Latest news with #SenateCommitteeonHomelandSecurityandGovernmentalAffairs
Newsweek
5 days ago
- Health
- Newsweek
John Fetterman Trashed In Home State Newspaper: 'Step Away'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman has been accused of neglecting his duties in his home state newspaper. The Philadelphia Inquirer's editorial board published an opinion piece on Sunday that said if Fetterman wants to continue as a U.S. senator, he "must take his position seriously." "Public service is not about serving yourself," the board's piece concluded. "It's time for Fetterman to serve Pennsylvanians, or step away." Newsweek has contacted Fetterman's office for comment via email. Senator John Fetterman (D-PA) speaks during a hearing with the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on May 20, 2025. Senator John Fetterman (D-PA) speaks during a hearing with the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on May 20, It Matters Fetterman's victory in 2022's Senate race was cause for celebration for Democrats, flipping a seat that was key to the party holding a majority in the Senate. He ran as a hero to progressives, but his rightward shift on some issues as a senator has led some former supporters to disavow him. He has drawn rebukes from progressives over his staunch support of Israel in its war in Gaza and angered his fellow Democrats for arguing his party needs to work with President Donald Trump. He has also faced concerns about his health since his 2022 Senate run, when he suffered a stroke. He checked himself into Walter Reed National Military Medical Center for treatment for clinical depression shortly after he was sworn in to the Senate. Several current and former staffers expressed concern about Fetterman's mental and physical health in a New York Magazine report in May that Fetterman dismissed as a "one-source hit piece." What To Know The Inquirer editorial board's opinion piece said Fetterman has missed more votes than nearly any other senator in the past two years, regularly skips committee hearings, cancels meetings, avoids daily caucus lunches with colleagues, and rarely goes on the Senate floor. It also said that Fetterman, like some Republican elected officials, is also avoiding holding town hall meetings with constituents "for fear of being heckled." It noted that while Fetterman dismissed the New York Magazine report, other media outlets have "confirmed Fetterman's erratic behavior through multiple sources, including The Inquirer." The Inquirer reported in May that Fetterman had yelled at several representatives of a teachers' union and banged his fists on the table after they pressed him to do more to push back on cuts to federal education. The piece also criticized Fetterman for justifying his decision to skip committee work and procedural work that he described as "performative" in a recent interview with The New York Times. Fetterman also said he had missed votes he considers a waste of time to spend time with his family or visit his father, who recently had a heart attack. "Senators often work long nights in Washington. But they also have flexible schedules and enjoy plenty of time off from Washington, since there are only an average of 165 legislative days," the opinion piece says. "Many of Fetterman's constituents would like to work half a year so they, too, could spend time with their families. Safe to say, many would do it for less than Fetterman's salary of $174,000, which is more than double the nation's median household income." It also criticized Fetterman for having time to meet with Trump, travel overseas and appear on talk shows but not make time for his constituents. "Fetterman has not had much time for Washington or Pennsylvania. But he found time to jet down to Mar-a-Lago to schmooze with Trump," it said. "Fetterman has flown to Israel twice in the past year, including a recent all-expense-paid junket to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been accused of war crimes and corruption. He and his wife flew first class and stayed in five-star hotels as part of a fact-finding mission that cost $36,000 and was paid for by a New York-based nonprofit." What People are Saying The opinion piece also said: "Being an elected official comes with public scrutiny. If Fetterman can't handle the attention or perform his job, then in the best interest of the country and the nearly 13 million residents of Pennsylvania he represents, he should step aside. "After all, being an elected representative is a privilege, not an entitlement. Being a U.S. senator is a serious job that requires full-time engagement." Daniel Pearson, editorial writer for The Inquirer wrote on X: "Showing up to work is not performative, Senator Fetterman." Senator Fetterman told The New York Times in a recent interview that he has been shamed into fulfilling senatorial duties. He said he was "showing up because people in the media have weaponized" his absenteeism to portray him as mentally unfit. He added: "The votes I missed were overwhelmingly procedural; they're even called 'bed check' votes. I had to make a decision: getting here and sticking my thumb in the door for three seconds for a procedural vote or spend Monday night as a dad-daughter date." What's Next Fetterman has not publicly responded to The Inquirer editorial board's opinion piece. He is likely to continue facing scrutiny in the coming weeks and months. Fetterman is up for reelection in 2028.
Yomiuri Shimbun
27-05-2025
- Politics
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Democratic Troubles Revive Debate over Left-Wing Buzzwords
Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Michigan) during a Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs hearing on April 3. Maybe it's using the word 'oligarchs' instead of rich people. Or referring to 'people experiencing food insecurity' rather than Americans going hungry. Or 'equity' in place of 'equality,' or 'justice-involved populations' instead of prisoners. As Democrats wrestle with who to be in the era of President Donald Trump, a growing group of party members – especially centrists – is reviving the argument that Democrats need to rethink the words they use to talk with the voters whose trust they need to regain. They contend that liberal candidates too often use language from elite, highly educated circles that suggests the speakers consider themselves smart and virtuous, while casting implied judgment on those who speak more plainly – hardly a formula for winning people over, they say. The latest debate is, in part, also a proxy for the bigger battle over what the Democrats' identity should be in the aftermath of November's devastating losses – especially as the party searches for ways to reverse its overwhelming rejection by rural and White working-class voters. 'Some words are just too Ivy League-tested terms,' said Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Arizona). 'I'm going to piss some people off by saying this, but 'social equity' – why do we say that? Why don't we say, 'We want you to have an even chance'?' Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear – who, like Gallego, is considered a potential 2028 Democratic presidential hopeful – made a similar point. 'I believe that, over time, and probably for well-meaning reasons, Democrats have begun to speak like professors and started using advocacy-speak that was meant to reduce stigma, but also removed the meaning and emotion behind words,' Beshear said, citing such examples as using 'substance abuse disorder' to refer to addiction. 'It makes Democrats or candidates using this speech sounding like they're not normal,' Beshear said. 'It sounds simple, but what the Democratic Party needs to do is be normal and sound normal.' Other Democrats and progressives strongly disagree, saying the party's problems can hardly be traced to a few terms that, they say, are used by activists far more than by actual Democratic politicians. There are good reasons for using nonprejudiced language and seeking new ways to be sensitive to those who have suffered discrimination, they say – and only bad reasons for jettisoning them in the face of Republican attacks. 'We are simply asking people to consider the language they are using as we move toward shared goals,' said Daria Hall, executive vice president of Fenton Communications, a progressive communications firm. 'It is important to acknowledge the human element within populations and to recognize how they identify themselves. Language evolves; it always has.' The divides are not clear-cut. But some Democrats are emphasizing a need to embrace centrist, common-sense ideas in a plainspoken way, while others say the key is to trumpet progressive, inclusive policies that fit the angry populist mood. Recent years have seen a pattern of progressives embracing new terms that conservatives turn against them. Republicans have long excelled at using such 'politically correct' terms as 'woke,' 'critical race theory' and 'gender-fluid' to depict Democrats as out of touch. 'Honestly, Democrats trip over themselves in an attempt to say exactly the right thing,' said Allison Prasch, who teaches rhetoric, politics and culture at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. 'Republicans maybe aren't so concerned about saying exactly the right thing, so it may appear more authentic to some voters.' She added: 'Republicans have a willingness to paint with very broad brushstrokes, where Democrats are more concerned with articulating multiple perspectives. And, because of that, they can be hampered by the words and phrases they utilize.' Against that backdrop, a crop of youthful, up-and-coming Democrats is arguing that liberals need to abandon what they portray as constantly evolving linguistic purity tests. Gallego derided the term 'Latinx' – which avoids the gender binary suggested by 'Latinos' and 'Latinas' – as 'stupid,' saying few Hispanics use the term. He also recalled once being told not to describe his own background as 'poor,' but rather as 'economically disadvantaged.' 'Not every person we meet is going to have the latest update on what the proper terms are,' Gallego said. 'It doesn't make them sexist or homophobic or racist. Maybe they are a little outdated, but they have a good heart.' Beshear said liberals, in genuine efforts to be more sensitive, have drained the power from many words. Saying someone has defeated 'substance abuse disorder,' he said, minimizes the sheer human triumph of beating addiction; decrying 'food insecurity' fails to convey the tragedy of hungry children. Some Democrats contend that their use of elite-sounding terms is highly exaggerated. Actual party leaders rarely use words such as woke or gender-fluid, they say, contending they are mostly used by left-leaning activists or academics – or by Republicans trying to create an issue. Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Michigan) is another rising swing-state Democrat who contends that her party needs to use language that comes, as she puts it, from the factory line and not the faculty lounge. She said the scope of her party's challenge hit home when a voter wearing a 'Make America Great Again' cap asked her, 'What's your hat?' He was hoping for a Democratic message that could fit onto a cap, she said, and she realized there was no obvious answer. She recalled speaking to a roomful of skeptical Teamsters before the November election. 'I just said, 'Hey, you motherf—ers, I don't want to hear another godd— word about all Donald Trump has done for you,'' she said, adding: 'They love it. … To me, that is a different way to enter the room.' The Democrats' renewed linguistic debate broke into the open in April, when Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont), a progressive firebrand, was headlining a 'Fighting Oligarchy' tour to rally opposition to Trump's alliance with ultra-wealthy figures. 'We have a nation which is now run by a handful of greedy billionaires,' Sanders told an enthused crowd in Nampa, Idaho, on April 14. 'I used to talk about oligarchy and people say, 'What is he talking about?' Everybody knows what I'm talking about tonight.' In a subsequent interview with Politico, Slotkin mentioned her view that the term 'oligarchy' does not mean much to most people, and that Democrats would be better off declaring, say, that Americans do not have kings. Sanders retorted on NBC's 'Meet the Press' that 'I think the American people are not quite as dumb as Ms. Slotkin thinks they are.' Slotkin downplays the dispute, although she stands by her contention that 'oligarchy' is not a user-friendly word. More important, she said, is the Democrats' need to confront Trump with 'alpha energy,' which she described as a sort of plainspoken toughness leavened with compassion. Since taking office, Trump has continued his all-out war on words that he deems liberal or woke, ordering them excised from government websites and targeting programs that have such terms in their names as 'diversity, equity and inclusion,' or DEI. Trump says he is rescuing free speech from progressives' cultural tyranny. Liberals say Trump is doing the opposite: silencing language he opposes. The battle unfolded on a particularly emotional front in the 2024 election, when GOP leaders seized on the view of Democratic nominee Kamala Harris and other Democrats that people have a right to choose their own pronouns. Trump aired ads declaring 'Kamala is for they/them; President Trump is for you' that were considered highly effective by strategists on both sides. Hall, who leads her firm's racial justice and DEI group, said the point of progressive language is not to judge anyone but to respect how people want to be identified in this moment. 'We have a lot more work to do, but we have to give ourselves some grace, because we are all learning as language continues to shift,' Hall said. The true irritant for some critics is not the words, she added, but the underlying social shifts. 'American demographics are changing, and some people have an issue with that,' Hall said. 'Diversity, equity and inclusion are not bad words unless people make them so. These words are an effort to be more inclusive, not less.' Many Democrats privately admire Trump's ability to talk in a way that connects with voters on a visceral level. He is unusually skilled, they concede, at finding words and phrases that stir powerful emotions, such as promising to 'make America great again' and decrying an 'invasion' of 'illegal' immigrants. Democrats contend that Trump's slogans are empty at best and dishonest at worst. But they have struggled to find equally powerful language to convey Democratic values and ideas. 'What the Trump team has completely failed at is having anything behind their slogans,' Slotkin said. 'They figured out the slogans, but they have no plans.' Democrats need to have effective policies, she said – but, at the same time, 'you need the tagline.' The notion that Democrats must communicate better in the 2026 and 2028 campaigns is increasingly accepted within the party, and potential candidates including Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and former transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg have been road-testing their tone and style. 'It's so important for Democrats to have a vocabulary that can reach everybody,' Buttigieg told reporters after a recent town hall in Iowa. 'And you can't fashion that vocabulary online, or only talking to people who already agree with you or who are already kind of in your political style.'
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Hassan, Noem lock horns over habeas corpus
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) tussled with Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem at a committee hearing Tuesday over habeas corpus, which the administration is considering suspending as it increasingly comes into focus in the legal fights over President Trump's immigration agenda. 'What is habeas corpus?' Hassan asked during the hearing before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. 'Well, habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country, to suspend their right to —' Noem responded. Hassan then interjected, 'Let me stop you, ma'am. Habeas corpus, excuse me, that's incorrect.' Habeas corpus requires the government to bring someone they are detaining before a court and justify the legality of their detention. It has become a key legal tool for migrants to contest the administration's immigration crackdown. Among others, it has been used by Venezuelans to challenge the Trump administration's use of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to swiftly deport them to a Salvdoran megaprison and foreign students to contest their immigration detention over participation in pro-Palestinian activism. 'If not for that protection, the government could simply arrest people, including American citizens, and hold them indefinitely for no reason,' Hassan said. 'Habeas corpus is the foundational right that separates free societies like America from police states like North Korea.' The New Hampshire Democrat then asked Noem at the hearing if she supports habeas corpus. 'I support habeas corpus, I also recognize that the president of the United States has the authority under the Constitution to decide if it should be suspended or not,' Noem responded. Her comments echo those of White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, who suggested earlier this month that the president may try to suspend habeas corpus to carry out mass deportations without bringing individuals for court hearings. The Constitution provides that 'the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.' Noem last week indicated she believed current immigration conditions could warrant a suspension. Any move by the White House to unilaterally revoke the writ by declaring an 'invasion' at the southern border is all but certain to spark lawsuits. The restrictions were laid out in Article I of the Constitution, which defines the legislature. But the specific phrasing does not explicitly tie the suspension power to Congress, leaving ambiguity that the administration believes also vests Trump with the authority. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Kristi Noem stuns committee with botched definition of fundamental right the White House is threatening to suspend
Kristi Noem, the Department of Homeland Security secretary, surprised members of a Senate hearing by appearing not to understand what a fundamental right that the White House is threatening to suspend actually means. Sitting before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Noem repeated a recent claim made by Stephen Miller, a Trump administration official, that they are 'looking at' suspending habeas corpus in order to deport undocumented immigrants. Habeas corpus allows people to challenge the legality of their detainment, and has been a right in the United States since 1789. But when asked by Senator Maggie Hassan to define it, Noem claimed it is 'a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country.' Hassan interrupted Noem, declaring, 'That's incorrect.' Habeas corpus is a constitutional right awarded to all people in the United States, including immigrants, to challenge their detention by the government. When invoked, the government must provide a reason for the detainment. Earlier this month, Miller told reporters the president had the authority to suspend habeas corpus under a rarely-used exception: 'in cases of rebellion or invasion.' When asked if she supports habeas corpus on Tuesday, Noem affirmed she does, but echoed Miller's claim. 'I support habeas corpus, I also recognize that the president of the United States has the authority under the Constitution to decide if it should be suspended or not,' Noem said. Hassan interrupted Noem again to assert that it had 'never been done.' To suspend habeas corpus, the administration would need to prove the country was under the threat of rebellion or being invaded. There have been very few occasions in history when habeas corpus has been suspended, and not without intense debate. Noem recalled that former president Abraham Lincoln suspended it nationwide during the Civil War; however, Congress later passed a statute permitting it, which Hassan mentioned. The Trump administration has sought multiple avenues to expedite the removal of undocumented immigrants, even bypassing typical due process. The president did this by invoking the Alien Enemies Act, declaring an invasion by the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, in order to remove alleged gang members quickly. However, multiple judges have blocked removals under the act. The Supreme Court has permitted the administration to move forward with deportations but reaffirmed that they are still are entitled to submit habeas corpus petitions.
The Hill
20-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Hassan, Noem lock horns over habeas corpus
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) tussled with Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem at a committee hearing Tuesday over habeas corpus, which the administration is considering suspending as it increasingly comes into focus in the legal fights over President Trump's immigration agenda. 'What is habeas corpus?' Hassan asked during the hearing before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. 'Well, habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country, to suspend their right to —' Noem responded. Hassan then interjected, 'Let me stop you, ma'am. Habeas corpus, excuse me, that's incorrect.' Habeas corpus requires the government to bring someone they are detaining before a court and justify the legality of their detention. It has become a key legal tool for migrants to contest the administration's immigration crackdown. Among others, it has been used by Venezuelans to challenge the Trump administration's use of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to swiftly deport them to a Salvdoran megaprison and foreign students to contest their immigration detention over participation in pro-Palestinian activism. 'If not for that protection, the government could simply arrest people, including American citizens, and hold them indefinitely for no reason,' Hassan said. 'Habeas corpus is the foundational right that separates free societies like America from police states like North Korea.' The New Hampshire Democrat then asked Noem at the hearing if she supports habeas corpus. 'I support habeas corpus, I also recognize that the president of the United States has the authority under the Constitution to decide if it should be suspended or not,' Noem responded. Her comments echo those of White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, who suggested earlier this month that the president may try to suspend habeas corpus to carry out mass deportations without bringing individuals for court hearings. The Constitution provides that 'the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.' Noem last week indicated she believed current immigration conditions could warrant a suspension. Any move by the White House to unilaterally revoke the writ by declaring an 'invasion' at the southern border is all but certain to spark lawsuits. The restrictions were laid out in Article I of the Constitution, which defines the legislature. But the specific phrasing does not explicitly tie the suspension power to Congress, leaving ambiguity that the administration believes also vests Trump with the authority.
