Latest news with #HouseofDelegates
Yahoo
07-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Virginia emerges as key bellwether ahead of midterms
Virginia's off-year elections are being viewed by both parties as a key bellwether heading into next year's midterms, as well as a potential indicator for how voters view President Trump. Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears (R) and former Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.) will face off to become the first female governor of the state, while Democrats will seek to maintain and grow their majority in the House of Delegates. The races could prove to be a litmus test for the first year of Trump's second administration as Republicans prepare to defend their majorities in Congress next year, especially as Virginia has a tendency to oscillate between the two parties in the race for governor. 'The Democrats want to look at this as a bellwether largely because they think they have an advantage here,' longtime Virginia political analyst Bob Holsworth said. The nonpartisan Cook Political Report and Sabato's Crystal Ball each rate the gubernatorial contest as 'lean Democratic.' A Roanoke College survey released in May showed Spanberger with a wide 43 percent to 26 percent lead over Earle-Sears, with 28 percent of voters saying they were undecided. However, another May poll released by the business group Virginia FREE showed Spanberger leading by 4 percentage points. Spanberger also holds a fundraising lead over Earle-Sears. According to the Virginia Public Access Project, Spanberger raised $6.5 million, while Earle-Sears brought in $3.5 million; Spanberger currently has more than $14 million in the bank, while Earle-Sears has just less than $3 million. Spanberger, a former intelligence officer, has a history as a formidable candidate, having unseated former Rep. Dave Brat (R) in the state's highly competitive 7th Congressional District and gone on to win reelection twice. Additionally, she has touted herself as a moderate Democrat, pointing to her work across the aisle while serving in the House. While Spanberger has touted a number of kitchen table issues including affordability, investing in schools and community safety, she also often points to federal government job cuts made under Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The cuts have had a unique impact on Virginia, given the federal government's close proximity to the state. 'Virginia is home to more than 320,000 federal employees,' Spanberger said in an interview with The Hill. 'I will never miss an opportunity to make sure the president understands that the haphazard DOGE effort has been deeply, deeply detrimental to Virginians, to their families, to our economy, and that the havoc it has wreaked across our commonwealth is so significant.' 'As a former national security professional, I have dire concerns about what the future looks like,' she said, referring to laid-off government employees with 'institutional understanding and historical references.' Earle-Sears, who is originally from Jamaica, has a background as a Marine Corps veteran and business owner. She served in the House of Delegates from 2002-04, ending her tenure when she challenged Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) in the state's 3rd Congressional District in 2004. In 2021, she became Virginia's first female lieutenant governor, winning alongside Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) and Attorney General Jason Miyares (R). Earle-Sears has leaned into her work in the Youngkin administration in making her case to the commonwealth's voters, particularly on job creation. '[Voters] all pretty much say they want what we are doing in Virginia to continue, and my opponent's problem is she was never a part of creating this great economy that we have, bringing all these jobs to Virginia,' Earle-Sears told The Hill in an interview. In the wake of the DOGE cuts, Youngkin and Earle-Sears have touted the administration's 'Virginia Has Jobs' initiative, which includes 250,000 open jobs in the state. A 'support resource bundle' would also be available to federal workers looking for work. Democrats have attacked Earle-Sears over her response to the impact of DOGE cuts on the state, however, pointing to remarks she made earlier this year in which she touted the state's jobs initiative and said losing a job is 'not unusual.' 'I have lost a job, and in any room that this has been brought up, I ask the people: 'How many of you have ever lost a job?'' Earle-Sears told The Hill last month, referring to remarks from earlier this year. 'I raised my hand, along with them. And I got to tell you, we don't want people to, of course, not have jobs, and that's why we have been so successful in creating over 270,000 of them.' However, Republicans are still voicing concerns about Earle-Sears's chances in November. Veteran GOP strategist and senior adviser to Trump's 2024 presidential campaign Chris LaCivita called her staff 'amateurs' in a post on the social platform X in May, while one Virginia Republican strategist called this year's cycle 'a hard hill to climb' for Republicans. 'The money disadvantage is massive, and that's a problem,' the Virginia GOP strategist said. 'That's the challenge beyond structure: the resource piece, and running really good campaigns.' The strategist noted that in addition to touting her work in Youngkin's administration, Earle-Sears could draw on issues that have played well for Republicans nationally. 'There are encouraging signs,' the strategist said. 'Obviously the president's approval rating, stability around the world, stability on trade policy. There are the conditions for the national environment to be solid, and yet still it is a challenging state to compete in simply because of the makeup of the state and, historically, just with the party in power, it makes it difficult to [hold onto the governorship].' During Trump's first administration in 2017, Democrats saw victories in the gubernatorial, lieutenant gubernatorial and state attorney general races. Democrats did not win a majority in the House of Delegates that year, but they narrowed the GOP majority to one seat. Two years later, in 2019, Virginia Democrats gained control of the House of Delegates and the state Senate, giving the party control of both legislative chambers and the governor's mansion for the first time since 1994. In 2021, when former President Biden was in the White House, Republicans hit back in the state's off-year elections, when they won back control of the House of Delegates and Youngkin won the gubernatorial contest. When asked about whether Trump's presence in the White House will impact the gubernatorial race, Earle-Sears said the campaign is about her and Spanberger. 'This race is about Abigail Spanberger and me and the commonsense ideas that I stand for,' Earle-Sears said. 'People can differentiate and make that distinction.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
07-07-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Virginia emerges as key bellwether ahead of midterms
Virginia's off-year elections are being viewed by both parties as a key bellwether heading into next year's midterms, as well as a potential indicator for how voters view President Trump. Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears (R) and former Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.) will face off to become the first female governor of the state, while Democrats will seek to maintain and grow their majority in the House of Delegates. The races could prove to be a litmus test for the first year of Trump's second administration as Republicans prepare to defend their majorities in Congress next year, especially as Virginia has a tendency to oscillate between the two parties in the race for governor. 'The Democrats want to look at this as a bellwether largely because they think they have an advantage here,' said veteran Virginia political analyst Bob Holsworth. The nonpartisan Cook Political Report and Sabato's Crystal Ball each rate the gubernatorial contest as 'lean Democratic.' A Roanoke College survey released in May showed Spanberger with a wide 43 percent to 26 percent lead over Earle-Sears, with 28 percent of voters saying they were undecided. However, another May poll released by the business group Virginia FREE showed Spanberger leading by 4 percentage points. Spanberger also holds a fundraising lead over Earle-Sears. According to the Virginia Public Access Project, Spanberger raised $6.5 million while Sears brought in $3.5 million. Spanberger currently has more than $14 million in the bank, while Sears has just less than $3 million. Spanberger, a former intelligence officer, has a history as a formidable candidate, having unseated former Rep. Dave Brat (R-Va.) in the state's highly competitive 7th Congressional District. The congresswoman went on to win reelection in the district twice. Additionally, Spanberger has touted herself as a moderate Democrat, pointing to her work across the aisle while serving in the House. While Spanberger has touted a number of kitchen=table issues including affordability, investing in schools and community safety, the former congresswoman often points to federal government job cuts made under Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The cuts have had a unique impact on Virginia given the federal government's close proximity to the state. 'Virginia is home to more than 320,000 federal employees,' Spanberger said in an interview with The Hill. 'I will never miss an opportunity to make sure the president understands that the haphazard DOGE effort has been deeply, deeply detrimental to Virginians, to their families, to our economy, and that the havoc it has wreaked across our commonwealth is so significant.' 'As a former national security professional, I have dire concerns about what the future looks like,' she said, referring to laid-off government employees with 'institutional understanding and historical references.' Earle-Sears, who is originally from Jamaica, has a background as a Marine Corps veteran and businesswoman. She served in the House of Delegates from 2002 to 2004 and unsuccessfully challenged Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) in the state's 3rd Congressional District in 2004. In 2021, she became Virginia's first female lieutenant governor when she won alongside Gov. Glenn Youngkin and Attorney General Jason Miyares (R). Earle-Sears has leaned into her work in the Youngkin administration in making her case to the commonwealth's voters, particularly on job creation. '[Voters] all pretty much say they want what we are doing in Virginia to continue, and my opponent's problem is she was never a part of creating this great economy that we have, bringing all these jobs to Virginia,' Earle-Sears told The Hill in an interview. In the wake of the DOGE cuts, Youngkin and Earle-Sears have touted the administration's 'Virginia Has Jobs' initiative, which includes 250,000 open jobs in the state; a 'support resource bundle' would also be available to federal workers looking for work. However, Democrats have attacked Earle-Sears over her response to the impact of DOGE cuts on the state, pointing to remarks she made earlier this year in which she touted the state's jobs initiative and said losing a job is 'not unusual.' 'I have lost a job, and in any room that this has been brought up, I ask the people how many of you have ever lost a job?' Earle-Sears told The Hill last month, referring to remarks from earlier this year. 'I raised my hand along with them. And I got to tell you, we don't want people to of course not have jobs, and that's why we have been so successful in creating over 270,000 of them.' However, Republicans are still voicing concerns about Earle-Sears's chances in November. Veteran GOP strategist and senior adviser to Trump's 2024 presidential campaign Chris LaCivita called her staff 'ameteurs' in a post on the social platform X in May, while one Virginia Republican strategist called this year's cycle 'a hard hill to climb' for Republicans. 'The money disadvantage is massive, and that's a problem,' the Virginia GOP strategist said. 'That's the challenge beyond structure, the resource piece and running really good campaigns.' The strategist noted that in addition to touting her work in Youngkin's administration, Earle-Sears could draw on issues that have played well for Republicans nationally. 'There are encouraging signs,' the strategist said. 'Obviously the president's approval rating, stability around the world, stability on trade policy. There are the conditions for the national environment to be solid, and yet still it is a challenging state to compete in simply because of the makeup of the state and historically, just with the party in power, it makes it difficult to [hold on to the governorship].' During Trump's first administration in 2017, Democrats saw victories in the gubernatorial, lieutenant gubernatorial and state attorney general races. Democrats did not win a majority in the House of Delegates that year, but they narrowed the GOP majority to a one-seat advantage. Two years later, in 2019, Virginia Democrats gained control of the House of Delegates and the state Senate, giving the party control of both legislative chambers and the governor's mansion for the first time since 1994. In 2021, when former President Biden was in the White House, Republicans hit back in the state's off-year elections, when the party won back control of the House of Delegates and Youngkin won the gubernatorial contest. When asked about whether Trump's presence in the White House will impact the gubernatorial race, Earle-Sears said the race is about her and Spanberger. 'This race is about Abigail Spanberger and me and the commonsense ideas that I stand for. People can differentiate and make that distinction,' Earle-Sears said.
Yahoo
01-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
‘I Voted' sticker contest underway in Loudoun County
LOUDOUN COUNTY, Va. () — As Virginia's 2025 general election inches closer, residents in Loudoun County have the opportunity to put their creativity to the test. The Loudoun County Office of Elections and Voter Registration is offering residents the chance to design an 'I Voted' sticker for the upcoming election, which will be given out to voters who cast their ballot at early voting sites, those who vote by mail and those who vote on Election Day. The basic sticker design is a circle, two inches in diameter, that just has to include the phrase 'I Voted' or a close variation of the phrase, with no more than four colors. Artists can submit as many designs as they want from July 1 through July 31. Where to watch Fourth of July fireworks across DC, Maryland and Virginia Eight finalists will be chosen, followed by an online vote, which will take place from Aug. 1 to Aug. 17, to pick the three winning designs. The three winners will be announced by Aug. 25, according to the county. For more information and to enter, click The general election will be elect the Commonwealth's new governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, members of Virginia's House of Delegates and to elect to local offices. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
NBC News
29-06-2025
- Politics
- NBC News
To fight Trump's funding freezes, states propose a new gambit: Withholding federal payments
Democratic legislators mostly in blue states are attempting to fight back against President Donald Trump's efforts to withhold funding from their states with bills that aim to give the federal government a taste of its own medicine. The novel and untested approach — so far introduced in Connecticut, Maryland, New York and Wisconsin — would essentially allow states to withhold federal payments if lawmakers determine the federal government is delinquent in funding owed to them. Democrats in Washington state said they are in the process of drafting a similar measure. These bills still have a long way to go before becoming law, and legal experts said they would face obstacles. But they mark the latest efforts by Democrats at the state level to counter what they say is a massive overreach by the Trump administration to cease providing federal funding for an array of programs that have helped states pay for health care, food assistance and environmental protections. 'Trump is illegally withholding funds that have been previously approved,' said David Moon, the Democratic majority leader in Maryland's House of Delegates. 'Without these funds, we are going to see Maryland residents severely harmed — we needed more options on the table for how Maryland could respond and protect its residents.' Moon said the two bills are in response to various Trump actions that have withheld federal funding for programs that pay to assist with children's mental health and flood wall protections. He compared the bills he's introduced to traditional 'collections' actions that one would take against a 'deadbeat debtor.' Even if they were not to move forward, Moon said the bills would help to bring about an audit and accounting of federal money to the state. Early in his second term, Trump's Department of Government Efficiency unilaterally froze billions of dollars in funding for programs that states rely on. He's also threatened to withhold federal funding from states that implement policies he politically disagrees with, including 'sanctuary' policies for undocumented immigrants, though some such freezes have been halted by courts. A Trump White House spokesperson didn't respond to questions for this story. Wisconsin state Rep. Renuka Mayadev, a Democrat, introduced two near-identical bills that she said would seek to compel the federal government to release money it has withheld that had previously been paying for Department of Agriculture programs that help farmers, and for child care centers that mostly serve low-income families. 'We've seen the Trump administration is willfully breaking the law by holding back federal funds to which Wisconsinites are legally entitled. So these bills are really about providing for a legal remedy and protecting Wisconsinites,' she said. In all four states, the bills direct state officials to withhold payments owed by the states to the federal government if federal agencies have acted in contravention of judicial orders or have taken unlawful actions to withhold funds previously appropriated by Congress. Payments available for withholding include the federal taxes collected from the paychecks of state employees, as well as grant payments owed back to the federal government. In Wisconsin, the bills are unlikely to move forward because Republicans control both chambers of the Legislature. But the trajectory of the bills in Maryland, New York and Connecticut — where Democrats control the legislatures and governorships — is an open question. The same is true in Washington, where Democratic lawmakers plan to introduce similar bills next session. 'It's a novel concept,' said Washington state Sen. Manka Dhingra. 'I don't think states have ever been in this position before … where there's someone making arbitrary decisions on what to provide funding for and what not to provide funding for, contrary to current rules and laws and congressional allocation of funds.' Legal experts have raised substantial questions about the hurdles such bills would face if they were enacted. For one, they said, the U.S. Constitution's supremacy clause clearly gives the federal government precedence over states, which could complicate legal arguments defending such laws — even though it remains an open legal question whether the executive branch has the power to single-handedly control funding. More immediate practical obstacles, they explained, stem from the fact that there's vastly more money flowing from the federal government to the states than the other way around. 'So withholding state payments to the federal government, even if there were no other obstacles, isn't likely to change very much,' said David Super, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center who specializes in administrative and constitutional law. Super added that states withholding money could potentially further worsen the status of programs affected by federal cuts. 'There's also the potential that some of the money going to the federal government has to be paid as a condition for the state receiving one or another kind of benefit for itself or for its people,' he said. 'The federal government could say, 'You didn't make this payment, therefore you're out of this program completely.'' But that doesn't mean states, working in the current hostile political environment, shouldn't try, said Jon Michaels, a professor at the UCLA School of Law who specializes in the separation of powers and presidential power. 'Where can you try to claw back money in different ways? Not because it's going to make a huge material difference for the state treasury or for the people of the state, but just to essentially show the federal government like, 'Hey, we know what you're doing and we don't like it,'' he said. 'States need to be enterprising and creative and somewhat feisty in figuring out their own scope of authority and the ways in which they can challenge the law.' But another potential drawback is one foreseen by the Democratic lawmakers themselves: further retribution from Trump. 'We would all be foolish to not acknowledge that the feds hold more cards than states do with respect to the budget,' said Moon, the Maryland legislator. 'There's certainly a risk of retaliation by the White House.'
CNBC
29-06-2025
- Politics
- CNBC
To fight Trump's funding freezes, states try a new gambit: Withholding federal payments
Democratic legislators mostly in blue states are attempting to fight back against President Donald Trump's efforts to withhold funding from their states with bills that aim to give the federal government a taste of its own medicine. The novel and untested approach — so far introduced in Connecticut, Maryland, New York and Wisconsin — would essentially allow states to withhold federal payments if lawmakers determine the federal government is delinquent in funding owed to them. Democrats in Washington state said they are in the process of drafting a similar measure. These bills still have a long way to go before becoming law, and legal experts said they would face obstacles. But they mark the latest efforts by Democrats at the state level to counter what they say is a massive overreach by the Trump administration to cease providing federal funding for an array of programs that have helped states pay for health care, food assistance and environmental protections. "Trump is illegally withholding funds that have been previously approved," said David Moon, the Democratic majority leader in Maryland's House of Delegates. "Without these funds, we are going to see Maryland residents severely harmed — we needed more options on the table for how Maryland could respond and protect its residents." Moon said the two bills are in response to various Trump actions that have withheld federal funding for programs that pay to assist with children's mental health and flood wall protections. He compared the bills he's introduced to traditional "collections" actions that one would take against a "deadbeat debtor." Even if they were not to move forward, Moon said the bills would help to bring about an audit and accounting of federal money to the state. Early in his second term, Trump's Department of Government Efficiency unilaterally froze billions of dollars in funding for programs that states rely on. He's also threatened to withhold federal funding from states that implement policies he politically disagrees with, including "sanctuary" policies for undocumented immigrants, though some such freezes have been halted by courts. A Trump White House spokesperson didn't respond to questions for this story. Wisconsin state Rep. Renuka Mayadev, a Democrat, introduced two near-identical bills that she said would seek to compel the federal government to release money it has withheld that had previously been paying for Department of Agriculture programs that help farmers, and for child care centers that mostly serve low-income families. "We've seen the Trump administration is willfully breaking the law by holding back federal funds to which Wisconsinites are legally entitled. So these bills are really about providing for a legal remedy and protecting Wisconsinites," she said. In all four states, the bills direct state officials to withhold payments owed by the states to the federal government if federal agencies have acted in contravention of judicial orders or have taken unlawful actions to withhold funds previously appropriated by Congress. Payments available for withholding include the federal taxes collected from the paychecks of state employees, as well as grant payments owed back to the federal government. In Wisconsin, the bills are unlikely to move forward because Republicans control both chambers of the Legislature. But the trajectory of the bills in Maryland, New York and Connecticut — where Democrats control the legislatures and governorships — is an open question. The same is true in Washington, where Democratic lawmakers plan to introduce similar bills next session. "It's a novel concept," said Washington state Sen. Manka Dhingra. "I don't think states have ever been in this position before … where there's someone making arbitrary decisions on what to provide funding for and what not to provide funding for, contrary to current rules and laws and congressional allocation of funds." Legal experts have raised substantial questions about the hurdles such bills would face if they were enacted. For one, they said, the U.S. Constitution's supremacy clause clearly gives the federal government precedence over states, which could complicate legal arguments defending such laws — even though it remains an open legal question whether the executive branch has the power to single-handedly control funding. More immediate practical obstacles, they explained, stem from the fact that there's vastly more money flowing from the federal government to the states than the other way around. "So withholding state payments to the federal government, even if there were no other obstacles, isn't likely to change very much," said David Super, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center who specializes in administrative and constitutional law. Super added that states withholding money could potentially further worsen the status of programs affected by federal cuts. "There's also the potential that some of the money going to the federal government has to be paid as a condition for the state receiving one or another kind of benefit for itself or for its people," he said. "The federal government could say, 'You didn't make this payment, therefore you're out of this program completely.'" But that doesn't mean states, working in the current hostile political environment, shouldn't try, said Jon Michaels, a professor at the UCLA School of Law who specializes in the separation of powers and presidential power. "Where can you try to claw back money in different ways? Not because it's going to make a huge material difference for the state treasury or for the people of the state, but just to essentially show the federal government like, 'Hey, we know what you're doing and we don't like it,'" he said. "States need to be enterprising and creative and somewhat feisty in figuring out their own scope of authority and the ways in which they can challenge the law." But another potential drawback is one foreseen by the Democratic lawmakers themselves: further retribution from Trump. "We would all be foolish to not acknowledge that the feds hold more cards than states do with respect to the budget," said Moon, the Maryland legislator. "There's certainly a risk of retaliation by the White House."
