Tag: Democrats

  • Nearly 30 employees have left Chester County’s election office since 2021 amid allegations of toxic work culture

    Nearly 30 employees have left Chester County’s election office since 2021 amid allegations of toxic work culture

    More than two years ago, a Chester County Voter Services employee made a dire prediction.

    In an eight-page grievance against Voter Services Director Karen Barsoum, the employee described a hostile work environment in which election workers were subjected to “bullying” from the department’s director.

    At the time of the complaint, the employee wrote, 15 people had left the 25-person department since Barsoum was hired in 2021.

    “I have very legitimate fears that there will be a mass exodus from voter services in the coming months,” the employee, who asked not to be named for fear of retaliation, wrote in the grievance document he provided to The Inquirer. “My concern is how this will impact the 370k voters of Chester County.”

    Two years later, it appears that his prediction had come true. The number of staff departures since Barsoum took over grew to 29 by November of this year, according to a Chester County spokesperson.

    Election offices across the nation have experienced a high level of turnover and staff burnout in recent years in the face of election denialism and threats, but Chester County’s churn-rate is nearly double the number of departures in Montgomery and Delaware Counties’ elections departments that have lost 16 and 15 people respectively in the same time period. Both departments are larger than Chester County’s election office.

    Accounts and records from three former staffers at Chester County Voters Services Department, two of whom asked not to be named, paint a picture of a hostile work environment where employees were often made to feel as though management had placed a target on their back.

    These concerns have been raised to elected and non-elected county leaders for more than two years.

    Barsoum said in an interview that she couldn’t respond to allegations from employees but described her management style as collaborative.

    Employees, she said, had left for a variety of reasons including jobs in other Southeast Pennsylvania election offices that pay better than Chester County. Others, she said, left to pursue other opportunities or for family reasons.

    Some, she said, left because of the increased pressures of election work as state law changes and the intensity increases.

    “I encourage everyone to do what is the best for them,” Barsoum said Thursday.

    Though Barsoum acknowledged it was challenging for the office when people left, she said she and other managers were very hands-on in training staff and ensuring that staff members knew the ins and outs of various positions.

    Karen Barsoum, Chester County’s director of voter services, at the Chester County Government Services Building in 2022.

    The employee who filed the grievance said he feared that the attrition would lead to mistakes during the 2024 presidential election, when the eyes of the nation were on Pennsylvania.

    The county reported no major mistakes in 2024.

    But in 2025 the department failed to include an office on the May primary ballot and left the names of roughly 75,000 voters off the poll books in November.

    Ultimately, everyone who wanted to vote was able to, county officials said. But the error created a chaotic scene as the county kept polls open two additional hours and more than 12,000 voters were asked to cast provisional ballots — which require more steps from election workers and voters to be counted.

    The county hired a West Chester law firm to investigate how and why the poll book error occurred.

    Chester County’s CEO David Byerman, the county’s top unelected official, said that turnover across all departments can be attributed to a variety of factors in the county including pay and managers.

    He described working in elections today as a “pressure cooker” as a result of the political climate.

    The investigation, he said, would look closely at management in the department and whether factors existed that would have hindered staff from identifying or reporting concerns.

    “The very fact that we’re doing an investigation into what happened last month … indicates that we want to learn more about what happened in this particular election,” Byerman said. “Part of that investigation is looking at the performance of our management team in voter services.”

    It’s unclear at this stage whether the error can be attributed to the turnover and environment in voter services, but Paul Manson, a professor at Portland State University who researches challenges faced by election workers, said the turnover seen in Chester County is unusual and alarming.

    Often, Manson said, staff tends to be relatively stable in election offices because they care deeply about the work. Stressors of reduced staffing and the toxic environment described by three former employees, he said, could create a dynamic that makes mistakes more likely.

    “When we have these periods of turnover local election officials really sort of grit their teeth because they worry about these small errors turning into big errors,” he said.

    Election workers process mail ballots for the 2024 general election at the Chester County, administrative offices in West Chester. (AP Photo/Matt Slocum)

    Allegations of ‘hostility’ toward staff

    Barsoum, who came to Chester County from Berks County in 2021, has earned respect in the election field nationally and within Pennsylvania. Barsoum had been the assistant director in the Berks election office.

    “Karen Barsoum has an extraordinary knowledge that is a resource both statewide here in Pennsylvania and has been a resource nationally. I don’t think anyone doubts her knowledge of election processes,” said Byerman, the Chester County CEO.

    “At the end of the day I think any manager needs to combine two abilities. An ability to manage an office effectively and an ability to be knowledgeable and an expert.”

    Byerman said each manager in the county is evaluated on these criteria regularly, but when asked whether Barsoum possessed both qualities, Byerman did not respond.

    Former county employees said Barsoum’s high reputation outside Chester County did not align with what they experienced in their jobs.

    The employee who filed the grievance against Barsoum said he got along with her well when she started and he received high marks on performance reviews, according to documents provided to The Inquirer.

    But after a reorganization in the department in 2022, he said, he noticed that more and more staff members were leaving. The employee was promoted to a new role and during the 2022 election did that job while maintaining responsibilities from his prior role.

    He said he expressed concern about being overworked and received little support in the new role. After the employee said he dropped the ball on a minor item and reported it to Barsoum, she began treating him differently.

    “In Karen’s eyes you’re either 100% right or 100% wrong,” he said in an interview.

    The employee filed his grievance in August of 2023 after a meeting where, he said, Barsoum listed accomplishments of staff members and refused to acknowledge any of his work.

    Barsoum’s “hostility” toward him in the meeting was so noticeable, he wrote in the complaint, that eight colleagues approached him afterward to say they noticed it.

    “After so many months of mistreatment and disrespect in such a hostile work environment, it eventually gets to the point that something needs to be said. If the Presidential Election were to not run smoothly next year and ChesCo voters were disenfranchised due to the Voter Services, I would forever regret not sending this grievance,” the employee wrote in his grievance.

    That employee left the department the next year. He was placed on a performance-improvement plan weeks after submitting his grievance, and, after completing that plan, he was placed on another as a result of a low performance review and quit before he could be terminated.

    Elizabeth Sieb, who worked at the election office for eight years before leaving in 2022, said she had similar experiences with Barsoum to those detailed in the grievance. For the past year and a half she has been telling county officials about her concerns.

    In 2022, Barsoum reorganized the office to respond to the new stressors of elections and new responsibilities that come with mail voting. Since then, she said, she and staff work to evaluate after each election what worked and what didn’t so adjustments can be made.

    But Sieb said Barsoum didn’t take constructive criticism well when changes were made and stifled discussion among staff members.

    Sieb was fired from the department in 2022. She said she was placed on a personal-improvement plan that demanded that she seek mental health treatment and subsequently placed on a three-day unpaid suspension.

    Following the suspension, Sieb said, she was directed not to speak to her colleagues if it was not directly related to her work. She said she was fired for violating that rule when she reported to a lower-level manager concerns about another manager speaking disparagingly about a job applicant in earshot of other employees.

    Sieb, who at times questioned Barsoum’s decisions, said she felt that the director was threatened by long-term staff and was prone to outbursts when employees would correct her.

    “She was slowly but surely wearing down and getting rid of all the people that had been there a long time,” Sieb said.

    Jennifer Morrell, the CEO of the Elections Group, a company that assists local election officials, said turnover in election offices happens for a variety of reasons — including the long hours and relatively low pay civil servants receive.

    She noted that training programs from state agencies and associations are designed to help prevent errors as a result of turnover and that a larger department, like Chester County, may be able to fill rolls with election workers from other counties.

    “Karen is highly respected in the election community, super professional,” Morrell said. “Our hearts just ached with what happened because it could have happened to anybody.”

    Commissioners respond to concerns

    After leaving the department, Sieb said, she believed she suffered from PTSD related to her experience.

    Beginning in 2024 she began reaching out to Republican Commissioner Eric Roe with her concerns. Roe, Sieb said, investigated the complaints and brought them to the other commissioners, Democrats Josh Maxwell and Marian D. Moskowitz. The commissioners also serve as the county’s election board.

    “I have had a lot of people come to me with various concerns throughout county government, and voter services is certainly one of them,” Roe told The Inquirer, explaining that his role as minority party commissioner makes him a frequent recipient of workforce complaints.

    Chester County Commissioners (from left) Eric M. Roe, Josh Maxwell, and Marian D. Moskowitz at a board meeting in September.

    But a year and a half later, Barsoum remained in her role and Sieb continued to hear from her former colleagues with concerns. Twice this year, Sieb went before the Chester County Election Board to raise public concerns about turnover under Barsoum.

    Maxwell, who chairs the Chester County Election Board, said the county reviews reports from departments when they receive them. He said he was unable to comment on specific departments or personnel matters but said the county needed to do everything it could to support its election workers.

    “We need to do a better job, I think, making sure that people feel valued. Including the folks that unfortunately we’ve lost,” he said.

    Election work in Pennsylvania and elsewhere has gotten increasingly fraught. The work itself is more intense than it once was with more mail voting, and workers now deal with threats, longer hours, and a camera on them when they’re working with ballots.

    “We were seen as clerical people, maybe, in the past; now we are wearing many different hats,” Barsoum said.

    Moskowitz attributed much of the turnover in the county to burnout and noted the threats that election employees have faced in her years on the job.

    Barsoum became emotional as she said she had worked to ensure that her staff had the resources they needed to feel safe, including mental health resources through the Human Resources department, team building outside election cycles, and a space for workers to step off camera.

    “We can count on each other; we lean on each other. It’s a strong bond, a camaraderie,” she said.

    When hiring new staffers, Barsoum said she warns them of what’s to come — that they’re not walking into a normal 9-to-5 job, that they won’t be able to plan vacations through about half of the year, and that they’ll be asked to take phone calls from irate people.

    It’s a lifestyle, she said, that isn’t right for everyone — including some parents.

    “If you’re leaning on a daycare and that is your sole, the go-to, it will be very hard to work in the department because there is 24/7 operations, and there are so many things that are going off and beyond the regular work schedule.”

    Josh Maxwell, chair of Chester County Commissioners and the county Elections Board, presides over a September commissioners meeting.

    Maxwell and Moskowitz declined to comment specifically when asked if they were confident in Barsoum’s leadership, but Maxwell has repeatedly asked residents to direct their anger at November’s error at him rather than Barsoum or her staff.

    “I think it’s important that we protect these folks and we empower them to make the best decisions possible,” Maxwell said at an election board meeting last week.

    Speaking to The Inquirer, he reiterated that point.

    “We want to make sure that people feel welcomed and empowered and are in a working environment they appreciate,” Maxwell said in an interview.

    “Elections have changed so much in five years it’s not surprising to me that some people want to find something new to do.”

    This suburban content is produced with support from the Leslie Miller and Richard Worley Foundation and The Lenfest Institute for Journalism. Editorial content is created independently of the project donors. Gifts to support The Inquirer’s high-impact journalism can be made at inquirer.com/donate. A list of Lenfest Institute donors can be found at lenfestinstitute.org/supporters.

  • Top Pennsylvania Republicans are projecting relative calm amid 2026 national party panic

    Top Pennsylvania Republicans are projecting relative calm amid 2026 national party panic

    The same week Republican National Committee chair Joe Gruters said history predicted “almost certain defeat” for his party in the 2026 midterms, Pennsylvania Republicans partying in Midtown Manhattan projected relative calm about the election cycle.

    Gruters, President Donald Trump’s handpicked chair to run the party, said on a conservative radio station last week: “It’s not a secret. There’s no sugarcoating it. It’s a pending, looming disaster heading our way. We are facing almost certain defeat.”

    He added that the goal is to win and he “liked our chances in the midterms,” but noted “only three times in the last hundred years has the incumbent party been successful winning a midterm.”

    Pennsylvania could decide which party controls the U.S. House next year, as Democrats eye four congressional districts that Republicans recently flipped while the GOP fights to maintain its majority.

    But Pennsylvania Republicans in New York City for the annual Pennsylvania Society glitzy gathering of politicos last weekend had a less hair-on-fire view.

    “At this point when I was running [for Senate in 2024], the betting market said there was a 3% chance I was going to win,” Sen. Dave McCormick (R., Pa.) said after addressing a bipartisan audience at the Pennsylvania Manufacturer’s Association luncheon on Saturday.

    “We’re a million miles from Election Day, and we’ve got a great track record of things to talk about and a great vision for how the president’s policies are going to make life better for working families,” McCormick said. “We just got to go out and make that message happen, but also continue to make the policies that are going to make that a reality happen.”

    The political environment was, of course, far more favorable to Republicans in 2024, when Trump won Pennsylvania by a larger margin than he did in 2016. But with Republicans in power and popular Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro on the ballot for reelection, the headwinds in 2026 in the Keystone State are different.

    Pennsylvania GOP chair Greg Rothman, in an interview outside the PMA event on Saturday, called Shapiro “one of the greatest politicians of my generation” but noted that upsets have happened across various political environments in state history.

    “Anything can happen and the voters are smart, and all I can do is prepare the party to ride the waves and ignore the crashes, but I’m optimistic,” he added.

    Shapiro will likely face a GOP challenge from State Treasurer Stacy Garrity, who is a popular politician in her own right and holds the record for receiving the most votes of any candidate for statewide office in Pennsylvania.

    Meanwhile, Rothman predicted that the four Pennsylvania congressional incumbents running for reelection in swing districts will sink or swim based on how Trump and his policies land with voters come November.

    “They will be judged by the national economy and by immigration,” he said, and by Trump’s ability to end some international conflicts.

    But U.S. Rep. Rob Bresnahan, a GOP incumbent running for reelection in Pennsylvania’s Eighth Congressional District, which includes Scranton, had a more local view of how to win in 2026.

    “Everything about our job as a member of Congress is about northeastern Pa.,” Bresnahan said.

    “Northeastern Pennsylvania has always been our North Star. We know our district. We are out in our district. We’ve done over 250 public events. Our constituency case work is, in my opinion, one of the best offices in the country.”

    Bresnahan appeared at a rally with Trump in Mount Pocono last week. He was also one of just 20 House Republicans to sign a successful discharge petition to force a vote for collective bargaining to be restored for federal workers.

    “At the end of the day that might have been going against party leadership, but it was what’s right for northeastern Pennsylvania,” he said.

    Democrats have begun a full court press. That was evident at the Pennsylvania Society, where attendees seen mingling with other politicians included: Janelle Stelson, who is running for a second time against U.S. Rep. Scott Perry in the 10th Congressional District, as well as firefighter Bob Brooks and former federal prosecutor Ryan Croswell, both of whom are running for the Democratic nomination to take on U.S. Rep. Ryan Mackenzie in the Seventh.

    Bresnahan’s challenger, Scranton Mayor Paige Cognetti, also attended the soiree and walked through the Rainbow Room atop Rockefeller Center with U.S. Sen. Chris Coons (D., Del.) on Friday night. Coons said the time is now for Democrats to get involved in these races.

    “Given the margin, if there were to be four new Democrats in the House this cycle, as there were in 2018, that’d be the difference maker for the country,” Coons added.

    Staff writer Gillian McGoldrick contributed to this article.

  • Josh Shapiro doesn’t need Pa. Society, the Parker-Johnson relationship, Kim Ward’s budget ballad, and more takeaways from Pa.’s weekend in NYC

    Josh Shapiro doesn’t need Pa. Society, the Parker-Johnson relationship, Kim Ward’s budget ballad, and more takeaways from Pa.’s weekend in NYC

    NEW YORK — Pennsylvania’s political class schmoozed their way across Midtown Manhattan this past weekend, bouncing from cocktail parties to swanky receptions organized to woo the elite ahead of a big midterm election year.

    Hundreds of Pennsylvania politicos made their way for the state’s annual weekend of civility, bipartisanship, fundraising, and more than a few hangovers.

    Four Inquirer political writers were among those who traveled to the Pennsylvania Society gathering, chatting with lawmakers and interviewing candidates inside the moody bars and penthouse parties. Here are our takeaways.

    Maybe Shapiro doesn’t need Pa. Society anymore

    Gov. Josh Shapiro this year has hosted fundraisers in New Jersey and Massachusetts for his unannounced reelection campaign.

    But he didn’t need to make the rounds this weekend among Pennsylvania’s political elite as he emerges as a top contender for the 2028 Democratic nomination for president.

    Shapiro traveled to New York City only to deliver his annual speech to the Pennsylvania Society and honor former U.S. Ambassador to Canada, David L. Cohen, who received the society’s top award.

    Instead of handshaking and fundraising like most incumbent governors would, Shapiro has largely avoided Pennsylvania Society mingling during his time as governor. His reelection campaign did not appear to change that.

    Pennsylvania politicians (from left) Lt. Gov. Austin Davis, Gov. Josh Shapiro and State House of Representatives Speaker Joanna E. McClinton last January attending the swearing-in ceremony of Attorney General David W. Sunday, Jr. in Harrisburg.

    Instead, Lt. Gov. Austin Davis hosted a solo fundraiser for their joint reelection ticket.

    “There’s a lot of demands on the governor’s time,” Davis said following a speech at the annual luncheon hosted by the Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association.

    The Third Congressional District race was the talk of the town

    Three of the candidates vying to replace retiring U.S. Rep. Dwight Evans in the Third Congressional District had a busy weekend in New York. State Sen. Sharif Street, pediatric surgeon Ala Stanford, and State Rep. Morgan Cephas made the rounds.

    Sharif Street speaks from the pulpit of Mother Bethel A.M.E. church Sunday, Nov. 2, 2025 as the Black Clergy of Philadelphia and Vicinity holds a press conference with other community and political leaders to discuss the negative impacts of the ongoing government shutdown. Mother Bethel Pastor Rev. Carolyn Cavaness is at left.

    Stanford held a somewhat star-studded fundraiser Thursday evening, hosted, according to a posted listing for the private event, by Hamilton actor Leslie Odom Jr. (who did not attend but lent his name).

    Street, the former state party chair and a longtime attendee at Pennsylvania Society, held two fundraisers in Manhattan, fresh off his endorsement last week by former Gov. Ed Rendell.

    Not spotted: State Rep. Chris Rabb, who is running as an anti-establishment progressive.

    “That’s not really my thing,” he said in a text message.

    The Parker-Johnson relationship was a hot topic

    Philadelphia City Council wrapped up its final meeting of the year the day before the Pennsylvania Society began, and the lawmakers gave the chatterati plenty to talk about in Manhattan, with a dramatic close to the session.

    One major topic of conversation in New York: What did Council’s recent conflict with Mayor Cherelle L. Parker over her housing plan mean for the unusually tight relationship between Council President Kenyatta Johnson and the mayor?

    The consensus: Mom and Dad were fighting, but they’ll probably patch things up.

    “Disagreements between Council and mayor — it happens,” said Larry Ceisler, a Philadelphia-based public affairs executive whose firm hosted a packed party in Midtown on Saturday. “It’s the way the system is set up.”

    But Ceisler said he’s not worried that Parker and Johnson will abandon their goal of emulating then-Mayor Rendell’s close working relationship with Council President John F. Street in the 1990s.

    “The fact is they’re certainly in sync more than they’re not,” Ceisler said.

    City Council president Kenyatta Johnson speaking with Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle Parker in June 2024.

    Johnson, he said, likely improved his standing with members by holding firm against a last-minute amendment Parker proposed to alter Council’s version of the housing plan’s budget.

    Parker and Johnson both made the trek to Manhattan, along with Councilmembers Rue Landau, Nina Ahmad, Jamie Gauthier, Jeffery “Jay” Young Jr., Kendra Brooks, Katherine Gilmore Richardson, Jim Harrity, Cindy Bass, and Quetcy Lozada.

    The mayor also took the opportunity to engage in a bit of bipartisanship. She has often touted her ability to build relationships across the aisle, despite Philadelphia politics being dominated by Democrats.

    At the PMA luncheon, Parker embraced former Gov. Tom Corbett and gave a warm greeting to Auditor General Tim DeFoor, both Republicans.

    Mayor Cherelle L. Parker (left) and former Gov. Tom Corbett at the luncheon hosted by the Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association on Saturday in New York.

    At the same event, Republican U.S. Sen Dave McCormick shouted out Parker multiple times during his prepared remarks. The pair have forged a working relationship despite their partisan differences.

    “We talk about challenges in the city that we’re facing right now, and the hope is that we can count on some folks as allies,” Parker said of meeting with members of the GOP.

    She added: “It’s great to try to maintain those lines of communication.”

    Special interests woo political elite

    Many of the events were hosted by special-interest groups and corporations that have business with the government and are looking to win influence over glasses of Champagne.

    There were the usual suspects and big law firms: Duane Morris always hosts a marquee late-night event on Friday in the sprawling Rainbow Room atop Rockefeller Center. Other firms including Cozen O’Connor, Ballard Spahr, and Saul Ewing also hosted cocktail parties.

    One notable newcomer to the party scene was Pace-O-Matic, the Georgia-based operator of “skill games” at the center of negotiations over regulation and taxing of the machines.

    The company, which has spent millions on political contributions and lobbying, threw a cocktail reception Thursday night at an Italian restaurant attended by a sizable contingent of state lawmakers.

    Legislators have yet to agree on how to regulate and tax skill games, which remain entirely unregulated and untaxed.

    But solutions seemed possible at the Pace-O-Matic party, as Central Pennsylvania Republicans and Philadelphia Democrats milled about the bar in an unlikely alliance.

    Another bipartisan event — this one in a sunny room atop the vintage Kimberly Hotel — was hosted by Independence Blue Cross and AmeriHealth Caritas, insurance companies that have Medicaid contracts with the state.

    Lawmakers often credit the weekend of partying in New York as a time for civil conversations in a neutral territory that ultimately benefit a philanthropic cause at the Pennsylvania Society’s annual dinner.

    But Rabbi Michael Pollack, who leads the government accountability group March on Harrisburg, said the civility seems to come only when special interests are footing the bill.

    “It’s absolutely embarrassing that our legislators can only interact with each other when a lobbyist sets up a playdate for them,” he said.

    A Christmas budget ballad by DJ Ward

    Senate President Pro Tempore Kim Ward debuted a hidden musical talent on stage at the annual bipartisan Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry breakfast: She can write a Harrisburg holiday hit.

    “I did live in Nashville for six years and no one discovered me,” she joked, before launching into a three-minute budget balladto the tune of “Deck the Halls.”

    Ward (R., Westmoreland) debuted her song after an ugly budget battle that lasted 135 days and ended just last month. Punctuated by fa-la-las, she called out each of the top leaders who were in the closed-door budget talks.

    Senate President Pro Tempore Kim Ward (R., Westmoreland) speaking in February 2024 at the Capitol in Harrisburg.

    Ward is among Shapiro’s top critics. The two had hardly spoken since 2023 until Ward joined in-person budget negotiations at the end of October.

    During those negotiations, Ward has said Shapiro gave her a special heart-shaped cookie to break the ice. And it appears that she’s not yet letting that go, dedicating a moment in her song to the encounter:

    Mr. Shapiro give me a break

    You know you gave me that heart cookie cake

    Why are you saying that you didn’t do it?

    Ward’s jingle wasn’t the first time a Pennsylvania Republican leader leaned on the power of song during the bitter budget battle.

    At the peak of the clash over transit funding in August, Senate Majority Leader Joe Pittman quoted heavily from the lyrics of John Mellencamp’s “Small Town” in recalling his upbringing in rural Western Pennsylvania.

    Shapiro will propose a new budget in February, restarting the budget negotiation process. Ward urged the group of leaders to take a break from fighting during the holiday season.

    It’s Christmas and we’re all here together

    Republicans and Democrats, and all who matter

    Let’s celebrate the birth of Jesus

    For the next three weeks, let’s not be egregious

    Perhaps next budget season will inspire a mixtape.

  • Why hasn’t Trump sent troops to Philly, the city where ‘bad things happen’? Everyone has a theory.

    Why hasn’t Trump sent troops to Philly, the city where ‘bad things happen’? Everyone has a theory.

    In the last six months, President Donald Trump has sent troops, immigration agents, or both to Democratic cities from coast to coast. The list includes Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington, Memphis, Portland, Ore., Charlotte, N.C., New Orleans, and Minneapolis.

    But not Philadelphia.

    The city that seemed an obvious early target, condemned by Trump as the place where “bad things happen,” has somehow escaped his wrath. At least so far.

    That has sparked speculation from City Hall to Washington over why the president would ignore the staunchly Democratic city with which he has famously feuded. Here we offer some insight into whether that’s likely to change.

    Why has Philadelphia been spared when smaller, less prominent cities have not?

    Nobody knows. Or at least nobody knows for sure. But lots of people in government and immigration circles have ideas.

    There’s the weather theory, that it’s hard for immigration agents who depend on cars to make arrests in cities that get winter snow and ice. Except, of course, the administration just launched Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations in Minneapolis, which gets 54 inches of snow a year.

    Then there’s the swing-state theory, that Trump is staying out of Philadelphia because Pennsylvania ranks among the handful of states that can tip presidential elections. But that doesn’t explain Trump’s surge into North Carolina, where he sent immigration forces last month.

    While the Tar Heel State voted for Trump three times, elections there can be decided by fewer than 3 percentage points.

    U.S. Rep. Brendan Boyle, a Democrat whose North and Northeast Philadelphia district includes many immigrants, suggested a blue-state theory, that Trump has mostly targeted cities in states that voted for Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election. But Boyle acknowledged that North Carolina and Tennessee are exceptions.

    “It could just be that they’re working their way down the list,” Boyle said.

    Has Mayor Cherelle L. Parker had a hand in keeping troops out of Philadelphia?

    It depends on whom you talk to.

    For months she has passed up opportunities to publicly criticize the president, turning aside questions about his intentions by saying she is focused on the needs of Philadelphia. Some believe her more passive approach has kept the city out of the White House crosshairs.

    People close to the mayor point out that big-city mayors who land on the president’s bad side have faced big consequences. For instance, in Los Angeles, Mayor Karen Bass frequently clashed with Trump ― and faced a National Guard deployment.

    Some point out that Parker has good relationships with Republicans who are friendly with the president, including U.S. Sen. Dave McCormick of Pennsylvania, who has praised the mayor on multiple occasions.

    On the other hand, some in the city’s political class ― especially those already skeptical of Parker ― say the suggestion that she has shielded the city gives her too much credit.

    One strategist posited that the lack of overt federal action has more to do with Trump’s trying to protect a razor-thin Republican majority in the House, and that targeting Philadelphia could anger voters in the Bucks County and Lehigh Valley districts where Republicans hold seats.

    What does Trump say about his plans for Philadelphia?

    Not much. Or at least nothing specific.

    During a raucous campaign-style rally Tuesday night in Northeast Pennsylvania, Trump made no mention of his intentions ― even as he railed against immigration and accused Democrats of making the state a “dumping ground” for immigrants.

    Trump suggested there should be a “permanent pause” on immigration from “hellholes like Afghanistan, Haiti, Somalia and many other countries,” declared Washington the safest it has been in decades, and praised ICE as “incredible.”

    He also reminisced about hosting the Philadelphia Eagles at the White House earlier this year, after their Super Bowl win, hailing head coach Nick Sirianni as a “real leader” and marveling at running back Saquon Barkley’s muscles.

    “I love Philadelphia,” Trump declared. “It’s gotten a little rougher, but we will take it.”

    That was a marked change from a decade ago, when Trump called Jim Kenney a “terrible” mayor, and Kenney called him a “nincompoop.”

    Kenney fought Trump in court and won in 2018, when a U.S. District Court judge ruled that the president could not end federal grants based on how the city treats immigrants. After the ruling, the Irish mayor was captured on video dancing a jig and calling out “Sanctuary City!”

    More recently, in May, Philadelphia landed on Trump’s list of more than 500 sanctuary jurisdictions that he planned to target for funding cuts. That was no surprise. Nor was it surprising that in August, when the administration zapped hundreds of places off that list, Philadelphia was among the 18 cities that remained.

    “I don’t know why they’re not here yet,” said Peter Pedemonti, codirector of New Sanctuary Movement of Philadelphia. But the larger point is that “ICE is in neighborhoods every day, they are taking away people every day,” and he urged those who support immigrants to prepare.

    “Now is the time to get involved with organizations that are organizing around this,” Pedemonti said. “There are neighbors who need us.”

    Has Gov. Josh Shapiro helped dissuade federal action in Philadelphia?

    It’s hard to say. Shapiro has challenged Trump in court multiple times, including when he was the state attorney general during Trump’s first term.

    As governor, Shapiro sued the administration over its move to freeze billions in federal funds for public health programs, infrastructure projects, and farm and food bank contracts. He also joined a multistate suit challenging an executive order that restricted gender-affirming care for minors.

    On immigration, however, Shapiro has been careful not to directly engage in the sanctuary city debate, saying his job is to provide opportunity for all Pennsylvanians. But he has been critical of Trump’s enforcement tactics, calling them fear-inducing and detrimental to the state’s economy and safety.

    Still, Trump has not lashed out at Shapiro, a popular swing-state governor. At his rally in Mount Pocono last week, in which he criticized several Democrats, Trump didn’t mention Shapiro ― or the Republican in attendance who is running against the governor in 2026, Stacy Garrity.

    Why is the president sending troops to American cities in the first place? Isn’t that unusual?

    Highly unusual ― and fought in court by the leaders of many of the cities that have been targeted. On Wednesday, a federal judge blocked Trump’s deployment of troops to Los Angeles, saying it was “profoundly un-American” to suggest that peaceful protesters “constitute a risk justifying the federalization of military forces.”

    Trump says the National Guard is needed to end violence, to help support deportations, and to fight crime in Democratic-run cities. Last week he declared that Democrats were “destroying” Charlotte, after a Honduran man who had twice been deported allegedly stabbed a person on a commuter train.

    Two members of the West Virginia National Guard were hospitalized in critical condition ― one subsequently died ― after being shot by a gunman in Washington the day before Thanksgiving.

    That the attack was allegedly carried out by an Afghan man who had been granted asylum helped spark a wave of immigration policy changes, all in the name of greater security. For some immigrants who are attempting to legally stay in the country, that has resulted in the cancellation of citizenship ceremonies and the freezing of asylum processes.

    So what happens next?

    It’s hard to say. Immigration enforcement will surely continue to toughen.

    More immigrants are being arrested when they show up for what they expect to be routine immigration appointments, suddenly finding themselves handcuffed and whisked into detention. In Philadelphia this year, more than 90 immigrants have been trailed from the Criminal Justice Center by ICE agents and then arrested on the sidewalks outside, according to advocates who are pushing the sheriff to ban the agency from the courthouse.

    But it’s difficult to predict when or whether troops might land on Market Street.

    “I’ve heard so many different theories,” said Jay Bergen, the pastor at Germantown Mennonite Church, who has helped lead demonstrations against courthouse arrests. “It’s probably all of them ― a little bit of the way Shapiro has positioned himself, the way the mayor has positioned herself, a little bit the electoral map of Pennsylvania, a little bit, more than a little bit, Trump’s own personality.”

    That Philadelphia has been ignored to date doesn’t mean it won’t be in Trump’s sights tomorrow, Bergen said.

    “This administration thrives on being unpredictable, and on sowing as much exhaustion and pain as possible,” Bergen said. “We don’t do ourselves a favor by getting panicked in advance, but we also need to be ready.”

  • Candidates for Dwight Evans’ congressional seat hunt for cash and support at the Pa. Society in New York

    Candidates for Dwight Evans’ congressional seat hunt for cash and support at the Pa. Society in New York

    NEW YORK — In dimly lit Italian restaurants, boisterous Irish pubs, and the vintage sprawling ballroom atop Rockefeller Center, candidates running for Congress in Philadelphia spent a busy weekend in New York trying to woo donors and supporters.

    State Sen. Sharif Street, Ala Stanford, and State Rep. Morgan Cephas, all seeking to replace retiring U.S. Rep. Dwight Evans in one of the nation’s most Democratic districts, made the rounds, as Pennsylvania’s political elite gathered in Manhattan for the annual Pennsylvania Society dinner — and a parade of related events.

    Stanford held a somewhat star-studded fundraiser Thursday evening, hosted, according to a posted listing for the private event, by Hamilton actor Leslie Odom Jr., (who did not attend but lent his name). Other hosts included Holly Hatcher-Frazier, an educator and original cast member on the TV show Dance Moms, and Lauren Bush, the niece of former President George W. Bush and co-founder of FEED Projects, a fashion brand which donates a portion of its proceeds to alleviating childhood hunger.

    “What I’m hearing is people want a different type of solution,” Stanford said in an interview at a breakfast held by the University of Pennsylvania on Saturday. “Innovative, reaching across the aisle, collaborative, not afraid to stand up to authority,” she added.

    A lot of eyes are on the pediatric surgeon and founder of a community health center, to see how she translates a career that involved fundraising for nonprofits into funding her first campaign.

    She was endorsed by Evans upon launching her bid to succeed him in the 3rd Congressional District.

    She’s built her campaign around her experience in the medical community and the biggest buzz of the weekend may have been her response to a minor medical incident. An older woman fell down some steps exiting a reception hosted by House Speaker Joanna McClinton (D., Philadelphia).

    Stanford “triaged” the situation, according to Democrats in attendance, instructing Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice Kevin Dougherty and his son State Rep. Sean Dougherty to lift the woman onto some chairs so she could evaluate her. The woman ended up being fine and was able to walk home from the restaurant.

    Street, the former state party chair and a longtime attendee at Pennsylvania Society, held two fundraisers in Manhattan, fresh off his endorsement last week by former Gov. Ed Rendell.

    “We got a lot of people that can vote in the district here, we want their votes,” he said in an interview at a rooftop reception hosted by Independence Blue Cross. “We got a lot of people who can write checks here, we want their checks.”

    State Rep. Ben Waxman, a longtime friend and colleague of Cephas, is in talks with donors to organize a super PAC to support the fellow Philadelphia Democrat’s campaign, according to a source familiar with the plans. The PAC would likely be run by longtime Philadelphia strategist Brandon Evans, who worked for both former Mayor Jim Kenney and District Attorney Larry Krasner.

    The PAC has a goal of raising $250,000 to spend on digital, mail, and field, according to the source.

    Cephas was the only sitting member of the Pennsylvania House to endorse Waxman when he ran in 2022 and has been a big supporter ever since. He is the treasurer of a state PAC created to support the Philadelphia delegation in Harrisburg, which she chairs.

    Not spotted at Pennsylvania Society weekend was State Rep. Chris Rabb, who is running as an anti-establishment progressive.

    “That’s not really my thing,” he said in a text message, of the glitzy Manhattan affair.

    Declared candidates in the Democratic primary for Philadelphia’s 3rd Congressional District, clockwise from upper left: State Sen. Sharif Street, State Rep. Chris Rabb, Ala Stanford, and State Rep. Morgan Cephas. The seat, currently held by retiring U.S. Rep. Dwight Evans, represents a large portion of Philadelphia and is the most Democratic district in the state.

    The state of the race

    Street released an internal poll last week that showed him narrowly beating Rabb with Stanford and Cephas following behind.

    Several candidates running in the crowded race, which is up to about a dozen candidates, were not included in the poll and did not attend Pennsylvania Society.

    “I believe our standing is strong,” Stanford said when asked about the poll. “I believe that there are many endorsements and people donate lots of money. But ultimately every individual has one vote. And that is the equalizer.”

    One question will be whether Street, the son of former Mayor John Street, ties up most or all of the Democratic establishment support.

    Several state representatives and ward leaders, like State Rep. Danilo Burgos, have already endorsed him — little surprise given his background running the party. But other elected officials, including City Councilmember and ward leader Katherine Gilmore Richardson, said they are waiting for their ward’s official vetting process to get underway.

    Street said when it comes to his colleagues, “I think by the time we get to Election Day, most of my colleagues will be for me.”

    John Brady, political director of the Pennsylvania Democratic Party, said 60% of Philadelphia wards have endorsed Street. He said the City Committee is waiting for more of the remaining wards, including the progressive and independent wards, to complete their processes so the full committee can move forward with their endorsement process in February.

    “Look, two months from now is the first week of February, that’s plenty of time for them to complete their processes.” The concern, Brady said, is if the party waits too long, an endorsement may not carry weight.

    While the City Committee wants to firm up an endorsement, some elected Democrats at Pennsylvania Society said they were struggling with whom to back — several said they really liked Cephas but felt wary of political backlash if they didn’t back Street and he won the nomination.

    While Rabb has carved out a clear lane as the progressive, some of the city’s most progressive elected lawmakers have not lined up behind him yet. City Councilmember Jamie Gauthier, who represents West Philadelphia, said this weekend she is not yet ready to endorse and Working Families Party member Kendra Brooks, also on City Council, said the Working Families Party would go through a formal process in January (the progressive group often gets involved in Democratic races).

    While Evans is backing Stanford, Philly’s other Democratic members of Congress have yet to weigh in. U.S. Rep. Brendan Boyle said he might not endorse in the primary. U.S. Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon, at an event on Friday night, said she’s worked with both Cephas and Stanford and has “great respect for both of them.”

    Mayor Cherelle L. Parker has said she will endorse in the primary and her vetting process starts in January.

    “For me, I’m really looking at Philadelphia’s agenda, you know, safe, clean, green, economic opportunity for all and how will you leverage your seat at the table to deliver for the 3rd Congressional District?” she said.

    “What do you advocate for and champion as a legislator? What’s your personal passion and then you have to leverage tangible results.”

  • Trump seeks to cut restrictions on marijuana through planned order

    Trump seeks to cut restrictions on marijuana through planned order

    President Donald Trump is expected to push the government to dramatically loosen federal restrictions on marijuana, reducing oversight of the plant and its derivatives to the same level as some common prescription painkillers and other drugs, according to six people familiar with the discussions.

    Trump discussed the plan with House Speaker Mike Johnson (R., La.) in a Wednesday phone call from the Oval Office, said four of the people, who, like the others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. The president is expected to seek to ease access to the drug through an upcoming executive order that directs federal agencies to pursue reclassification, the people said.

    The move would not legalize or decriminalize marijuana, but it would ease barriers to research and boost the bottom lines of legal businesses.

    Trump in August said he was “looking at reclassification.” He would be finishing what started under President Joe Biden’s Justice Department, which followed the recommendation of federal health officials in proposing a rule to reclassify marijuana; that proposal has stalled since Trump took office.

    “We’re looking at it. Some people like it, some people hate it,” Trump said this summer. “Some people hate the whole concept of marijuana because it does bad for the children, it does bad for the people that are older than children.”

    Trump cannot unilaterally reclassify marijuana, said Shane Pennington, a D.C. attorney who represents two pro-rescheduling companies involved in the hearing. But he can direct the Justice Department to forgo the hearing and issue the final rule, Pennington said.

    “This would be the biggest reform in federal cannabis policy since marijuana was made a Schedule I drug in the 1970s,” Pennington said.

    The president was joined on the Wednesday call with Johnson by marijuana industry executives, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services chief Mehmet Oz, three of the people said.

    Johnson was skeptical of the idea and gave a list of reasons, including several studies and data, to support his position against reclassifying the drug, two of the people said.

    Trump then turned the phone over to the executives gathered around his desk, who rebutted Johnson’s arguments, the people said.

    Trump ended the call appearing ready to go ahead with loosing restrictions on marijuana, the people said, though they caution the plans were not finalized and Trump could still change his mind.

    A White House official said no final decisions have been made on rescheduling of marijuana.

    The Department of Health and Human Services referred questions to the White House. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A representative from Johnson’s office declined to comment.

    Marijuana is currently classified as a Schedule I substance, the same classification as heroin and LSD. Federal regulations consider those drugs to have a high potential for abuse and no accepted use for medical treatment.

    Trump would move to classify marijuana as a Schedule III substance, which regulators say carry less potential for abuse and are used for certain medical treatments, but can also create risks of physical or psychological dependence.

    Other Schedule III drugs include Tylenol with codeine, as well as certain steroid and hormone treatments.

    Democrats and Republicans alike have been interested in reclassifying marijuana, with some politicians citing its potential benefit as a medical treatment and the political popularity of the widely used drug.

    Marijuana has become easier than ever to obtain, growing into an industry worth billions of dollars in the United States. Dozens of states and Washington, D.C., have legalized medical marijuana programs, and 24 have approved recreational marijuana.

    The Biden administration pursued efforts to ease access to the drug, with health officials recommending reclassification to Schedule III in 2023. But health officials have said that those recommendations were slowed down by the Drug Enforcement Administration, which took months to undergo required administrative reviews and were not completed before the end of Biden’s term.

    The Drug Enforcement Administration was supposed to hold an administrative hearing on the proposal, with a judge hearing from experts on the health benefits and risks of marijuana. But the hearing has been in legal limbo since Trump took office, amid allegations from cannabis companies that the DEA was working to torpedo the measure.

  • Homeland Security Secretary Noem defends Trump’s hard-line immigration policies at hearing

    Homeland Security Secretary Noem defends Trump’s hard-line immigration policies at hearing

    Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem defiantly defended the Trump administration’s hard-line immigration policies on Thursday during a House committee hearing, portraying migrants as a major threat faced by the nation that justifies a crackdown that has seen widespread arrests, deportations and a dizzying pace of restrictions on foreigners.

    Noem, who heads the agency central to President Donald Trump’s approach to immigration, received backup from Republicans on the panel but faced fierce questioning from Democrats — including many who called for her resignation over the mass deportation agenda.

    The secretary’s testimony was immediately interrupted by protesters shouting for her to stop Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids and “end deportations.” They trailed her down the halls as she left early for another engagement, chanting, “Shame on you!”

    But she vowed she “would not back down.”

    “What keeps me up at night is that we don’t necessarily know all of the people that are in this country, who they are and what their intentions are,” Noem said.

    The hearing was Noem’s first public appearance before Congress in months, testifying at the House Committee on Homeland Security on “Worldwide Threats to the Homeland,” and it quickly grew heated as she emphasized how big a role she believed immigration played in those threats. It focused heavily on the Trump administration’s immigration policies, whereas in years past the hearing has centered on issues such as cybersecurity, terrorism, China and border security.

    Rep. Bennie Thompson, the panel’s ranking Democrat, said Noem has diverted vast taxpayer resources to carry out Trump’s “extreme” immigration agenda and failed to provide basic responses as Congress conducts its oversight.

    “I call on you to resign,” the Mississippi congressman said. “Do a real service to the country.”

    Trump returned to power with what the president says is a mandate to reshape immigration in the U.S. In the months since, the number of people in immigration detention has skyrocketed; the administration has continued to remove migrants to countries they are not from; and, in the wake of an Afghan national being accused of shooting two National Guard troops, Noem’s department has dramatically stepped up checks and screening of immigrants in the U.S.

    Tough questions from Democrats

    Several Democrats repeatedly told Noem flatly that she was “lying” to them and to the public over claims they are focused on violent criminals. They presented cases of U.S. citizens being detained in immigration operations and families of American military veterans being torn apart by deportations of loved ones who have not committed serious crimes or other violations.

    “You lie with impunity,” said Rep. Delia Rodriguez (D., Ill.) who said Noem should resign or be impeached.

    Republicans largely thanked Noem for the work the department is doing to keep the country safe and urged her to carry on.

    “Deport them all,” said Rep. Andy Ogles (R., Tenn).

    Since Noem’s last Congressional appearance in May, immigration enforcement operations, especially in Los Angeles and Chicago, have become increasingly contentious, with federal agents and activists frequently clashing over her department’s tactics.

    Noem did not address the calls to resign, but she tangled with the Democratic lawmakers — interrupting some — and suggested that she and the department she leads weren’t going anywhere.

    “We will never yield. We will never waver,” she said.

    Noem, whose own family, including an infant granddaughter, was in the audience, praised the Trump administration’s efforts when it comes to immigration, saying, “We’re ending illegal immigration, returning sanity to our immigration system.”

    During the hearing, a federal judge ordered the government to free Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whose wrongful deportation to a notorious prison in El Salvador made him a flashpoint in the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement. Noem did not address the judge’s order, nor was she asked about it during the hearing.

    Noem left early, saying she was headed to a meeting of the Federal Emergency Management Agency review council. The meeting, however, was abruptly canceled with no reason given.

    Noem, department under scrutiny

    The worldwide threats hearing, usually held annually, is an opportunity for members of Congress to question the leaders of the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and the National Counterterrorism Center.

    FBI Director Kash Patel did not appear, but sent Michael Glasheen, operations director of the national security branch of the FBI.

    Glasheen said the nation faces “serious and evolving” threats, and pointed to so-called antifa, and Trump’s executive order designating the group as a domestic terror organization, as the “most immediate violent threat” facing the country.

    Pressed by Thompson for details — where is antifa headquartered? How many members does it have? — the FBI’s representative appeared unable to provide answers, saying it’s “fluid” and investigations are “ongoing.”

    And, notably, he did not identify immigration as among the most pressing concerns for the homeland.

    Asked about the U.S. seizure of an oil tanker off the Venezuelan coast, Noem linked it to the Trump administration’s antidrug campaign in the region, saying cocaine had been kept from entering the U.S. as a result.

    The hearing offered lawmakers a rare opportunity to hear directly from Noem, but many members of the panel used the bulk of their allotted time to either praise or lambast her handling of immigration enforcement.

    During one sharp exchange, the secretary levied broad criticism for the program through which the man suspected of shooting two National Guard members last month came to the United States.

    “Unfortunate accident?” Noem retorted after Thompson raised the issue. She called it a “terrorist attack.”

    The program, Operation Allies Welcome, was created by then-President Joe Biden’s Democratic administration after the 2021 decision to leave Afghanistan following 20 years of American intervention and billions of dollars in aid. Thompson pointed out that the Trump administration approved the asylum claim of the suspect in the National Guard attack.

    Noem’s department is under particular scrutiny because Congress in July passed legislation giving it roughly $165 billion to carry out its mass deportations agenda and secure the border. The department is getting more money to hire 10,000 more deportation officers, complete the wall between the U.S. and Mexico and increase detention and removal of foreigners from the country.

    The secretary’s appearance also comes as a federal judge is investigating whether she should face a contempt charge over flights carrying migrants to El Salvador.

  • Indiana Republicans defy Trump and reject his House redistricting push in the states

    Indiana Republicans defy Trump and reject his House redistricting push in the states

    INDIANAPOLIS — Indiana’s Republican-led Senate decisively rejected a redrawn congressional map Thursday that would have favored their party, defying months of pressure from President Donald Trump and delivering a stark setback to the White House ahead of next year’s midterm elections.

    The vote was overwhelmingly against the proposed redistricting, with more Republicans opposing than supporting the measure, signaling the limits of Trump’s influence even in one of the country’s most conservative states.

    Trump has been urging Republicans nationwide to redraw their congressional maps in an unusual campaign to help the party maintain its thin majority in the House of Representatives. Although Texas, Missouri, Ohio, and North Carolina went along, Indiana did not — despite cajoling and insults from the president and the possibility of primary challenges.

    “The federal government should not dictate by threat or other means what should happen in our states,” said Spencer Deery, one of the Republican senators who voted no on Thursday.

    When the proposal failed, cheers could be heard inside the chamber as well as shouts of “thank you!” The debate had been shadowed by the possibility of violence, and some lawmakers have received threats.

    The proposed map was designed to give Republicans control of all nine of Indiana’s congressional seats, up from the seven they currently hold. It would have effectively erased Indiana’s two Democrat-held districts by splitting Indianapolis among four districts that extend into rural areas, reshaping U.S. Rep. André Carson’s safe district in the city. It would’ve also eliminated the northwest Indiana district held by U.S. Rep. Frank Mrvan.

    District boundaries are usually adjusted once a decade after a new census. But Trump has described redistricting as an existential issue for the party as Democrats push to regain power in Washington.

    “If Republicans will not do what is necessary to save our Country, they will eventually lose everything to the Democrats,” Trump wrote on social media the night before the vote.

    The president said anyone who voted against the plan should lose their seats. Half of Indiana senators are up for reelection next year, and the conservative organization Turning Point Action had pledged to fund campaigns against them.

    Inside the state Senate chamber, Democratic lawmakers spoke out against redistricting ahead of the vote.

    “Competition is healthy my friends,” said Sen. Fady Qaddoura. “Any political party on earth that cannot run and win based on the merits of its ideas is unworthy of governing.”

    In the hallways outside, redistricting opponents chanted “Vote no!” and “Fair maps!” while holding signs with slogans like “Losers cheat.”

    Three times over the fall Vice President JD Vance met with Republican senators — twice in Indianapolis and once in the White House — to urge their support. Trump joined a conference call with senators on Oct. 17 to make his own 15-minute pitch.

    Behind the scenes, James Blair, Trump’s deputy White House chief of staff for political affairs, was in regular touch with members, as were other groups supporting the effort such as the Heritage Foundation and Turning Point USA.

    “The administration made a full-court press,” said Republican Sen. Andy Zay, who was on the phone with White House aides sometimes multiple times per week, despite his commitment as a yes vote.

    Across the country, mid-cycle redistricting so far has resulted in nine more congressional seats that Republicans believe they can win and six more congressional seats that Democrats think they can win. However, some of the new maps are facing litigation.

    In Utah, a judge imposed new districts that could allow Democrats to win a seat, saying Republican lawmakers violated voter-backed standards against gerrymandering.

    Despite Trump’s push, support for gerrymandering in Indiana’s Senate was uncertain. A dozen of the 50 senators had not publicly committed to a stance ahead of the vote.

    Republican Sen. Greg Goode signaled his displeasure with the redistricting plan before voting no. He said some of his constituents objected to seeing their county split up or paired with Indianapolis. He expressed “love” for Trump but criticized what he called “over-the-top pressure” from inside and outside the state.

    Sen. Michael Young, another Republican, said the stakes in Washington justify redistricting, as Democrats are only a few seats away from flipping control of the U.S. House in 2026. “I know this election is going to be very close,” he said.

    Republican Sen. Mike Gaskill, the redistricting legislation’s sponsor, showed Senators maps of congressional districts around the country, including several focused on Democratic-held seats in New England and Illinois. He argued other states gerrymander and Indiana Republicans should play by the same rules.

    The bill cleared its first hurdle Monday with a 6-3 Senate committee vote, although one Republican joined Democrats in opposing it and a few others signaled they might vote against the final version. The state House passed the proposal last week, with 12 Republicans siding with Democrats in opposition.

    Among them was state Rep. Ed Clere, who said state troopers responded to a hoax message claiming a pipe bomb outside his home Wednesday evening. Indiana state police said “numerous others” received threats but wouldn’t offer details about an ongoing investigation.

    In an interview, Clere said these threats were the inevitable result of Trump’s pressure campaign and a “winner-take-all mentality.”

    “Words have consequences,” Clere said.

  • Senators clash over Trump’s National Guard deployments as military leaders face questioning

    Senators clash over Trump’s National Guard deployments as military leaders face questioning

    WASHINGTON — Members of Congress clashed Thursday over President Donald Trump’s use of the National Guard in American cities, with Republicans saying the deployments were needed to fight lawlessness while Democrats called them an extraordinary abuse of military power that violated states’ rights.

    Top military officials faced questioning over the deployments for the first time at the hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee. They were pressed by Democrats over the legality of sending in troops, which in some places were done over the objections of mayors and governors, while Trump’s Republican allies offered a robust defense of the policy.

    It was the highest level of scrutiny, outside a courtroom, of Trump’s use of the National Guard in U.S. cities since the deployments began and came a day after the president faced another legal setback over efforts to send troops to support federal law enforcement, protect federal facilities and combat crime.

    “In recent years, violent crime, rioting, drug trafficking and heinous gang activity have steadily escalated,” said Mississippi Sen. Roger Wicker, the committee chairman. The deployments, he said, are “not only appropriate, but essential.”

    Democrats argued they are illegal and contrary to historic prohibitions about military force on U.S. soil.

    Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D., Ill.) said domestic deployments traditionally have involved responding to major floods and tornadoes, not assisting immigration agents who are detaining people in aggressive raids.

    “Trump is forcing our military men and women to make a horrible choice: uphold their loyalty to the Constitution and protect peaceful protesters, or execute questionable orders from the president,” said Duckworth, a combat veteran who served in the Illinois National Guard.

    Democrats ask military officials about illegal orders

    Democrats asked military leaders about Trump’s comments about “the enemy within” America and whether service members could be asked to follow orders that violate their oath.

    Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D., Mich.) said Trump’s comments about rigged elections and his rhetoric about political opponents have created a “trust deficit” and fueled suspicions about the domestic use of the military.

    She asked Charles Young III, principal deputy general counsel at the Pentagon, whether Trump could place troops at polling places during next year’s election and whether such an order would be legal.

    The idea “sends a shiver down the spine of every American, and should whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican,” Slotkin said.

    Young said he could not answer such a question without details, calling it “a hypothetical situation.” He said the Supreme Court has ruled that the president has exclusive authority to decide whether an emergency exists that could require a National Guard response.

    Slotkin was one of six Democratic lawmakers who recorded a video calling on troops to uphold the Constitution and defy “illegal orders.” In response, Trump accused the lawmakers, all military or intelligence veterans, of sedition “punishable by DEATH.”

    Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) pressed Young on news reports that the administration had dismissed advice from military lawyers on deploying Guard and bombing alleged drug boats in Latin America.

    “If an attorney raises concerns about the legality of military operations, do you think the appropriate response is to tell them to shut up and get out of the way?” Warren asked Young.

    Young denied those reports, saying leadership is “very attentive” to the concerns of military lawyers.

    When asked about Trump’s statements about an “invasion within” or an “enemy within,” Air Force Gen. Gregory Guillot, commander of U.S. troops in North America, said, “I do not have any indications of an enemy within.”

    Republicans and Democrats see the deployments differently

    In one exchange, Sen. Mazie Hirono (D., Hawaii) noted how former Defense Secretary Mark Esper alleged that Trump inquired about shooting protesters during the George Floyd demonstrations. She asked whether a presidential order to shoot protesters would be lawful.

    Young said he was unaware of Trump’s previous comments and that “orders to that effect would depend on the circumstances.”

    Republicans countered that Trump was within his rights — and his duty — to send in troops.

    Republican Sen. Tim Sheehy of Montana, a former Navy SEAL officer, argued during the hearing that transnational crimes present enough of a risk to national security to justify military action, including on U.S. soil.

    Sheehy claimed there are foreign powers “actively attacking this country, using illegal immigration, using transnational crime, using drugs to do so.”

    Military leaders point to training

    During questioning, military leaders highlighted the duties that National Guard units have carried out. Troops are trained for their specific missions, they said, and are prohibited from using force unless in self-defense.

    Since the deployments began, only one civilian — in California — has been detained by National Guard personnel, Guillot said. He says the troops are trained to de-escalate tense interactions with people, but do not receive any specific training on mental health episodes.

    “They can very quickly be trained to conduct any mission that we task of them,” Guillot said.

    During the hearing, senators also offered their sympathies after two West Virginia National Guard members deployed to Washington were shot just blocks from the White House in what the city’s mayor described as a targeted attack. Spc. Sarah Beckstrom died a day after the Nov. 26 shooting, and her funeral took place Tuesday. Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe remains in a Washington hospital.

    Hearing follows court setback for Trump

    A federal judge in California on Wednesday ruled that the administration must stop deploying the California National Guard in Los Angeles and return control of the troops to the state. The judge put the decision on hold until Monday, and the White House said it plans to appeal.

    Trump called up more than 4,000 California National Guard troops in June following protests over immigration raids. It marked the first time in decades that a state’s National Guard was activated without a governor’s request and marked a significant escalation in the administration’s efforts to carry out its mass deportation policy.

    Trump also had announced National Guard members would be sent to Illinois, Oregon, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Other judges have blocked or limited the deployment of troops to Portland, Oregon, and Chicago, while Guard members have not yet been sent to New Orleans.

  • Senate rejects extension of healthcare subsidies as costs are set to rise for millions of Americans

    Senate rejects extension of healthcare subsidies as costs are set to rise for millions of Americans

    WASHINGTON — The Senate on Thursday rejected legislation to extend Affordable Care Act tax credits, essentially guaranteeing that millions of Americans will see a steep rise in costs at the beginning of the year.

    As Republicans and Democrats have failed to find compromise, senators voted on two partisan bills instead that they knew would fail — the Democratic bill to extend the subsidies, and a Republican alternative that would have created new health savings accounts.

    It was an unceremonious end to a monthslong effort by Democrats to prevent the COVID-19-era subsidies from expiring on Jan. 1, including a 43-day government shutdown that they forced over the issue.

    Ahead of the votes, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York warned Republicans that if they did not vote to extend the tax credits, “there won’t be another chance to act,” before premiums rise for many people who buy insurance off the ACA marketplaces.

    “Let’s avert a disaster,” Schumer said. “The American people are watching.”

    Republicans and Democrats never engaged in meaningful or high-level negotiations on a solution, even after a small group of centrist Democrats struck a deal with Republicans last month to end the shutdown in exchange for a vote. Most Democratic lawmakers opposed the move as many Republicans made clear that they wanted the tax credits to expire.

    The deal raised hopes for a compromise on healthcare. But that quickly faded with a lack of any real bipartisan talks.

    “We failed,” said Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, one of four Republicans who voted for the Democratic bill, after the vote. “We’ve got to do better. We can’t just say ‘happy holidays, brace for next year.’”

    A Republican alternative

    The dueling Senate votes were the latest political messaging exercise in a Congress that has operated almost entirely on partisan terms, as Republicans pushed through a massive tax and spending cuts bill this summer using budget maneuvers that eliminated the need for Democratic votes. In September, Republicans tweaked Senate rules to push past a Democratic blockade of all of Trump’s nominees.

    On healthcare, Republicans similarly negotiated among themselves, without Democrats. The health savings accounts in the GOP bill that they eventually settled on would give money directly to consumers instead of to insurance companies, an idea that has been echoed by President Donald Trump.

    Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R., S.D.) said ahead of the vote that the Democrats’ simple extension of the subsidies is “an attempt to disguise the real impact of Obamacare’s spiraling healthcare costs.”

    But Democrats immediately rejected the GOP plan, saying that the accounts wouldn’t be enough to cover costs for most consumers.

    The Senate voted 51-48 not to move forward on the Democratic bill, with four Republicans — Maine Sen. Susan Collins, Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley and Alaska Sens. Murkowski and Dan Sullivan — voting with Democrats. The legislation needed 60 votes to proceed, as did the Republican bill, which was also blocked on a 51-48 vote.

    An intractable issue

    The votes were the latest failed salvo in the debate over the Affordable Care Act, former President Barack Obama’s signature law that Democrats passed along party lines in 2010 to expand access to insurance coverage.

    Republicans have tried unsuccessfully since then to repeal or overhaul the law, arguing that healthcare is still too expensive. But they have struggled to find an alternative. In the meantime, Democrats have made the policy a central political issue in several elections, betting that the millions of people who buy healthcare on the government marketplaces want to keep their coverage.

    “When people’s monthly payments spike next year, they’ll know it was Republicans that made it happen,” Schumer said in November, while making clear that Democrats would not seek a compromise.

    Even if they view it as a political win, the failed votes are a loss for Democrats who demanded an extension of the benefits during the shutdown — and for the millions of people facing premium increases on Jan. 1.

    Maine Sen. Angus King, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, said the group tried to negotiate with Republicans after the shutdown ended. But, he said, the talks became unproductive when Republicans demanded language adding new limits for abortion coverage that were a “red line” for Democrats. He said Republicans were going to “own these increases.”

    House to try again

    Republicans have used the looming expiration of the subsidies to renew their longstanding criticisms of the ACA, also called Obamacare, and to try, once more, to agree on what should be done.

    In the House, Speaker Mike Johnson (R., La.) has promised a vote next week on some type of healthcare legislation. Republicans weighed different options in a conference meeting on Wednesday, with no apparent consensus.

    Murkowski and other Senate Republicans who want to extend the subsidies expressed hope that the House could find a way to do it. GOP leaders were considering bills that would not extend the tax credits, but some Republicans have launched longshot efforts to try to go around Johnson and force a vote.

    “Hopefully some ideas emerge” before the new year, said Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who has been pushing his colleagues for a short-term extension.

    “Real Americans are paying the price for this body not working together in the way it should,” said Alabama Sen. Katie Britt, a Republican.

    Republican moderates in the House who could have competitive reelection bids next year are pushing Johnson to find a way to extend the subsidies. But more conservative members want to see the law overhauled.

    Rep. Kevin Kiley (R., Calif.) has also been pushing for a short extension.

    If they fail to act and healthcare costs go up, the approval rating for Congress “will get even lower,” Kiley said.