in the future' she said.
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
This AI Company Wants Washington To Keep Its Competitors Off the Market
Dario Amodei, CEO of the artificial intelligence company Anthropic, published a guest essay in The New York Times Thursday arguing against a proposed 10-year moratorium on state AI regulation. Amodei argues that a patchwork of regulations would be better than no regulation whatsoever. Skepticism is warranted whenever the head of an incumbent firm calls for more regulation, and this case is no different. If Amodei gets his way, Anthropic would face less competition—to the detriment of AI innovation, AI security, and the consumer. Amodei's op-ed came in a response to a provision of the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which would prevent any states, cities, and counties from enforcing any regulation that specifically targets AI models, AI systems, or automated decision systems for 10 years. Senate Republicans have amended the clause from a simple requirement to a condition for receiving federal broadband funds, in order to comply with the Byrd Rule, which in Politico's words "blocks anything but budgetary issues from inclusion in reconciliation." Amodei begins by describing how, in a recent stress test conducted at his company, a chatbot threatened an experimenter to forward evidence of his adultery to his wife unless he withdrew plans to shut the AI down. The CEO also raises more tangible concerns, such as reports that a version of Google's Gemini model is "approaching a point where it could help people carry out cyberattacks." Matthew Mittelsteadt, a technology fellow at the Cato Institute, tells Reason that the stress test was "very contrived" and that "there are no AI systems where you must prompt it to turn it off." You can just turn it off. He also acknowledges that, while there is "a real cybersecurity danger [of] AI being used to spot and exploit cyber-vulnerabilities, it can also be used to spot and patch" them. Outside of cyberspace and in, well, actual space, Amodei sounds the alarm that AI could acquire the ability "to produce biological and other weapons." But there's nothing new about that: Knowledge and reasoning, organic or artificial—ultimately wielded by people in either case—can be used to cause problems as well as to solve them. An AI that can model three-dimensional protein structures to create cures for previously untreatable diseases can also create virulent, lethal pathogens. Amodei recognizes the double-edged nature of AI and says voluntary model evaluation and publication are insufficient to ensure that benefits outweigh costs. Instead of a 10-year moratorium, Amodei calls on the White House and Congress to work together on a transparency standard for AI companies. In lieu of federal testing standards, Amodei says state laws should pick up the slack without being "overly prescriptive or burdensome." But that caveat is exactly the kind of wishful thinking Amodei indicts proponents of the moratorium for: Not only would 50 state transparency laws be burdensome, says Mittelsteadt, but they could "actually make models less legible." Neil Chilson of the Abundance Institute also inveighed against Amodei's call for state-level regulation, which is much more onerous than Amodei suggests. "The leading state proposals…include audit requirements, algorithmic assessments, consumer disclosures, and some even have criminal penalties," Chilson tweeted, so "the real debate isn't 'transparency vs. nothing,' but 'transparency-only federal floor vs. intrusive state regimes with audits, liability, and even criminal sanctions.'" Mittelsteadt thinks national transparency regulation is "absolutely the way to go." But how the U.S. chooses to regulate AI might not have much bearing on Skynet-doomsday scenarios, because, while America leads the way in AI, it's not the only player in the game. "If bad actors abroad create Amodei's theoretical 'kill everyone bot,' no [American] law will matter," says Mittelsteadt. But such a law can "stand in the way of good actors using these tools for defense." Amodei is not the only CEO of a leading AI company to call for regulation. In 2023, Sam Altman, co-founder and then-CEO of Open AI, called on lawmakers to consider "intergovernmental oversight mechanisms and standard-setting" of AI. In both cases and in any others that come along, the public should beware of calls for AI regulation that will foreclose market entry, protect incumbent firms' profits from being bid away by competitors, and reduce the incentives to maintain market share the benign way: through innovation and product differentiation. The post This AI Company Wants Washington To Keep Its Competitors Off the Market appeared first on
