Latest news with #Democratic-majority
Axios
5 days ago
- Business
- Axios
Colorado calls special session to address cuts due to "big, beautiful bill"
Colorado Gov. Jared Polis is calling a special legislative session for later this month to fix a $1 billion budget shortfall and clarify the state's artificial intelligence law. Why it matters: The Democratic-majority Legislature must plug a massive budget hole while shoring up Medicaid coverage, food assistance programs and insurance subsidies disrupted by President Trump's reconciliation bill. State of play: The special session starting Aug. 27 comes three months after the regular term ended, but state lawmakers face a completely new fiscal outlook with the passage of H.R. 1, dubbed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The session will take at least three days — the minimum required to pass a bill in Colorado — but will likely last longer. By the numbers: Colorado's current budget is $783 million short, according to a revised estimate from the governor's budget chief. Polis announced a hiring freeze on Wednesday effective Sept. 1 through the end of the year to save at least $3 million in state expenditures. The intrigue: Even before the federal bill, lawmaker faced a spending pinch this year — one so deep that they cut roughly $30 million set aside for potential special sessions. The other side: Republican lawmakers expressed frustration that it took the governor so long to fix the budget. "I'm just bamboozled with what's going on," Rep. Rick Taggart (R-Grand Junction) said at a budget hearing earlier this week.
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
'I warned you': Left-wing governor scraps migrant shelter plan after $1B blowup
Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey announced the closure of all remaining hotel shelters in the Bay State amid the formal termination of her executive emergency focused on the state's Biden-era migrant influx. Meanwhile, Mike Kennealy -- her Republican rival in the 2026 gubernatorial sweeps who also served as the state's housing secretary under GOP Gov. Charlie Baker -- is telling the Democrat, "I told you so." Healey described her emergency order period as a success, saying that when she took over from Baker, "families were being placed in hotels all across the state, and families were staying in shelter for months – sometimes years – at a time." "There was no plan in place to reform the shelter system to handle the surge in demand, protect taxpayer dollars or help families leave shelter. We can all agree that a hotel is no place to raise a family. So, we took action," Healey said, as the state employed hotels, community centers and even a defunct prison to house the influx. It'll Upend The Community: Pa Town Roiled By Talk Of Migrant Housing In Civil-war Era Orphanage In 1983, then-Gov. Michael Dukakis signed what remains the nation's only statewide right-to-shelter law, which set in motion the conditions for such a migrant housing crisis. Read On The Fox News App Healey and the Democratic-majority legislature in Boston revised Dukakis' law to a six-month limit on that right, and to require proof of residency as well as proper immigration paperwork with some exceptions. Kennealy said he warned Healey about a "potential, looming migrant crisis – I warned her in writing." "She didn't listen," he posted Tuesday, accusing Healey of "playing politics" with the Biden-era migrant crisis and "selling false hope" to migrants and taxpayers. Massachusetts Resident Condemns Right-to-shelter Law Turning Bay State Into 'Destination For Migrants' "The hotels may be closed for now, but the crisis lives on through the HomeBASE program and runaway spending," Kennealy said, adding that if elected he will "audit and fix it." Kennealy's comments came weeks after a report showed Bay Staters will spend as much as $1 billion cumulatively on the state's emergency shelter program in FY-2025, with migrant families making up a significant share of those receiving assistance. The costs work out at about $3,496 per week per family, or around $1,000 per person per week for the program, known as the Emergency Assistance system, according to the state's Executive Office for Housing and Livable Communities. A Healey spokesperson told the Boston Herald on Monday that the governor "inherited a disaster of a shelter system" from Kennealy, whom she said offered scant substantive advice. Click To Get The Fox News App "Gov. Healey is the one who took action to implement a length of stay limit, mandate criminal background checks, require residents to prove Massachusetts residency and lawful immigration status, and get families out of hotels," Karissa Hand told the paper. A Kennealy spokesperson told the paper the now-candidate had warned both Healey and Lt. Gov. Kim Driscoll of the impending crisis in-person. Fox News Digital's Michael Dorgan contributed to this article source: 'I warned you': Left-wing governor scraps migrant shelter plan after $1B blowup Solve the daily Crossword
Fox News
6 days ago
- Politics
- Fox News
'I warned you': Left-wing governor scraps migrant shelter plan after $1B blowup
Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey announced the closure of all remaining hotel shelters in the Bay State amid the formal termination of her executive emergency focused on the state's Biden-era migrant influx. Meanwhile, Mike Kennealy -- her Republican rival in the 2026 gubernatorial sweeps who also served as the state's housing secretary under GOP Gov. Charlie Baker -- is telling the Democrat, "I told you so." Healey described her emergency order period as a success, saying that when she took over from Baker, "families were being placed in hotels all across the state, and families were staying in shelter for months – sometimes years – at a time." "There was no plan in place to reform the shelter system to handle the surge in demand, protect taxpayer dollars or help families leave shelter. We can all agree that a hotel is no place to raise a family. So, we took action," Healey said, as the state employed hotels, community centers and even a defunct prison to house the influx. In 1983, then-Gov. Michael Dukakis signed what remains the nation's only statewide right-to-shelter law, which set in motion the conditions for such a migrant housing crisis. Healey and the Democratic-majority legislature in Boston revised Dukakis' law to a six-month limit on that right, and to require proof of residency as well as proper immigration paperwork with some exceptions. Kennealy said he warned Healey about a "potential, looming migrant crisis – I warned her in writing." "She didn't listen," he posted Tuesday, accusing Healey of "playing politics" with the Biden-era migrant crisis and "selling false hope" to migrants and taxpayers. "The hotels may be closed for now, but the crisis lives on through the HomeBASE program and runaway spending," Kennealy said, adding that if elected he will "audit and fix it." Kennealy's comments came weeks after a report showed Bay Staters will spend as much as $1 billion cumulatively on the state's emergency shelter program in FY-2025, with migrant families making up a significant share of those receiving assistance. The costs work out at about $3,496 per week per family, or around $1,000 per person per week for the program, known as the Emergency Assistance system, according to the state's Executive Office for Housing and Livable Communities. A Healey spokesperson told the Boston Herald on Monday that the governor "inherited a disaster of a shelter system" from Kennealy, whom she said offered scant substantive advice. "Gov. Healey is the one who took action to implement a length of stay limit, mandate criminal background checks, require residents to prove Massachusetts residency and lawful immigration status, and get families out of hotels," Karissa Hand told the paper. A Kennealy spokesperson told the paper the now-candidate had warned both Healey and Lt. Gov. Kim Driscoll of the impending crisis in-person.
Time of India
02-08-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Newsom may call special California election to decide on new Congressional maps - here's what redistricting means
Gavin Newsom pushes for special California election to redraw congressional maps as Trump's GOP reshapes Texas districts- In a bold and controversial move, California Governor Gavin Newsom is preparing to call a special statewide election in November 2025 to allow voters to approve new congressional maps. This high-stakes maneuver is aimed at countering the Republican redistricting strategy led by President Donald Trump in Texas, which could shift the balance of power in the U.S. House of Representatives. Newsom's proposal is drawing national attention, stirring political debates, and raising legal questions about the future of fair redistricting in America. Newsom wants voters to decide on new congressional maps this November Gavin Newsom is considering a November 2025 special election to put the power of redrawing California's congressional districts directly into the hands of voters. If approved, this would temporarily bypass the state's independent Citizens Redistricting Commission, a voter-approved body responsible for creating fair and nonpartisan political maps since 2010. Instead, new maps would be crafted by the Democratic-majority California Legislature, then submitted to voters for approval. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category healthcare Others Management Design Thinking Technology Data Science Digital Marketing Product Management Public Policy Project Management Operations Management Healthcare Data Analytics Data Science Finance Cybersecurity CXO Artificial Intelligence MCA others Leadership Degree PGDM MBA Skills you'll gain: Duration: 11 Months IIM Lucknow CERT-IIML Healthcare Management India Starts on undefined Get Details The maps would apply to the 2026, 2028, and 2030 U.S. House elections. After 2030, the current redistricting commission system would be restored, according to Newsom's plan. The governor emphasized that this is a temporary strategic response, not a permanent change to the system. Trump-backed Texas redistricting plan prompts California's counter move This proposal comes in direct response to President Trump's Republican allies in Texas, who are currently pushing for mid-decade redistricting to add up to five new GOP-leaning congressional districts. Texas had already redrawn its districts after the 2020 Census, but now Republicans are aggressively pursuing a second redistricting effort before the 2026 elections to strengthen their hold in the House. Newsom described California's plan as a "counterattack" against what he sees as a deeply unfair and partisan move by Texas Republicans. In a statement to reporters, he said, 'We can't let them play by a different set of rules while we tie our own hands. Democracy can't be one-sided.' Live Events Democrats argue they must fight fire with fire to protect the House With control of the U.S. House at stake in 2026, Democratic leaders are warning that if red states like Texas manipulate congressional maps to favor the GOP, blue states must respond in kind to protect representative balance. Newsom and other Democratic governors have been under pressure to retaliate strategically and prevent a Republican supermajority engineered through redistricting alone. The governor's plan would allow California to potentially gain Democratic-friendly districts to offset GOP gains in Texas. If successful, it could have a major impact on the outcome of the 2026 midterms and help Democrats maintain—or even retake—control of Congress. A special election in California could cost over $200 million The idea of a statewide special election in an off-year like 2025 is not without precedent. California held a high-profile gubernatorial recall election in 2021, which cost taxpayers around $208 million. Newsom acknowledged the high price tag but insisted that protecting democracy is worth the investment. 'This isn't just about California,' Newsom said. 'This is about ensuring every voter in this country is represented fairly and not silenced by gerrymandering power plays in other states.' State officials estimate that a November 2025 special election could cost upwards of $200 million, especially if held alongside already scheduled local elections in various counties. Critics slam the plan as a dangerous attack on nonpartisan redistricting Despite support from national Democrats, Newsom's proposal is facing strong criticism from voting rights advocates and good government groups who argue that tampering with the independent redistricting process, even temporarily, sets a dangerous precedent. The California Citizens Redistricting Commission, created through two voter-approved ballot measures in 2008 and 2010, was hailed as a model for nonpartisan mapmaking. Critics warn that overriding it—no matter the reason—undermines public trust in fair elections and could erode California's reputation for political integrity. 'This is a slippery slope,' said Kathay Feng, a prominent voting rights attorney. 'If we gut the commission every time it's politically convenient, what's to stop future governors from doing the same?' Legal experts warn of constitutional and court challenges ahead To implement this plan, Newsom may need a constitutional amendment or legislative referral, which would require voter approval. Legal experts warn that any attempt to bypass the redistricting commission will face swift legal challenges, potentially delaying or even blocking the new maps from being used in 2026. Election law scholars say California's state constitution provides strong protections for the redistricting commission. Altering that structure, even temporarily, may spark lengthy court battles that could leave congressional races in limbo. Still, Newsom seems ready for the fight. 'Texas isn't following the rules,' he said. 'If we don't stand up now, they will redraw democracy on their terms.' Newsom's 2028 ambitions may hinge on the success of this plan This high-stakes redistricting gamble could have serious consequences for Gavin Newsom's political future. The California governor is widely seen as a potential Democratic presidential contender in 2028, especially if President Trump seeks a second term. If Newsom succeeds in mobilizing voters, winning legal battles, and helping Democrats secure additional House seats, it could position him as a national Democratic hero. But if the plan backfires—either legally, politically, or financially—it may damage his credibility and embolden critics who see the move as partisan overreach. 'This is risky,' said a longtime Democratic strategist. 'But boldness is sometimes what defines leadership. Newsom is betting big on the idea that voters will see this as defending democracy, not undermining it.' Timeline: What happens next in California The California State Legislature is expected to reconvene on August 18, 2025 . Lawmakers will debate the proposal and decide whether to place the redistricting measure on the November ballot. If the plan advances, here's what to expect: Late August 2025 : Final legislative approval of the ballot proposition September 2025 : Draft maps released by the Legislature and public campaign begins November 4, 2025 : Statewide special election held alongside local contests 2026 : If approved, new maps go into effect for congressional elections Meanwhile, advocacy groups on both sides are already preparing media campaigns, legal briefs, and voter outreach as the battle over the future of congressional redistricting heats up in the Golden State. A defining moment for redistricting fairness and national politics Gavin Newsom's move to redraw California's House districts in response to Trump's Republican redistricting playbook in Texas is more than a state political drama—it's a national test of how Democrats plan to respond to partisan gerrymandering. With the balance of power in Congress hanging by a thread, both parties are now openly embracing political map warfare. The big question is whether voters in California, a state long known for championing electoral fairness, are ready to join the fight—and whether doing so will help or hurt the cause of democracy in the long run. As the November 2025 special election approaches, all eyes will be on California—not just as the largest blue state, but as the new front line in America's redistricting battle. FAQs: Q1: Why is Gavin Newsom planning a special election in California in 2025? To let voters decide if lawmakers should redraw congressional maps in response to GOP redistricting. Q2: What happens if California overrides its redistricting commission in 2025? It could allow Democrats to create new districts for 2026–2030 to counter GOP gains.
Yahoo
01-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Big Tax Bill Passes Senate With Less ‘Beautiful' Plan for National School Choice
The Senate on Tuesday passed the nation's first federal tax credit scholarship program as part of a massive tax and spending bill President Donald Trump wants to sign by July 4. But the provision is significantly watered down from the one school choice advocates have been working toward since the first Trump administration. As it currently stands, states may opt in, meaning many Democratic-majority states probably won't participate. Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter Jim Blew, co-founder of the Defense of Freedom Institute, a conservative think tank, called the Senate passage 'an important step toward making sure every family and teacher in our country enjoys education freedom.' But the restrictions, he said, will 'make it very, very hard to put funds into the hands of families who just want to get their children in a better school.' House staff began deliberations over the bill immediately, with a vote expected Wednesday. But it's unclear how members will greet the revamped choice plan. The plan grants donors to scholarship organizations a tax credit for the same amount they contribute. Those nonprofits then award funds to families for private school tuition and other educational expenses. But unlike the more expansive plan the House passed in late May, the Senate gives states a say over which groups can participate and strikes language that would have prohibited any control over private schools. That could be a major sticking point for House members, said Joshua Cowen, an education professor at Michigan State University and a vocal voucher opponent. 'Maybe they'll just hold their nose and pass it,' he said. But that would come at the cost of 'the most wide-ranging federal regulations we'd ever see on private and religious K-12 schools.' Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, a longtime sponsor of the Educational Choice for Children Act, didn't mention the revisions when he addressed the chamber during the early morning hours Tuesday after members worked on Trump's 'one big beautiful bill' through the night. 'This tax credit provision will unleash billions of dollars every single year for scholarships for kids to attend the K-through-12 school of their choice,' he said, calling school choice 'the civil rights issue of the 21st century.' The new program is just a small part of a legislative package that continues Trump's 2017 tax cuts and could add at least $3 trillion to the national debt by 2034. With a trifecta in Congress and the White House, Republicans passed the bill in a party-line vote. But Vice President J.D. Vance still had to break a 50-50 tie in the Senate after opposition from Republican Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Susan Collins of Maine. The legislation includes other child-related provisions, including the extension of an existing $2,000 child tax credit. The House version boosts it to $2,500, while the Senate version increases the credit to $2,200. 'Trump accounts,' a new feature, would provide a $1,000 investment fund for children that they could later use for education or a house. Among the most controversial changes are cuts and work requirements for Medicaid and food assistance programs for low-income families. The $1 trillion proposed cut to Medicaid could especially impact children in rural areas who are more likely to depend on the program for health care. On the Senate floor Monday morning, Senate Majority Leader John Thune said the 'reforms' make the program more efficient by targeting 'people who are supposed to benefit from Medicaid.' But Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, ranking member of the finance committee, warned: 'Kids with disabilities will lose health care.' Those provisions have generated far more debate among GOP members than the school choice provision. But Republicans made significant changes to that portion after a Senate official ruled Thursday that it didn't meet the standards for reconciliation and would require 60 votes to pass. In addition to allowing government oversight, Republicans dropped the total amount a donor can contribute from 10% of their annual income to $1,700. 'To raise $1.7 million for scholarships, [organizations]need to identify 1,000 donors, which is a lot harder to do,' Blew said. 'That wasn't done to help students or families.' Multiple questions remain over which families stand to benefit the most from the program. Some existing scholarship groups target funds to low-income students, but the federal program lacks such a requirement. The bill sets eligibility at 300% of median income, meaning that in higher-income areas, families earning nearly half a million dollars could use the scholarships. Preference for the scholarships would also go to students who received them the previous year or to their siblings, contributing to concerns that families who already have their children in private schools would be more likely to receive a voucher. 'You can be a very wealthy family in a very wealthy area and still be eligible for [these] funds,' said Jon Valant, director of the Brown Center on Education Policy at the left-leaning Brookings Institution. 'Who knows exactly how this is going to play out.' Supporters say the program will bring private school choice to students nationwide at a time of increasing demand. Tennessee's newly expanded voucher program, for example, received roughly 33,000 applications in the first few hours it was open on May 15, creating technical glitches Opponents argue the program allows donors to avoid taxes and would fund tuition at schools that discriminate against students. Related The House version, Cowan said, 'rams' vouchers into states like Michigan that have rejected them since 2000. Michigan billionaire Betsy DeVos, who promoted a similar federal plan as education secretary during Trump's first term, failed to get a voucher initiative on the ballot in 2023. Kentucky and Colorado said no to private school choice initiatives last November, and Nebraska voters repealed a program lawmakers passed in that state in 2024. In other states — Ohio, South Carolina and Utah — judges have ruled that voucher programs violate the law. On Tuesday, DeVos sounded a triumphant note, calling the Senate passage 'a major win for students and families' on X. Cowan said the vote would not give the former secretary 'her long-sought after goal of forcing vouchers into the states using the tax code' and gives 'substantial authority to state governors and perhaps [education] agencies to say 'no.' ' Education Secretary Linda McMahon welcomed a provision that limits student loans for college, but had nothing to say about the school choice aspect of the bill. Related Critics frequently cite the scarcity of private schools in rural areas as the reason they oppose vouchers. A data analysis from the Urban Institute shows that over 60% of students in urban areas live within two miles of a private school, compared with just a quarter of students in rural areas. Participation in the new program depends on how many families apply and the size of scholarships. Historically, take up rates have been relatively low with new voucher programs, said Colyn Ritter, a senior research associate at EdChoice, an advocacy organization. If scholarships are large enough to cover the full ride to some private schools, which averages about $12,000 nationwide, more families might seek a scholarship, Ritter said. But that amount wouldn't be enough to afford more expensive schools in the Northeast. If scholarship awards are as low as $2,500, that might offer a cut on tuition for families who can make up the difference, but it wouldn't be enough to make private school an option for a family in poverty, he said. Families could use the scholarships for homeschooling costs, like tutoring, curriculum and educational therapies. But Ritter called homeschoolers a 'hard-to-predict' group. The population has grown more diverse racially and politically. Some, he said, could be 'early adopters' of the new funds, but many homeschoolers are still leery of government-run programs. 'We just want to make sure that there are no strings attached and that we won't end up in some government database that can track us and tell us what to do in the future,' said Faith Howe, president of Texans for Homeschool Freedom. Related The Children's Scholarship Fund in New York is one of the nonprofits that would likely participate in the program. The group has affiliates in 23 states, including several blue states, that are closely watching negotiations over the final wording, said spokeswoman Elizabeth Toomey. Her organization has a small homeschool pilot program and might take advantage of the new legislation to expand it. Forty families currently receive $1,000 to spend on approved expenses through the ClassWallet platform, the same way many state education savings accounts operate. But the group's core mission, Toomey said, is awarding roughly 7,000 scholarships each year to students from low-income families across New York City. Recipients receive, on average, about $2,500 toward tuition, but Toomey said the new federal program would allow the organization to increase the award and serve more families. She acknowledged that a scholarship might not help the 'poorest of the poor,' but has helped push many families 'into a position where they can afford private school.'
