Democrat Mikie Sherrill and Republican Jack Ciattarelli to face off in race for New Jersey governor
TRENTON, N.J. — Democratic Rep. Mikie Sherrill and Republican Jack Ciattarelli, who had President Donald Trump's endorsement, won their primary elections in New Jersey's race for governor, setting the stage for a November election, poised to be fought in part over affordability and the president's policies.
Sherrill emerged from a crowded field of five experienced rivals on the strength of her biography as a Navy pilot and former prosecutor who has been a vocal critic of President Donald Trump.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
22 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Democratic governors will defend immigration policies before Republican-led House panel
WASHINGTON (AP) — As President Donald Trump spars with California's governor over immigration enforcement, Republicans in Congress are calling other Democratic governors to the Capitol on Thursday to question them over policies limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities. The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform posted a video ahead of the hearing highlighting crimes allegedly committed by immigrants in the U.S. illegally and pledging that 'sanctuary state governors will answer to the American people.' The hearing is to include testimony from Govs. JB Pritzker of Illinois, Tim Walz of Minnesota and Kathy Hochul of New York. There's no legal definition of a sanctuary jurisdiction, but the term generally refers to governments with policies limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Courts previously have upheld the legality of such laws. But Trump's administration has sued Colorado, Illinois, New York and several cities — including Chicago and Rochester, New York — asserting their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal law. Illinois, Minnesota and New York also were among 14 states and hundreds of cities and counties recently listed by the Department of Homeland Security as 'sanctuary jurisdictions defying federal immigration law.' The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. As Trump steps up immigration enforcement, some Democratic-led states have intensified their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting cooperation with immigration agents. Following clashes between crowds of protesters and immigration agents in Los Angeles, Trump deployed the National Guard to protect federal buildings and agents, and California Gov. Gavin Newsom accused Trump of declaring 'a war' on the underpinnings of American democracy. The House Oversight Committee has long been a partisan battleground, and in recent months it has turned its focus to immigration policy. Thursday's hearing follows a similar one in March in which the Republican-led committee questioned the Democratic mayors of Chicago, Boston, Denver and New York about sanctuary policies. Heavily Democratic Chicago has been a sanctuary city for decades. In 2017, then-Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner, a Republican, signed legislation creating statewide protections for immigrants. The Illinois Trust Act prohibits police from searching, arresting or detaining people solely because of their immigration status. But it allows local authorities to hold people for federal immigration authorities if there's a valid criminal warrant. Pritzker, who succeeded Rauner in 2019, said in remarks prepared for the House committee that violent criminals 'have no place on our streets, and if they are undocumented, I want them out of Illinois and out of our country.' 'But we will not divert our limited resources and officers to do the job of the federal government when it is not in the best interest of our state, our local communities, or the safety of our residents,' he said. Pritzker has been among Trump's most outspoken opponents and is considered a potential 2028 presidential candidate. He said Illinois has provided shelter and services to more than 50,000 immigrants who were sent there from other states. A Department of Justice lawsuit against New York challenges a 2019 law that allows immigrants illegally in the U.S. to receive New York driver's licenses and shields driver's license data from federal immigration authorities. That built upon a 2017 executive order by then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo that prohibited New York officials from inquiring about or disclosing a person's immigration status to federal authorities, unless required by law. Hochul's office said law enforcement officers still can cooperate with federal immigration authorities when people are convicted of or under investigation for crimes. Since Hochul took office in 2021, her office said, the state has transferred more than 1,300 incarcerated noncitizens to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the completion of their state sentences. Minnesota doesn't have a statewide sanctuary law protecting immigrants in the U.S. illegally, though Minneapolis and St. Paul both restrict the extent to which police and city employees can cooperate with immigration enforcement. Some laws signed by Walz have secured benefits for people regardless of immigration status. But at least one of those is getting rolled back. The Minnesota Legislature, meeting in a special session, passed legislation Monday to repeal a 2023 law that allowed adults in the U.S. illegally to be covered under a state-run health care program for the working poor. Walz insisted on maintaining eligibility for children who aren't in the country legally, ___ Lieb reported from Jefferson City, Mo. Also contributing were Associated Press writers Anthony Izaguirre in Albany, N.Y.; Steve Karnowski in St. Paul, Minn.; and Sophia Tareen in Chicago.
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Plan to Kill Dozens of NASA Missions Threatens US Space Supremacy
(Bloomberg) -- NASA's car-sized Perseverance rover has been roaming the surface of Mars for four years, drilling into the alien soil to collect dirt it places in tubes and leaves on the ground. Shuttered NY College Has Alumni Fighting Over Its Future Trump's Military Parade Has Washington Bracing for Tanks and Weaponry NYC Renters Brace for Price Hikes After Broker-Fee Ban NY Long Island Rail Service Resumes After Grand Central Fire Do World's Fairs Still Matter? Engineers designed Perseverance to be the first step in the agency's exploration of the Red Planet. In the future, more robotic spacecraft would arrive to sweep up the capsules and rocket them back to Earth, where scientists could look for signs that Mars once was, or is, a world with life. The wait for answers may be about to get longer. President Donald Trump's proposed 2026 budget for the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration would cancel the planned follow-on mission, potentially abandoning the tubes for decades to Martian dust storms. The White House is calling for a roughly 50% cut to NASA's science spending to $3.9 billion, part of an overall pullback that would deliver the lowest funding level in the agency's history and kill more more than 40 NASA science missions and projects, according to detailed plans released last month. The Trump administration has also left the agency without a permanent leader and without a vision for how America's civilian space policy is going to work with US allies and compete with China and other rivals. The cuts would follow a shift in how the American public thinks about space. NASA has long enjoyed a unique place in US culture, with its exploits celebrated by movies, theme parks and merchandise — but companies like Elon Musk's SpaceX have begun to capture more attention. For decades, NASA's scientific undertakings have provided critical groundwork for researchers seeking to understand the structure of the universe, study how planets form and hunt for evidence that life might exist beyond Earth. Pictures from NASA craft like the Hubble Space Telescope and the recently launched James Webb Space Telescope have inspired and delighted millions. Now, the agency's position at the vanguard of discovery is facing foreclosure. Among the other programs set to lose funding are a craft already on its way to rendezvous with an asteroid that's expected to pass close to Earth in 2029, and multiple efforts to map and explore the acidic clouds of Venus. Researchers worry that abandoning missions would mean investments made by earlier generations might be lost or forgotten. 'Once you launch and you're operating, then all those costs are behind you, and it's relatively inexpensive to just keep the missions going,' said Amanda Hendrix, the chief executive officer of the Planetary Science Institute, a nonprofit research organization. 'So I'm very concerned about these operating missions that are still producing excellent and really important science data.' The Trump administration's narrower vision for NASA comes as it is seeking to reduce waste and jobs in the US government. Critics have faulted NASA over sluggish management of key programs, spiraling costs and delays. Still, the administration is eager to pour more money into putting people in space. It wants to use $7 billion of the $18.8 billion it would allocate to NASA overall to ramp up efforts to return people to the moon, and invest $1 billion more in sending people to Mars. 'This is a NASA that would be primarily human spaceflight focused,' Casey Dreier, chief of space policy for The Planetary Society, a nonprofit that advocates for space science and exploration, said of the proposed changes. 'This is a NASA that would say, 'The universe is primarily the moon and Mars,' and basically step away from everything else.' There are signs that the administration's proposed cutbacks won't satisfy lawmakers who view space as vital to US interests. Senator Ted Cruz, the Texas Republican who leads a committee that oversees NASA, has proposed legislation that would would provide nearly $10 billion to the agency. 'American dominance in space is a national security imperative,' Cruz said in a statement to Bloomberg. 'The Commerce Committee's bill carefully invests in beating China to the Moon and Mars — while respecting every taxpayer dollar. It's rocket fuel for the commercial space companies and NASA that are working to keep America ahead of China in the Space Race.' As Trump's spending proposal moves through Congress, NASA has been left without a strong leader who can press its case after the president withdrew his nomination of billionaire commercial astronaut Jared Isaacman to run the agency. In a recent interview on the All-In Podcast, Isaacman appeared to suggest Trump pulled his nomination because of his close ties to Musk, who had a public falling out with the president. Trump threatened to cancel SpaceX's government contracts amid the row, but has since backed down. 'Stopping Jared from becoming confirmed is only going to hurt NASA's ability to push back on budget cuts,' Jim Muncy, a space consultant and lobbyist with PoliSpace, said before Isaacman's nomination was pulled. Spaceflight Shift For decades, NASA handled every step of launching rockets, probes and people into space, from developing, building and launching vehicles, to running missions. Only the government had the resources and the capacity to shoulder the risks without returning a profit. That all changed in recent years with the emergence of a vibrant US space industry dominated by wealthy entrepreneurs with a passion for spaceflight and the financial wherewithal to withstand repeated failure. Over time, NASA has ceded more design, development and production work to those companies. SpaceX is carrying cargo and astronauts to the International Space Station, and sending probes into deep space from a rented launchpad at NASA's Kennedy Space Center. After helping to spur the development of SpaceX hardware, NASA is now one of the company's biggest customers. 'This has kind of been the tension with the rise of commercial space,' said Mike French, a consultant for the Space Policy Group. 'NASA has gone from 'We're operating these things; we're building these things' to 'We've gotten really good at buying these things.'' During Trump's presidency, NASA's transformation into an incubator for private industry is likely to gain speed. Throughout its budget proposal, the White House calls for mimicking past programs that have leaned more on outsourcing to the private sector. 'With a leaner budget across all of government, we are all taking a closer look at how we work, where we invest, and how we adjust our methods to accomplish our mission,' NASA's acting administrator, Janet Petro, wrote in a message accompanying the plan. 'At NASA, that means placing a renewed emphasis on human spaceflight, increasing investments in a sustainable plan to return to the Moon for long-term human exploration and accelerating efforts to send American astronauts to Mars.' NASA declined to comment beyond Petro's statement. NASA contracts remain one of the most significant and steady sources of funding for the space industry, which has allowed the agency to set the direction for many businesses. But that balance of power is shifting, and cuts to NASA's funding could cause its leadership to fade. 'NASA would, in a sense, define access and define the culture of spaceflight and define the ambitions of spaceflight,' Dreier said. 'Now, they have competitors for that, and frankly, some of their competitors are laying out more ambitious programs.' Challenging Missions While NASA has evolved into a technical adviser and financial backer for space companies, pure science has remained part of its mission. NASA's transition to more commercial partnerships was started, in part, to free up money to spend on exotic, challenging missions with no obvious near-term commercial rewards. Pulling back is likely to have consequences. Trump's broader push to curtail funding for science — the administration has choked off money for medical, climate and other research — risks eroding an important source of American soft power. After the end of the Cold War-era space race, NASA became a vessel for international cooperation, proving countries with lofty goals can work together. Many of the NASA missions Trump has proposed canceling or pulling away from entailed collaboration with European allies. The prospect of reduced funding is also causing worry about agency talent. Already, NASA is competing with the private space industry for engineers. Shutting down missions could push agency scientists to seek other opportunities. 'Folks are very worried about what they're going to do now with their lives, and where they're going to go,' said Hendrix, the Planetary Science Institute's CEO. The long-term outlook for NASA is difficult to discern. In the coming years, it is expected to continue its Artemis moon program, and start a new program for human exploration of Mars, with commercial companies at the forefront. But the scientific ambitions that long helped define NASA appear likely to become more limited. 'If we elect to say we no longer want to understand our origins, or we no longer want to challenge ourselves to see if there's life out in the cosmos, that is the equivalent of turning our heads down and burying ourselves in our cell phones when we're standing at the edge of the Grand Canyon,' said The Planetary Society's Dreier. 'We miss something more profound and big and deep that we otherwise have no access to in our modern society.' New Grads Join Worst Entry-Level Job Market in Years American Mid: Hampton Inn's Good-Enough Formula for World Domination The Spying Scandal Rocking the World of HR Software The SEC Pinned Its Hack on a Few Hapless Day Traders. The Full Story Is Far More Troubling Cavs Owner Dan Gilbert Wants to Donate His Billions—and Walk Again ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The $11 trillion gap between White House and economists on Trump's 'big, beautiful' bill
An array of economists — from the Congressional Budget Office to the Tax Foundation to the Penn-Wharton Budget Model — have reached a similar conclusion: Trump's signature legislation comes with a price tag in the neighborhood of $3 trillion over the next decade. They're all wrong, the White House says. And not just by a little. President Trump and his aides have instead offered claims that the bill will make money and that the final tally for both the tax-cutting legislation and other parts of the Trump agenda will usher in a new golden age not just for the US economy but also for government debt. The claims from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue go as high as $8 trillion in black ink (an $11 trillion chasm with the experts) in claims that go beyond what even Capitol Hill Republicans are projecting. As for reconciling the two, some economists essentially throw up their hands. "You can't square it because it's ridiculous," Erica York of the Tax Foundation said. "The bill unambiguously will increase deficits, it will not contribute that much to economic growth," she added, noting that the bill is largely focused on extending current tax rates that would not be expected to push the economy significantly upward from current levels. Yet the White House has remained steadfast even as this gap has led to increased tensions as the bill goes through another round of adjustments on Capitol Hill. A Wednesday appearance before Congress by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent was marked by lawmakers — mostly Democratic, but some Republicans as well — raising the debt issue. In one colorful moment, Democratic Rep. Mike Thompson of California asked Bessent to point to an independent expert "not on the payroll of this administration" who says this bill will not add to our debt. Bessent then cited Arthur Laffer, the former Reagan official and longtime Trump supporter who received the Presidential Medal of Freedom during the president's first term. The comment led to laughter in the chamber, with Thompson shooting back, "I don't think that one counts." It was a hearing where Bessent declined to repeat some of the administration's most aggressive claims, saying instead that "it remains to be seen" whether the bill will add to the national debt. Others have not been so restrained about the impact of Trump's overall agenda. "We're going to cut the deficit by $8 trillion over the next 10 years," press secretary Karoline Leavitt offered recently on Fox News. And a recent White House memo offered a slightly lower figure of about $6.7 trillion to $6.9 trillion in deficit reductions over the coming decade. One issue is that White House projections rely on a set of assumptions that are often internally contradictory, such as taking credit for taxes spurring economic growth while simultaneously saying they have no cost. Other parts of the bill would enact temporary tax cuts — and then take credit for lower costs there — while also claiming other permanent cuts are free. That's in addition to an overriding assumption at the White House that, essentially, things break historically right for the US economy and sustained 3% economic growth is in the offing. That's above even what House Republicans are projecting, as lawmakers there have rallied behind a lower (but still very aggressive) assumption of 2.6% growth. Both projections are unlikely, Marc Goldwein of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget said. "Some people are at 2%, some people are at 1.6% ... that is the neighborhood," he said of a series of projections for growth that hover around 1.8%. He added in an interview that even if sustained 3% growth were to happen, "it would have very little to do with this tax bill." Yet the White House has repeatedly dismissed the experts. Trump budget chief Russ Vought recently told reporters that everything "is part of a coherent fiscal agenda" and that the combination of tax cuts, tariffs, additional promised spending cuts, and "reforms we can do ourselves" to programs like Medicaid will lead to good outcomes for the US bottom line. White House projections also fully embrace recent CBO projections of $2.8 trillion in tariff revenues over the coming decade. But that embrace appears to ignore a prediction in the same report that tariffs will "reduce the size of the U.S. economy" and also lead to a potential inflation increase of 0.4 percentage points in 2025 and 2026. York has calculated that even two seemingly minor adjustments — taking the slightly lower but still very aggressive House estimate of 2.6% economic growth and factoring in the economic costs of tariffs — means the bill "is basically a wash or even negative for GDP." "They're picking and choosing," she added. Read more: What Trump's tariffs mean for the economy and your wallet And few are expecting tariffs to stay steady in the coming months, not to mention the coming years. Tariff levels are under active negotiation — two fronts this week are duties on goods from China and India — as the CBO report assumed rates remain steady not just during Trump's term, but also years after he is scheduled to leave office. The tariffs are also under a considerable cloud of legal uncertainty, with an appeals court ruling on Tuesday that Trump's "Liberation Day" tariffs could stay in force for now while it considers whether they are legal. "Even if they are upheld by the courts, it still seems like the Trump administration is willing to negotiate them down somewhat," York noted, "and then what happens in four years when a new administration comes in?" Ben Werschkul is Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. David Foster is a graphic artist for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
