Tag: Democrats

  • The SEPTA special prosecutor in Philly is set to expire this year. Will state lawmakers extend it into Larry Krasner’s third term?

    The SEPTA special prosecutor in Philly is set to expire this year. Will state lawmakers extend it into Larry Krasner’s third term?

    The special prosecutor for crimes on or near SEPTA property will be funded through the end of the year as part of the newly approved state budget, Pennsylvania lawmakers said this week.

    After that, the office’s fate is uncertain.

    The controversial position is set to expire in December. It was championed by GOP lawmakers in Harrisburg, who for years have tried to limit Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner’s powers and contended that the position was necessary because Krasner failed to prosecute crimes on the state’s largest transit system.

    Legislators set aside another full year of funding for the office — $1.2 million — but haven’t agreed whether they will extend it further into Krasner’s third term, which began in January.

    Senate Majority Leader Joe Pittman (R., Indiana), the top Republican leader in Pennsylvania’s split legislature, where Democrats narrowly control the state House and Republicans lead the state Senate, said Democratic leaders repeatedly rejected GOP efforts to extend the position as part of the closed-door budget talks.

    Krasner’s office has strongly opposed the law that created the special prosecutor position, calling it a “shocking usurpation of power” that unconstitutionally singled out Philadelphia and stripped an elected officials’ authority.

    He could not be reached for comment Thursday.

    The post has also faced opposition from Philadelphia-area lawmakers who say the effort is an affront to city voters who have reelected Krasner, a progressive prosecutor, three times.

    “This is nothing more than voter suppression and an attempt to circumvent some of the extremely popular criminal justice reforms under this DA,” said Sen. Nikil Saval (D., Philadelphia), who chairs the city’s Senate delegation to Harrisburg.

    Pittman, by contrast, said extending the special prosecutor is a critical component for Senate Republicans to agree to a new long-term funding source for SEPTA, which is approaching another fiscal cliff that could cause service disruptions when the state’s current short-term fix runs out next year.

    Asked about the future of the special prosecutor’s office, House Majority Leader Matt Bradford (D., Montgomery) said at Shapiro’s budget signing earlier this week that he hadn’t “given it much thought.”

    Pennsylvania Attorney General Dave Sunday, a Republican who is tasked with overseeing the office, has lauded the special prosecutor’s work so far.

    He said his office supports extending the position, calling it a “force multiplier” that has been effective in combating violent crimes against both SEPTA employees and riders.

    “Our caseload reflects a range of very serious conduct — including murder and aggravated assaults — and we have secured results through convictions,” he said.

    In one example of that effort, the special prosecutor will oversee the case of a 22-year-old woman charged with simple assault after authorities said she pepper-sprayed and punched a conservative social media influencer during a viral confrontation on a SEPTA bus.

    While legislators approved the special prosecutor’s office in 2023, it has been mired in legal challenges from the district attorney’s office in years since and did not begin taking on cases until last year.

    Some House Democrats supported creating the role in 2023, as part of a state budget deal with the Senate GOP and Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro, who was critical of Krasner when he served as attorney general.

    Saval said Democrats shouldn’t use the position as a bargaining chip again.

    “House Democrats who voted to suppress the will of Philadelphians should be ashamed of themselves, and should not support other attempts to do so,” Saval added. “This has nothing to do with the essential task at hand, which is to secure funding for mass transit.”

    A spokesperson for Bradford said the House needs to “take a critical look” at whether the SEPTA special prosecutor is necessary. She noted SEPTA’s success in reducing crime and the size of its police force, but said the money used to fund the position may be better spent to reduce fare evasion by replacing gates to full-length ones that cost $40,000 each.

    The funding was approved in the 2026-27 fiscal year budget “in the case of reauthorization,” and would be used to wind down the office, said Beth Rementer, Bradford’s spokesperson. Any unused funds would be returned to the general fund, she said.

    A spokesperson for Shapiro declined to comment on the prosecutor role, but said Senate Republicans “need to do their jobs” to find a long-term funding solution for mass transit.

    The office

    The office is overseen by Special Prosecutor Michael Untermeyer, a former deputy attorney general and real estate investor who ran against Krasner in the 2017 primary.

    Untermeyer did not respond to a request for comment.

    The single lawyer employed by his office is investigating about 15 cases, including charges of homicide, aggravated assault, and robbery, according to a spokesperson for the attorney general’s office. That figure does not include cases the special prosecutor is considering taking on or are still under investigation, the spokesperson said.

    Lawmakers could still choose to extend the position as part of their fall legislative session. It is among the several time-sensitive issues before the General Assembly ahead of the November election, in which Democrats hope to flip control of the state Senate for the first time in decades.

    Krasner’s office has challenged the special prosecutor role from the beginning. His office filed a lawsuit in 2024 in an attempt to nullify the law, but was rebuffed by a 4-3 Commonwealth Court ruling that said legislators had not violated the state constitution in creating the post.

    The office then appealed to the state Supreme Court, which has yet to decide the matter. As the high court heard oral arguments in the case last year, justices cited the Pennsylvania Constitution when suggesting that the legislature had been free to pass such a law, even if it interfered with the duties of an elected county official.

    And lawyers for the attorney general’s office argued that the special prosecutor role did not strip Krasner’s power, but rather offered additional powers to a prosecutor appointed by the attorney general to handle cases involving crimes in and around SEPTA property.

  • Touring Camden’s Cathedral Kitchen, Andy Kim calls Trump’s cuts to SNAP ‘devastating and cruel’

    Touring Camden’s Cathedral Kitchen, Andy Kim calls Trump’s cuts to SNAP ‘devastating and cruel’

    Touring Cathedral Kitchen, the largest emergency meal supplier in South Jersey, Democratic Sen. Andy Kim praised the 50-year-old Camden institution Friday for the food it has served and the people it has saved.

    “The Kitchen is building community, right here in New Jersey,” said Kim, who noted that the nonprofit distributes 28,000 meals a month while training low-income people to be chefs and restaurant workers. Cathedral Kitchen also works to help people obtain IDs, apply for jobs and benefits, and find housing.

    Its work is needed more than ever, the New Jersey lawmaker said, with hunger on the rise because of high food prices and President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which reduced federal food assistance such as SNAP (the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) beginning July 4 of last year.

    Cutting SNAP benefits and changing eligibility requirements, Kim said, is a “devastating and cruel thing to do” at a time when cost of living has been climbing.

    “Why are we taking away necessary support at this time?” Kim asked. “I mean, we’re talking about food, the basics of being a human. Why is this happening now, at a time when people are struggling with affordability?”

    New Jersey Sen. Andy Kim visits Cathedral Kitchen in Camden, speaking to the workers who provide food for their community and those in need.Tyger Williams / Staff Photographer

    The food assistance cuts are coinciding with the economic fallout from tariffs and the Iran war, Kim noted.

    Nationwide, between January 2025 and January 2026, SNAP rolls decreased by more than 4 million people — from 42 million to 38 million — according to USDA figures.

    In New Jersey, SNAP participation has fallen by more than 50,000 individuals between March 2025 and March of this year, New Jersey Department of Human Services figures show.

    And in Pennsylvania, nearly 90,000 people lost SNAP benefits between July 2025 and April due to new eligibility requirements, according to an analysis by the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services (DHS).

    At the same time, food prices have risen more than 3% in the last year.

    As a result, in Camden, Burlington, Gloucester, and Salem Counties, the number of meals distributed to help those in need grew by 34% over the last four years, according to the Food Bank of South Jersey

    “I know the Camden area,” said Kim, who grew up in nearby Marlton and Cherry Hill. “I’ve seen the struggles that have been here and still persist.”

    The Trump administration has said the cuts it’s made to SNAP, Medicaid, and other programs were necessary to staunch “waste, fraud, and abuse.” It maintains that it’s instituted strict work requirements for SNAP to move more people into the workforce and reduce dependency on government support.

    Kim said many Americans don’t understand that a large number of people who live in poverty also work. “Millions with jobs are still poor, and this country needs a mindset shift to understand that,” Kim said.

    Sen. Andy Kim (D., N.J.) speaks with Naimah Rutling, executive chef at Cathedral Kitchen in Camden, N.J., on Friday.Tyger Williams / Staff Photographer

    As he continued his Tour of Cathedral Kitchen, Kim invariably found himself in the organization’s actual kitchen, bustling with food workers slicing carrots and onions, preparing for meals ahead.

    Clearly enjoying the moment, Kim said that at home, he makes his own bread, including pizza dough.

    Kim asked executive chef Naimah Rutling what her favorite food is. “Grilled cheese,” she said without hesitating. Kim laughed and said, “I have a 9-year-old and a 10-year-old. About 90% of what we eat is grilled cheese.”

    Before leaving, Kim praised workers in the kitchen for their diligence and dedication in preparing food for those who need it.

    “It gives meaning and purpose to their lives,” he said. “I love the passion I see.”

  • DHS chief faces crisis moment amid mounting arrests, fatal shootings

    DHS chief faces crisis moment amid mounting arrests, fatal shootings

    Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin was speaking to reporters this month in New York when one asked whether he was under pressure from the White House to increase immigration arrests. Mullin replied that his department was in lockstep with the president’s team and boasted that arrests and deportations were rising.

    “When we go after the worst of the worst, which is exactly what we’re doing, we’re saving lives,” he said.

    Just over two weeks later, Mullin is facing his biggest political and managerial crisis since taking office in March as he scrambles to respond to two deadly shootings involving U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers. The violence has drawn harsh denunciations from Democrats and immigration advocates, as well as criticism from one prominent Republican senator, and the situation has threatened to reignite the wide public backlash that arose in January when immigration officers killed two U.S. citizens during a surge of operations.

    Mullin’s attempt to quell the uproar over the shootings this week — ordering a moratorium on vehicle-stop arrests by ICE officers — has exposed the precarious position he is in while trying to comply with President Donald Trump’s demands. Less than 48 hours after Mullin issued the directive on traffic stops, a White House official confirmed that it had been reversed.

    Mullin promised to rebuild public trust in the Department of Homeland Security after replacing Kristi L. Noem, and he has undone some of his predecessor’s moves, taking a quieter approach in an effort to stay out of the headlines.

    At the same time, he has doubled down on Trump’s deportation agenda. Data provided to Congress and reviewed by the Washington Post show that under Mullin’s leadership, ICE officers have been making record numbers of arrests. Through July 12, ICE had arrested more than 200,000 people in 2026, a more than 40% increase compared with the same period last year.

    Those arrests were largely happening outside public view until last week, when an ICE officer shot and killed a 52-year-old Mexican man, Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, in Houston. Salgado had been driving to work, and DHS officials said he was not the target of the ICE operation. His family said he had lived in the United States as an undocumented immigrant for more than 35 years and had no criminal record. Surveillance footage has raised questions about DHS’s account of the events surrounding the shooting.

    Less than a week later, a 25-year-old Colombian man, Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero, was shot and killed by an ICE officer in Biddeford, Maine. He was also shot while driving, was the father of a young child and does not appear to have had a criminal record.

    Mullin’s apparent predicament illustrates the competing incentives within the Trump administration over immigration enforcement ahead of the midterm elections in November that will determine whether Democrats win back control of Congress and establish a meaningful check on Trump’s power for his final two years.

    Trump abruptly undercut Mullin on Wednesday by praising vehicle stops as one of ICE’s most important tools, and Trump’s far-right base revolted over Mullin’s leadership on enforcement, calling him weak and ineffective. After the policy was reversed, Mullin wrote on social media that there was no conflict between himself and the president.

    “President Trump and I are on the same page,” he wrote. “We want our @ICEgov officers to have all options available to keep them safe while executing our mission of deporting as many illegal alien criminals from our country as possible.”

    Some Republican allies and Trump political advisers are wary about the potential for a broader public backlash to the president’s immigration agenda in an election year. But the administration’s immigration hawks, including White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, have continued to push for mass deportations to make good on the president’s campaign promise and appeal to his hard-line base.

    “The president’s supporters reacted absolutely as they should have, and I think the president saw that,” said Mike Howell, president of the Oversight Project and a visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation, in regards to Mullin’s pause on traffic stops. “Everyone is now seeing another example of the walk-back instinct of DHS leadership.”

    ICE earlier this month had topped 2,000 arrests per day several times, a DHS official said, after setting that figure as a daily arrest target. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity to share internal information not authorized for release.

    In June, ICE arrested and detained more than 39,500 individuals, topping the previous monthly high of 37,800 in December, according to the data reviewed by the Post. DHS is on pace to exceed that number in July.

    The agency has added thousands of new officers, as well as surveillance technology and other resources, thanks to more than $170 billion in new immigration enforcement funding approved by congressional Republicans last year.

    During his news conference in New York this month, Mullin called that funding “the most consequential bill — definitely of President Trump’s tenure and possibly in recent history.” He accused Democrats, including New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, of being soft on crime and immigration enforcement, and said DHS “might have to flex a little bit more” to respond to the policies in places such as New York.

    Yet Mullin’s pullback on the vehicle stops, which came after he spoke with Sens. Susan Collins (R) and Angus King (Ind.) of Maine, has left him open to criticism from immigration hawks inside and outside the administration.

    One former DHS official suggested that Mullin made the policy change amid pressure from Collins, who is facing a difficult reelection campaign, without consulting the White House.

    “A cabinet secretary just went 180 degrees from the policy of both Trump administrations,” said the former official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to frankly discuss his former agency.

    In an interview with Fox News on Tuesday, White House border czar Tom Homan said Mullin had made the decision to pause vehicle stops after consulting with ICE leadership.

    “I’m confident that ICE is well trained in vehicle stops,” Homan said. “This is a temporary pause while they look at the incidents.”

    Mullin has said little publicly about the shootings. When asked about the Houston incident in a brief phone interview with Atlanta News First, he expressed regret that ICE officers were not wearing body cameras and blamed a 76-day partial shutdown of DHS in the spring as Congress was deadlocked over a funding bill for slowing efforts to distribute more cameras.

    Wednesday on X, Mullin reposted Trump’s message in support of ICE and added his own statement, saying DHS is focused on keeping officers safe and removing criminals.

    “Illegal aliens will be arrested and deported wherever they are. If you are here illegally, LEAVE NOW,” Mullin wrote, adding that officers are facing a major increase in attacks by people using vehicles to threaten them. (In fact, federal prosecutors in several cases have dropped charges against people accused of assaulting officers in light of contradictory evidence.)

    “We remind illegal aliens attempting to evade arrest is dangerous,” Mullin wrote.

    A former ICE official said Mullin was chosen for the role because he would follow White House directives, and had predicted that Mullin would walk back the pause on vehicle stops or water it down if Trump demanded he do so.

    “He’s not going to do anything counter to what the president wants,” the former official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to offer a frank assessment of internal deliberations.

    Immigrant rights advocates expressed skepticism that Mullin is committed to softening ICE’s image to restore broader public trust in the agency.

    Nayna Gupta, policy director at the American Immigration Council, said the Trump administration “may have moved away from the more theatrical displays of force that characterized operations in places like Minneapolis and Chicago, but the basic objective has not changed: a fixation on increasing detentions and deportations simply for the sake of numbers.”

    Gupta said that effort has accelerated as ICE has begun to spend the money from the congressional funding bill, and that it’s leading to more violence by federal officers.

    Yet some business leaders who have worked with Mullin, who previously owned a large plumbing company in Oklahoma, say he has taken a measured approach to enforcement and been far more receptive than Noem to hearing their concerns over the impact of mass deportations on their companies, many of which rely on immigrant labor.

    To the immigration hard-liners, any sign that Mullin is appeasing more moderate interests reads as a betrayal of the president and his voters.

    “Secretary Mullin comes from the Senate, and when it comes to that body, there’s an overeagerness to please other people in that body,” said Howell, of the Heritage Foundation. “So when Senator Collins calls and asks him to do something, then he does it, and it looks bad.”

  • Democrats are outraising Republican incumbents in competitive Pa. House districts — except for one

    Democrats are outraising Republican incumbents in competitive Pa. House districts — except for one

    With control of the U.S. House on the line in November, Pennsylvania’s swing-district candidates are stocking up their war chests for a critical election — but one Democrat is lagging behind his counterparts.

    Bucks County Commissioner Bob Harvie, who is challenging longtime incumbent Republican U.S. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick in the 1st Congressional District, raised almost $552,300 between April 30 and June 30, according to new campaign finance reports filed Wednesday, putting him at a little over $2 million raised since he launched his campaign in April 2025.

    But Harvie’s sum for this two-month period is almost half a million less than Fitzpatrick, and roughly $915,000 on average less than the other Democratic candidates.

    Fellow swing–district Democrats Bob Brooks, Paige Cognetti, and Janelle Stelson all outraised the Republican incumbents in the 7th, 8th, and 10th Districts respectively, each gathering more than $1 million during this two-month period, a sign national Democrats say is proof of their strength in these competitive Pennsylvania seats.

    The reporting period covers the final weeks before the May 19 primary and the six weeks that followed.

    Bucks County Commissioner Bob Harvie hosts a veterans roundtable on May 4 at Middletown Township Building in Langhorne.William Thomas Cain / For The Inquirer

    Harvie is seen by Democrats as the party’s best chance in a decade to beat Fitzpatrick, a five-term moderate with a massive fundraising operation, who has raised $6.7 million so far this campaign, bringing in over $1 million this period.

    The Bucks County Republican has been tough to beat, thanks to his name recognition and ability to garner support from voters across the political spectrum, but Democrats believe Harvie’s roots in the county, and his electoral record as county commissioner, make him their strongest candidate to date.

    (function(){function e(){window.addEventListener(`message`,function(e){if(e.data[`datawrapper-height`]!==void 0){var t=document.querySelectorAll(`iframe`);for(var n in e.data[`datawrapper-height`])for(var r=0,i;i=t[r];r++)if(i.contentWindow===e.source){var a=e.data[`datawrapper-height`][n]+`px`;i.style.height=a}}})}e()})();

    And their outlook on the race hasn’t budged. Democrats believe all four swing district Democrats will be successful in November but understand it will take continued investments, including more money, to get all of them across the finish line.

    Bucks County’s 1st Congressional District “is a winnable race, and Democrats should be all in on investing in Harvie so that he can help take back control of Congress,” said Dan McCormick, Harvie’s campaign manager, in a statement.

    He also added that Harvie doesn’t “take a dime” of corporate PAC money. McCormick did not comment on the contrast between Harvie’s fundraising and that of his counterparts in the other targeted districts.

    “Fitzpatrick sees the same polling we do, that’s why he’s busy lighting his money on fire lying about Bob,” McCormick said.

    Fitzpatrick began funding ads against Harvie before the May 19 primary, underscoring the significance of Harvie’s challenge in a year Republicans are expected to lose seats nationally. Fitzpatrick’s campaign spent nearly $2 million between May and June, compared with about $360,000 in spending by Harvie’s campaign.

    Both parties are targeting the seat, which includes all of Bucks and a sliver of Montgomery County, as they battle to secure control over the U.S. House.

    In a pre-primary report that covered April 1 through 29, Harvie had raised about $107,000, in addition to his stockpile reported Wednesday. Fitzpatrick raised $246,000 during that same period.

    Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R., Pa.) speaks to reporters June 3 after the House passed an Iran war powers resolution.Haiyun Jiang

    The nonpartisan Cook Political report has rated the 1st Congressional District as “likely” Republican, and the three other swing districts are considered toss-ups.

    In a high stakes election year — and with popular Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro at the top of the ticket and a sinking approval rating for President Donald Trump — Harvie’s fundraising numbers at this point are mostly on par with the last Democrat to take on Fitzpatrick.

    Former challenger Ashley Ehasz, who ran against Fitzpatrick in 2022 and 2024, raised more than $767,000 during this period two years ago, bringing her campaign total to $2.1 million as of June 30, 2024.

    Brittany Crampsie, a Democratic strategist in Pennsylvania, said donors may be doing “a little bit of hedging” their spending for Harvie at the moment, waiting to see more information on Shapiro’s poll numbers, Trump’s approval rating, and the national mood before investing more in the 1st District.

    “Democratic donors absolutely want to beat Fitzpatrick,” Crampsie said. “We want to control Congress by large margins. But PA-1 is an expensive race. I mean, you might want to be looking at a little bit more information.”

    The 1st and 7th Congressional Districts are part of the expensive Philadelphia television market, meaning both Harvie and Brooks will be competing for airtime.

    Brooks, who is taking on freshman Republican U.S. Rep. Ryan Mackenzie in the Lehigh Valley, has raised $2.3 million over the entire span of his campaign — getting a boost this period after winning a competitive primary — but it’s not too far off from Harvie’s $2 million total haul.

    Christopher Nicholas, a GOP consultant who grew up in Bucks County, said that Harvie is not just in a competition against Fitzpatrick, but also with the three other Democratic contenders in Pennsylvania.

    “If you’re some official at the DCCC, and you say ‘Let’s see, get me the report on Pennsylvania,’ and you see this, where is Harvie going to be in the rankings? Is he going to be moving up or moving down? I think that’s a pretty easy question to answer,” Nicholas said.

    Eli Cousin, a spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, emphasized that Pennsylvanians are wholeheartedly behind all four candidates who he says are “on the front lines of our path back to the House majority and will shake up a broken Washington in order to put Pennsylvania families first.”

    Donors still have a lot of time to realize that Harvie is “the right candidate” and to contribute to TV and other ad spends that will come later this summer into the fall, Crampsie said. Some may already be writing checks to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and other Democratic aligned-issues to support their cause of flipping the House blue.

    “Fitzpatrick has won several times after being called the number one target, and stakeholders may be less likely to oppose him publicly and want to put their money into spending for Harvie that’s not necessarily into PAC spending … but I don’t think that it’s a sign that people are not supporting Harvie,” Crampsie said.

    But even in the races where Democrats are outraising incumbents victory isn’t guaranteed in districts where Republicans have previously managed to prevail despite a cash disadvantage.

    Janelle Stelson, running to represent Pennsylvania in Congress, campaigns at a gas station. Michelle Gustafson

    In 2024, Stelson raised about $6.5 million during the entire cycle, roughly $2.1 million more than Republican U.S. Rep. Scott Perry, and still lost. Republicans are hoping Perry can prevail again when they have a rematch in November.

    And Republicans see other signs of hope in these races despite Democrats’ momentum. For example, Mackenzie has more than $2.9 million cash on hand, roughly $1.9 million more than Brooks.

    “Republicans remain in a strong position to defend our House majority after excellent quarters by our incumbent Members across Pennsylvania,” Reilly Richardson, a spokesperson for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said in a statement.

  • Doug Mastriano wouldn’t say if he believes all American leaders should be Christian as he’s vetted for an ambassadorship

    Doug Mastriano wouldn’t say if he believes all American leaders should be Christian as he’s vetted for an ambassadorship

    WASHINGTON — Doug Mastriano, the far-right Pennsylvania lawmaker whom President Donald Trump nominated to become the U.S. ambassador to Slovakia, refused to tell senators during his confirmation hearing on Thursday whether he believes all American political leaders should be Christian.

    A key Trump ally during the president’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election, Mastriano also rejected claims that he is a conspiracy theorist who assisted in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

    And while he said he regretted some of his past statements about the Holocaust and his associations with individuals considered antisemitic, he repeatedly pushed back on Democratic senators’ concerns about his fitness for the role.

    “I’ve never been involved in conspiracies,” he said during a heated exchange with U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va.), who at different points referred to Mastriano as “gullible” and someone who needs to “look in the mirror a little bit.”

    Trump nominated Mastriano for the ambassadorship in May.

    The Republican state senator from Franklin County is a retired U.S. Army colonel who deployed three times to Afghanistan after 9/11 and previously served in Eastern Europe.

    He was the Republican nominee for Pennsylvania governor in 2022 with Trump’s backing, but he lost to Democrat Josh Shapiro by nearly 15 percentage points. Mastriano’s nomination for the ambassadorship came as his supporters were promoting him as a write-in candidate for governor ahead of the May Republican primary, in which Treasurer Stacy Garrity was unopposed.

    U.S. Sen. Dave McCormick (R., Pa.), who pushed for Mastriano’s nomination and chaired his confirmation hearing during the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing Thursday, said Mastriano’s military career made him “highly qualified” for the role.

    “This position needs a leader with strategic judgment, intimate knowledge of NATO’s inner workings, and firsthand experience working alongside our allies with an unwavering commitment to advancing America’s interest,” McCormick said during the hearing. “Doug brings that experience, and I’m confident that he’ll represent the United States with great professionalism and integrity.”

    Mastriano also leaned on his experience, which he said involved planning operations in the Baltic states and fending off Russian aggression. He said he hoped to strengthen America’s relationship with Slovakia and encourage the country to contribute to Ukraine’s defense.

    But Democrats on the committee said they had serious concerns about both Mastriano’s past comments on foreign policy and a range of other issues — including an ideology that has been described as Christian nationalist.

    U.S. Sen. Jacky Rosen (D., Nev.) said Mastriano had spoken often about his Christian identity and his belief that the separation of church and state is a “myth.” Rosen, who is Jewish, asked Mastriano to look her in the eye and say whether all U.S. political leaders should be Christian.

    Mastriano said that he believed “religious liberty applies to every American” and that it was “why our country was founded.” After Rosen said it was “deeply problematic” that he would not say America is a pluralistic nation where leaders do not need to be Christian, Mastriano responded, “I will look you in the eye and repeat even simpler language” — though he did not answer the original question.

    “We are absolutely a pluralistic society and I have worked for non-Christians in the military and the government, and I’ve had them working for me,” Mastriano added.

    Rosen also questioned him about previous comments comparing abortion and his loss to Shapiro in the 2022 Pennsylvania governor’s race to the Holocaust.

    “There was a social media post that I would not post today,” Mastriano said, calling any comparisons to the Holocaust “unwise.”

    Asked about his associations with Andrew Torba, founder of the online platform Gab, which has been used to share extremist and antisemitic views, Mastriano said he “immediately” returned a campaign donation from Torba and cut off advertising on the platform when he learned about the Gab founder’s views.

    “You can denounce your past associations with antisemites. You can point to your support of Israel,” Rosen said. “But for me, I’m not sure that either excuses you or erases your record.”

    U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D., N.H.) questioned Mastriano while displaying a giant poster with his picture and a 2018 quote in which he said European Union leaders were “political, diplomatic enemies of the United States of America.”

    She said staff who had interviewed him recently had also quoted him as saying he believed the European Union was a “rising rival comparable to China and that it would eventually create a standing army to challenge the United States.” Visibly frustrated during her questioning, Shaheen said that the EU should be treated as allies, not rivals, and that Mastriano “should absolutely know better.”

    The most contentious exchange came between Mastriano and Kaine, who started by saying that he respected the nominee’s military service and that the nomination brought him “a real sense of sadness.”

    “You’ve associated with antisemites and Holocaust deniers. You’ve associated with 9/11 conspiracy theorists. You’ve made comments about foreign leaders that are not diplomatic in quality. And you and I share a very special day in American history,” Kaine said. “We were both here on Jan. 6, 2021.”

    Mastriano was Trump’s top ally in Pennsylvania as the president contested his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden. He worked both publicly and privately to contest the vote, and he was near the Capitol on the day that a mob broke in to stop the certification of the results. The Republican lawmaker was not charged with a crime related to any of those activities, which he reminded Kaine about on Thursday.

    “That is incorrect,” he said as Kaine pressed and said he had been at the Capitol to overturn the results. “I was here to hear the president. I was here with my wife to hear the president of the United States speak. We didn’t do anything illegal. We came, we saw, we left.”

    Asked if he would say, now, that Biden had won the election, Mastriano said only that Biden had been certified as the winner — a phrase that other Trump nominees have used in nomination hearings and that Democrats have described as a pre-negotiated script to appease a president who still stands by the fraudulent claims.

    “Conspiracy theorists generally are gullible people. They might have master’s degrees and Ph.D.s, and you’ve got them,” Kaine said to Mastriano, referring to his degree in history.

    “I don’t know what you’re talking about, senator,” Mastriano said, denying that he subscribes to conspiracy theories as the two talked over each other.

    Kaine said Mastriano could claim, if he wanted, that he only held a public hearing on the 2020 election — an event in Gettysburg that helped spread false claims that there was widespread fraud in the election — but he could not erase his record.

    “No, sir, there’s no erasing,” Mastriano said. “Facts are stubborn things.”

  • White House faces stiff pushback on subjecting grants to political review

    White House faces stiff pushback on subjecting grants to political review

    WASHINGTON — Some of the nation’s top law enforcement officials were not pleased when the White House embarked on its push to assert more political control over more than $1 trillion in annual federal grants.

    The proposal, unveiled in May, stood to enable the administration to steer significant funding to causes and organizations aligned with President Donald Trump — and to cancel grants if recipients did not conform to his political views. That troubled a set of groups representing sheriffs, narcotics officers, and district attorneys, which said this month that the “undefined expectations” in Washington could interfere with public safety.

    The letter was one of roughly 500,000 formal comments that have flooded the Trump administration in recent weeks. Many of the posted submissions expressed misgivings with the draft White House plan to take greater control of federal spending.

    The opposition has been wide-ranging, spanning academic researchers, artists, city leaders, civil engineers, congressional lawmakers, housing experts, state attorneys general and regular Americans, who have warned that the White House could imperil public services if it subjects federal grants to political review.

    The administration proposal, which is not final, targets a vast set of federal funding for climate, education, health, housing, and infrastructure. If carried out, the regulation would require Trump’s political appointees to approve grants before they are awarded to cities, states, nonprofits, and other institutions. The review would primarily aim to ensure that the money supports purposes that “demonstrably advance the president’s policy priorities.”

    Recipients of federal funding would also be subject to broad political handcuffs. Taxpayer dollars could not “promote anti-American values,” for example, or be doled out to nonprofits that engage in some kinds of “issue advocacy” or that have certain “memberships and affiliations.” And a large set of topics would be off-limits, especially for scientists and researchers, who could face some of the most severe restrictions.

    The White House budget office has described the changes as necessary to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse, including spending that the office’s director, Russell T. Vought, deems to be “woke.” To achieve that goal, the administration has adopted an expansive view of its budgetary powers, even though Congress possesses the power of the purse under the Constitution.

    Many recipients of federal grants told the White House over the last two months that the proposed changes could be debilitating and that they cannot afford to have their aid revoked if Trump does not agree with their agenda.

    “This will put a lot of things up in the air,” said Andy Schor, mayor of Lansing, Mich., a Democrat. He added that the plan would affect “policing to housing to all the dollars we get from the feds.”

    Such interruptions have already plagued Schor’s community. The mayor recalled a series of incidents in which federal grants to the city and local nonprofits, including money to address redlining and combat violence, had been interrupted or canceled under Trump.

    Schor said the consequences could be greater if White House officials could more easily cancel a larger set of grants simply because “they suddenly decide they don’t like something.” In that case, the mayor said he would face a dilemma that could force him to choose between “staff we have to lay off or dollars we can’t get into the community for these important things that are needed.”

    A spokesperson for the Office of Management and Budget did not respond to a request for comment.

    Testifying at a Senate hearing Thursday, Vought said the proposal aimed to ensure “that we have democratic control of the spending that is going out.”

    But the stakes of his approach became clear when Sen. Tina Smith (D., Minn.) asked Vought how the administration might approach federally funded cancer research. She raised the example of a grant devoted to identifying the source of high cancer rates among Black people — and the extent to which the administration would disallow the money because of the president’s long-stated opposition to diversity, equity, and inclusion.

    Vought began by saying the White House was “against DEI policies,” adding, “How that would impact with that particular grant would be a decision for a political official, policy official, at NIH,” referring to the National Institutes of Health. He said administration appointees would “make the final decisions,” though they would take expert views into account.

    Smith said that revealed the “absurdity and the bias of this proposed rule, and the danger of what happens when you bring political ideology into grant-making processes, particularly around healthcare.”

    The proposed rules are the latest step in Trump’s contentious campaign to recalibrate how the government spends its money. With the help of Vought, the administration has fired thousands of federal workers while taking steps to hold up or cancel billions of dollars in congressionally approved aid, arguing that the spending was unnecessary or misaligned with Trump’s beliefs.

    Lawmakers from both parties sharply criticized some of Trump’s moves, and federal judges have repeatedly declared the president’s actions illegal. Yet the White House has continued pressing ahead and has taken steps to formalize some of its practices with its proposal targeting federal grants.

    The roughly 400-page blueprint, which the White House aims to put into effect in October, quickly stoked broad opposition.

    In Pennsylvania, the United Way, a network of nonprofit providers, warned that the grant rules could create “unpredictable financial and legal risks” for organizations that provide food, housing and other essential services. The group warned that those entities probably did not have the resources to comply or contest the government’s proposed restrictions.

    The Los Angeles County Department of Arts and Culture took issue with the way the administration tried to restrict the political activities of grant recipients. The agency said that approach could “chill free speech, creative expression, and activities supportive of diverse cultures and communities,” including at museums.

    The National Sheriffs’ Association and other law enforcement groups said they did not have the resources to incorporate all of the changes the White House had envisioned. A national network of civil engineers said the plan would impinge on its ability to collaborate with foreign counterparts on infrastructure research.

    And scientists, researchers and health providers expressed some of the loudest opposition. More than 300 organizations — many representing practitioners working on cancer cures, ALS and HIV treatments and pediatric medicine — urged the Trump administration to slow down because of the risks to their work and patients.

    The White House proposal reserved some of its strictest rules for academics funded by federal dollars. It aimed to limit the research they pursue, the conferences where experts can appear, and the organizations and foreign labs with which they are allowed to collaborate.

    Entire research areas would also be restricted if the rules were to take effect as drafted: Grants could not support work related to diversity, equity or inclusion, for example, or projects or groups that “deny the biological reality of sex or the sex binary in humans.”

    The strictures amounted to a major “escalation” from the president’s previous attempts to slash and control funding at agencies like the NIH and the National Science Foundation, according to Sudip S. Parikh, CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, a nonprofit that promotes scientists.

    “It overemphasizes the political at the expense of scientific opportunities and the needs of the American people,” he said.

    Despite the president’s pursuit of deep cuts, Democratic and Republican lawmakers have ignored the requests and opted to keep most health and science funding intact. So the renewed push by Trump to cement his control over federally funded research enraged many Democrats, who view the proposed regulation as another encroachment of their spending powers.

    Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D., Conn.), who leads her party on the Appropriations Committee, said that the president, if successful, could undermine the idea enshrined in the Constitution that “money is directed based upon the needs of the American people, and that is transmitted through elected representatives.”

    DeLauro also joined with the 11 other House Democrats who serve in leadership positions on key appropriations committees this week to express deep reservations with the administration’s plans. The lawmakers estimated that the White House effort would affect more than $1 trillion every year.

    Democrats were not alone in airing frustration. In a separate letter last week, Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, the Republican chair of the Appropriations Committee who is facing a tough midterm election race, said the White House could imperil much-needed funding in ways that “harm small and rural communities.”

    The proposal drew support among Trump’s conservative allies. Daniel West, the government relations director for Heritage Action, said that some of the backlash had been “hyperbolic” and that he did not expect the White House budget office to retreat.

    “Everything I’ve seen indicates that OMB cares deeply about ensuring the proper stewardship of federal dollars, and they are moving this rule with that intention in mind,” West said.

    Some opponents still seemed to be readying for a legal battle. Citing the implications for education, healthcare, housing, science and other “critical services to hundreds of millions of people,” a group of governors and attorneys general from two dozen states told the White House on Monday that its proposed changes to grants would violate the Constitution. Many of the same states, including New York, California, and Colorado, have successfully fought Trump in the past over budget cuts enacted without the express permission of Congress.

    “The rule offends the Constitution,” the states argued at one point in their missive.

    This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

  • Fetterman says he’d leave the Democratic Party if it becomes anti-Israel. A majority of House Democrats voted to end aid.

    Fetterman says he’d leave the Democratic Party if it becomes anti-Israel. A majority of House Democrats voted to end aid.

    Only one House Democrat from Pennsylvania voted against an amendment on Wednesday that would have ended aid to Israel.

    The rest backed the measure, along with a plurality of Democrats in the chamber, highlighting shifts and factions within the party. The vote also inches closer to crossing a line that Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania says could cause him to abandon the party.

    The amendment, which would have cut $3.3 billion in military and humanitarian aid to Israel, was offered by U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican who has clashed with President Donald Trump and was the only member of his party to support the measure.

    Massie’s amendment failed in a 104-314 vote, but it showed shifting sentiment around Israel in the Democratic Party.

    U.S. Rep. Brendan Boyle, who represents parts of Philadelphia, was the only Pennsylvania Democrat who voted against the amendment.

    Boyle said that the U.S. should push back against the actions of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, but that the amendment was too broad to present a viable solution.

    “This amendment would have forced the closure of the U.S. Embassy in Israel, ended refugee resettlement programs, cut off vital humanitarian and diplomatic efforts, and weakened our ability to combat terrorist organizations,” Boyle wrote in a statement to The Inquirer. “The United States must change course in response to the far-right Netanyahu government’s conduct, the settler violence, and the devastating suffering of Palestinian civilians. But this sweeping amendment was not the answer.”

    The six other Pennsylvania Democrats supported the measure, while all Republicans present from the state voted no; U.S. Reps. Scott Perry of York County and Ryan Mackenzie of Lehigh County missed the vote.

    The share of Democrats voting for the amendment showed a striking difference from two years ago, when a similar amendment from U.S. Rep. Summer Lee, a progressive from Pittsburgh, garnered only 37 Democratic votes and 21 GOP votes.

    “Thousands and thousands of Palestinians have been killed using our tax dollars,” Lee wrote on X. “This shift in the party is a testament to the movement but it’s still unconscionable for any member of Congress to justify sending any aid to fuel Israel’s genocide.”

    The Israel-Hamas war started in October 2023 after a Hamas-led attack killed 1,200 Israelis. Since then, the Palestinian death toll has surpassed 73,000, the Associated Press reported.

    Fetterman, a staunch supporter of Israel, said that though he has no current plans to leave the Democratic Party, ending support for Israel is a line that could push him out of the party.

    “If our party ever becomes — and just makes it official — the anti-Israel party, that’s when I would leave because that’s been a moral clarity for me,” Fetterman said to the Hill on Wednesday.

    Fetterman has been insistent that he is still a Democrat, publishing an opinion piece in the Washington Post in May emphasizing he is still “pro-choice, pro-weed, pro-LGBT, pro-SNAP, pro-labor and even pro-rib-eye over bio slop.”

    But recently, more and more of Fetterman’s support has been coming from across the aisle.

    According to a Quinnipiac University poll released on Wednesday, 77% of surveyed Republicans said they approve of Fetterman, while only 19% of Democrats do.

    The poll also found that more than half of registered Pennsylvania voters want Fetterman to leave the Democratic Party altogether — a number that reflected majorities of voters from both parties.

  • Former Bucks County man who voted twice for President Donald Trump in 2020 sentenced to six months of house arrest

    Former Bucks County man who voted twice for President Donald Trump in 2020 sentenced to six months of house arrest

    A former Bucks County man who voted twice for President Donald Trump in the 2020 election was sentenced Wednesday to six months of house arrest and three years of probation.

    Matthew Laiss was found guilty by a jury earlier this year of casting two ballots in the 2020 election: first by mail in Pennsylvania, where he had once lived in Ottsville, and then again in person in Florida, where he was living at the time.

    Laiss, 32, said in court Wednesday that his actions were “stupid” and a mistake. And his lawyer said that Laiss never meant for both votes to actually count — that he had wrongfully assumed election officials would identify he had voted twice and only count one of his ballots.

    “In hindsight, it wasn’t good judgment,” Laiss said.

    Prosecutors, however, said they did not believe that, in part because they said Laiss misled FBI agents about his actions when he was confronted years later. And Assistant U.S. Attorney Mark Dubnoff said Laiss had shown a “striking” lack of remorse for what he did, repeatedly saying it was the result of his age or mental health at the time, as opposed to realizing he had committed a crime.

    “Mr. Laiss has not accepted ownership of what he did,” Dubnoff said.

    U.S. District Judge Joseph F. Leeson Jr. said Laiss’ crimes were serious and had affected “all citizens of this country.”

    But he declined to send Laiss to prison, noting that Laiss had already lost his job as an insurance salesman as a result of the case, and that he would have the felony conviction on his record for the rest of his life.

    The U.S. Attorney’s Office charged Laiss last year with crimes including voter fraud and voting more than once in a federal election.

    Prosecutors said records showed that Laiss had filled out and returned a mail-in Pennsylvania ballot in October 2020. And less than a week later, they said, he went to a polling place in Florida and voted again.

    Laiss later said in court documents that he voted twice for Trump. And as his case progressed toward trial, he sought to claim that his actions were covered by pardons Trump extended to people who tried to help him overturn the results of the 2020 election, which Joe Biden won.

    Leeson denied Laiss’ motion, and in March, Laiss, now a resident of Bethlehem, was found guilty by a federal jury in Allentown.

    Prosecutors announced Laiss’ case alongside the indictment of a Philadelphia woman, Miya Pack, who was separately charged with voting twice in the 2020 election. She pleaded guilty last month and is awaiting sentencing.

    Still, attorneys said cases involving people casting multiple ballots were relatively rare in eastern Pennsylvania. Laiss’ lawyer said the only other comparable case in the region that unfolded in recent years was that of Philip C. Pulley, a Philadelphia landlord who voted in the city, Montgomery County, and Florida in 2020 and 2022. He was also sentenced to probation.

    Trump has nonetheless made frequently questionable or false statements about the prevalence of voter fraud, particularly in instances where his opponents or Democrats have won. Election officials and experts generally agree that voter fraud has not historically occurred at widespread rates or in ways that could lead to incorrect outcomes.

  • Josh Shapiro has fundraised $50 million since the beginning of last year, his campaign says

    Josh Shapiro has fundraised $50 million since the beginning of last year, his campaign says

    Gov. Josh Shapiro’s teeming campaign war chest continues to grow.

    The first-term Democrat raised a whopping $12 million toward his reelection bid for Pennsylvania governor between April and June, his campaign said Wednesday — bringing his total fundraising to $50 million since January 2025.

    The announcement from Shapiro’s campaign came months ahead of the next financial filing deadline for Pennsylvania candidates, on Sept. 22.

    But the news of the governor’s eye-popping fundraising figures — topping the $10 million he raised between January and March — came the same week that federal elected officials and candidates are required to submit their financial reports.

    Shapiro is widely speculated to be considering a 2028 presidential run, though he has demurred when asked about any presidential ambitions. Several members of Congress, including U.S. Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey, Mark Kelly of Arizona, and Chris Murphy of Connecticut, and U.S. Reps. Ro Khanna of California and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York — all of whom were due to file their latest fundraising totals by Wednesday night — are also seen as prospective candidates for the Democratic presidential primary.

    However, federal officials face different limits on the amounts of money they can receive. Individuals can give only $3,500 per candidate per election. In Pennsylvania, state law allows unlimited spending for candidates, and multiple donors have contributed five- and six-figure dollar amounts to Shapiro’s campaign.

    A spokesperson for Shapiro declined to comment on the timing of his fundraising announcement.

    If Shapiro decides to run for higher office, the money he has raised would not follow him. State campaigns are not permitted to transfer money to a presidential run. But his connections could provide a vast network of donors if he pursues the White House.

    Shapiro, who has boasted high popularity ratings in Pennsylvania throughout his term, has also consistently polled well ahead of his Republican gubernatorial opponent, State Treasurer Stacy Garrity.

    Garrity’s campaign did not provide its latest fundraising numbers. Full reports for both Garrity and Shapiro, including who gave the money and how much was spent, will be available in September. In the 2022 Pennsylvania governor’s race, Shapiro spent a historic $73 million to beat Republican State Sen. Doug Mastriano.

    During the last reporting cycle, Shapiro outraised Garrity 10-1 as she struggled to compete with Shapiro’s large donations from across the country. Her campaign has previously emphasized that most of her contributions came from individual Pennsylvanians.

    State Treasurer and Republican candidate for governor Stacy Garrity holds a rally in Bucks County Sept. 25, 2025 at the Newtown Sports & Events Center.Tom Gralish / Staff Photographer

    On Tuesday, Garrity stopped in Philadelphia for an event with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis at the Union League about issues related to affordability, according to an event flyer. Media were denied entry into the private event.

    Shapiro was also in the city on Tuesday, touting the boost to education funding in the new state budget.

    The governor has repeatedly said his focus is on the November election in Pennsylvania, where he is vying not only for reelection but also to rally enthusiasm down-ballot in efforts to flip control of the state Senate and elect Democrats to four nationally watched congressional seats in attempts to flip the U.S. House.

    Shapiro has taken on a more prominent role in the state’s Democratic Party over the last year. A longtime ally, Larry Hailsham Jr., became the party’s executive director in October 2025, and since then, the governor has continued to invest in the party.

  • The other Graham Platner crisis for Dems | Will Bunch Newsletter

    The other Graham Platner crisis for Dems | Will Bunch Newsletter

    A journalistic mentor of mine back in the 1980s told me that Harry Truman, pressed for a comment on the passing of a political enemy, finally said, “It’s a damn shame when anybody dies.” Of course, like most perfect quotes, HST probably never actually said this, yet I find occasion to think of these words often. On Saturday night, South Carolina GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham — whose moral compass went haywire in the 2010s when a brief moment of truth–telling about Donald Trump melted into embarrassing capitulation — died suddenly from heart problems. He was just 71. It’s a damn shame.

    If someone forwarded you this email, sign up for free here.

    Dems need to give up on fake blue-collar campaigns like Platner’s

    Supporters cheer for Graham Platner in Blue Hill, Maine, after he won the Democratic Senate primary on June 9. Platner’s bid for the Senate inspired progressive Democrats. But the campaign, which he suspended July 8, was messy, disorganized and ultimately doomed by a steady drip of scandal. SOPHIE PARK

    Graham Platner, the failed Maine Democratic Senate candidate, was introduced to most of us outside of the Pine Tree State less as a human being than as a fully formed narrative.

    The rugged redhead with angry eyes was an ex-Marine from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars who became an oyster farmer and then a political outsider with all the right words for an electorate that’s mad as hell and isn’t going to take it anymore.

    We now know that Platner’s origin story — compelling, but larded with omissions and sprinkled with lies — belonged on the fiction shelf. But even after the Democrats’ scandal-scarred June primary winner accepted the inevitable and ended his candidacy on Friday, he lives on as an avatar upon which everyone with a stake in a badly broken Democratic party can project their distrust and rage toward others — folks who ought to be their allies in an all-out war against fascism.

    Days later, the Platner discourse is almost as toxic as the candidate himself. People who voice their opinions, even in 280 characters on social media, get called everything from sexist Bernie-bro rape apologists to Quislings who want big corporations to keep running the Democrats into the ground, and all the rest in between. Don’t even mention Israel. In fact, don’t @ me after this is posted.

    Having said all that, there is a conversation that must be had by the Democrats, and probably a wider circle. And the disappearance of Platner himself from the picture makes that easier, because I think we can all stipulate that as a human being he was clearly not worthy to be a U.S. senator, even in the Senate’s current morally diminished state.

    There is another Graham Platner somewhere on Earth 2 who also suffered PTSD and developed a drinking problem fighting in pointless wars, and who also got a Nazi tattoo and posted wretched stuff on Reddit, but turned his life around in a glorious redemption song. But that’s not the Platner we got on here on Earth 1. Instead of an apology, he was weirdly defensive about his past, because — we now know — he was hiding stuff that was even worse than that.

    Although Platner has denied the most serious charge of a sexual assault, there should be zero tolerance in the Democratic Party for the type of sexual misconduct that’s been confirmed, let alone what’s been additionally alleged. That’s not just the only proper moral stance, but it sets Dems apart from a twisted GOP that nominated Trump three times. Platner’s disappearance is a blessing to everyone.

    But even with that matter resolved, we still haven’t answered the bigger question that I posed the only other time I wrote about Platner back in the spring: Why did a majority of Maine Democrats — roughly 150,000 voters — ignore the party establishment to back this guy?

    The selection of Platner’s replacement over the next few weeks will show whether top Democrats understand that base voters want candidates who are younger, who support things like Medicare-for-all or Palestinian rights that many corporate donors do not, and who look like they will fight fascism, not bend the knee.

    But first Democrats — and just about everyone, frankly — need to do a better job understanding not just the “why” of Platner supporters, but the “who.” Baked into the Platner myth was this notion that in running a gruff-sounding ex-Marine and oyster farmer, Democrats had found a key to regaining the long-lost white working class.

    Two huge problems with this. First — and this will sound familiar here in Pennsylvania where shorts-and-hoodie-wearing Sen. John Fetterman grew up upper middle class before donning a blue collar — Platner comes from a fairly privileged background. He’s the son of a lawyer and upscale restaurant owner and grandson of a famous architect; he started high school at the super-elite Hotchkiss School.

    Which brings us to the crux of the problem: the notion that Platner’s pre-implosion success was his ability to win back working-class voters in an overwhelmingly white state. Polls exposed this all as a lie. A late June survey from the New York Times/Portland Press Herald/Siena showed Platner losing white, non-college educated voters by a whopping 21% to the GOP incumbent Sen. Susan Collins. So what gave him a shot at winning? A massive 37% edge among college degree holders.

    Look, we all know that it’s been the obsessive mantra of the political pundit class that Democrats will never fully win back America without restoring the working-class coalition that elected Franklin Roosevelt four times during the New Deal era. I hate to be a contrarian here, but what if that’s not true?

    A society that over a half-century has once again made higher education an elite sport and now has a right-wing media and demagogues like Trump to heighten working-class grievances and blame the wrong people has created voters who — at least for now (hold this thought) — arguably aren’t worth chasing after.

    The frayed alliance of progressives and liberals who comprise the core of the Democratic base do some dumb stuff — opposing new units that could lower housing costs, or “nice white parents” leading to de facto school segregation — that should stop.

    But the core values of the college-educated voter — that education makes a better person and not just a better worker, that the rights of every human including the trans community should be cherished, or that students should learn about America’s mistakes like slavery — are moral and good. They shouldn’t be mocked, and they shouldn’t be compromised by chasing votes that don’t exist.

    An America that’s not inclusive and that isn’t fair when it comes to gross income inequality, not to mention who gets to see a doctor or send their kid to college, isn’t a cause worth fighting for. And there’s already a healthy number of working-class people — not the majority, not yet — who would agree with this.

    Platner was a bad guy but he appealed to voters who wanted good things. Let’s not bemoan the fact that his movement was based on educated people. Let’s build on that. Instead of lowering our values to win elections, let’s play the long game to lift more people up to a better place.

    That means elevating education to the top of the agenda — including much more access to low-cost or even free college or trade school, plus an emphasis on critical thinking that ditches AI, while raising up civics and the humanities. Push a universal gap year of national service for high school grads — to work on projects that will remind young Americans what we have in common, not what divides us. Build a United States with available healthcare and affordable housing that will fuel ambition, not anger.

    It’s way past time for college-educated progressives and our allies to stop apologizing for the things we believe in. The current push to find a candidate who can replace Platner and fight for all the right stuff — without the personal baggage of their predecessor — is a great place to start. Maybe it’s even time to revive the old cliché: As Maine goes, so goes the nation.

    Yo, do this!

    • Tuesday is the folk-music legend Woody Guthrie’s 114th birthday. I use the present tense because it very much feels like the singer who influenced living icons from Bob Dylan to Bruce Springsteen is still with us. Now, a friend, the pioneering rock journalist Greg Mitchell, has directed a new documentary about the musician, his political activism in the mid-20th century, and his lasting influence: Woody Guthrie and the Ghost of Tom Joad. It’s now streaming on PBS.org and will also be popping up on PBS stations this summer. You can — and should! — stream it here.
    • Monday night I read a remarkable piece of journalism that I feel compelled to share. Last week, a lot of America was talking about a photo from July 4 that showed a young Black woman on a D.C. Metro train surrounded by masked members of the white supremacist Patriot Front. There was so much commentary about what this woman must be feeling and thinking, and almost all of it — as shown by some remarkable reporting by former Inquirer journalist Ellie Silverman, writing for NOTUS — was wrong. The truth is heartbreaking.

    Ask me anything

    Question: Why do we not know what’s going on with (ailing Kentucky Sen. Mitch) McConnell? What is the Republican endgame? What’s the benefit to prolonging the process of determining a replacement? What is that process (seems to be in dispute)?

    Answer: We know a little more now than we did when I addressed this issue last week. His staff on Sunday released a brief statement and what is being called a “proof of life photo” — with that morning’s Washington Post sports page visible in the shot — seeking to explain McConnell’s month-long hospitalization and hoped-for return to the Senate. There were, of course, immediate conspiracy theories that the photo was artificial intelligence, but there’s no compelling evidence of that. The biggest mystery is, why doesn’t the 84-year-old McConnell just quit, with only about six months left until he leaves office in January? Kentucky has changed its Senate replacement law a couple of times, mainly because GOP lawmakers don’t want Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear making the pick. The new law requires a special election, but there probably will not be one if McConnell stays in office through Aug. 3. Republicans seem desperate to avoid the special election, and I’m not sure why, since McConnell surely isn’t helping advance the Trump agenda from his hospital bed.

    What you’re saying about…

    You really didn’t think I could go a whole newsletter without mentioning soccer, did you? Last week’s question about Trump’s FIFA intervention and the reversal of the American Folarin Balogun’s red-card suspension drew a unanimous response: The president was wrong to get involved, and he seemed to create a negative vibe around the U.S. team before it got blown out of the World Cup by Belgium, 4-1. “To me, it appeared to be the wrong call, but the ref called it.” wrote ex-soccer mom Suzanne Urban Ryan. “We had to live with it. Trump getting involved was just really poor judgement based on his need to win a game that he is not even a player.” Added Jordan Lang: “I’m sure his corrupted meddling negatively affected the psychology of the U.S players.” Yup.

    📮 This week’s question: Trump plans to address the nation in prime time Thursday with ginned-up information about his bogus and debunked claim that the 2020 election was stolen from him. He is laying the groundwork for November, and election interference on a scale to rival the Jim Crow South. How can Congress, the courts, the media, and everyday citizens respond to this dire threat before it spirals out of control? Please email me your answer and put the exact phrase “Trump election meddling” in the subject line.

    Backstory on why ICE is killing immigrants, again

    A vehicle with a damaged window is transported away from the scene of a shooting involving U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Monday in Biddeford, Maine. Robert F. Bukaty

    The fight against police brutality against African Americans in the late 2010s found its rallying cry when New York City police choked and killed a street peddler named Eric Garner, whose last words were. “I can’t breathe!” Now, Monday’s latest fatal shooting by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents that shattered the morning calm of Biddeford, Maine has produced a new mantra. As 26-year-old Joan Sebastian Guerrero lay dying on the pavement — shot in the head, then dragged from his car and handcuffed — a bystander heard him say in anguish: “I tried to stop.”

    Moments earlier, the man, reported to be a Colombian national with a U.S. work permit, had left his home, possibly with his daughter, in a white Kia sedan, which was hemmed in by ICE agents in their vehicles. Although the Department of Homeland Security changed the wording of its statements over the course of the day, it ultimately reported that an ICE agent shot Guerrero because the driver attempted to flee and the officer was “fearing for public safety.” But ICE and DHS, whose officers have now shot and killed at least 11 people since Donald Trump returned to office, have repeatedly seen their versions unravel as more video and witnesses emerged. The two most recent attacks — Monday’s assault on Guerrero and last week’s Houston shooting of 52-year-old Mexican national Lorenzo Salgado Araujo — happened on working-class residential streets without clear videos of the shootings, and with ICE agents not wearing body cams.

    Still, a pattern is starting to emerge as DHS and its new leader, the former Oklahoma senator Markwayne Mullin, put a flood of new, barely trained ICE recruits on the streets in attempt to make mass arrests of immigrants without the same level of hoopla and backlash that happened in cities like Minneapolis and Chicago under Mullin’s predecessor, Kristi Noem. In both the Houston and Biddeford shootings, ICE began the morning in what it claimed was a targeted operation seeking a specific immigrant with a removal order, only to try to arrest and ultimately kill men, in Salgado and Guerrero, who were not the supposed targets.

    It’s quickly becoming clear that ICE’s new strategy is a recipe for disaster. Both Salgado and Guerrero, according to what we know from witness accounts, didn’t seem to know what exactly to do when their vehicles were surrounded by unmarked vans and yelling men. In both cases, ICE agents interpreted the predictable panic and chaos as aggression, and made a split-second decision to end a human life forever. It increasingly looks as if the federal agents — facing an impossibly ambitious goal from the Trump regime of arresting and deporting 1 million people a year — insist they have a name on a sheet of paper, when in reality they are racially profiling brown-skinned men driving to blue-collar jobs.

    Like so many projects of our current government, the new ICE scheme is not only inhumane but also dumb and counterproductive. Mullin’s apparent new strategy was to meet the high arrest quotas sought by Trump and his immigration guru Stephen Miller without generating the kind of public protest and backlash that all but drove DHS out of Minnesota this winter. It’s not working. Even before Guerrero’s name was released, angry demonstrators took to the streets in Biddeford and stormed the office of the state’s GOP Sen. Susan Collins, who recently voted for a $70 billion cash infusion for immigration raids.

    The tactics may have changed slightly, but the repulsive devaluation of human life has not. Mass deportation is a failure — strategically, politically, and morally.

    What I wrote on this date in 2019

    Some days my past writings read like Nostradamus, but more often than not they reveal how fleeting our political moments can be. On this date seven years ago, this columnist joined a lot of progressive voters in swooning over the early-stage presidential ambitions of Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who had just spoken at the left-wing convention Netroots Nation here in Philadelphia. “With her slam-dunk performance Saturday,” I wrote, “Elizabeth Warren became president … of the American progressive movement, anyway.” But Sen. Bernie Sanders had other ideas about that, and then Joe Biden and South Carolina voters came along with different ideas about Warren, Sanders, and control of the Democratic Party. Read the rest: “Netroots Nation was the day Elizabeth Warren became president of the American left.”

    Recommended Inquirer reading

    • It was a full week for me, and for American outrage. First, I tackled the Houston ICE killing of 52-year-old Mexican national Lorenzo Salgado Araujo and the return of ambitious immigration raids to American cities. I noted that the new ICE strategy aimed to ramp up arrests without generating public outcry, and I urged readers not to go to sleep on mass deportation. Over the weekend, I wrote about the similarities between the Trump regime and the disastrous ancient reign of the Roman emperor Caligula. I detailed how Trump’s growing paranoia that he will be assassinated in office is causing new bloodshed in the Persian Gulf and inspiring fresh efforts to quash civil liberties here at home.
    • Kenesaw Mountain Landis must be spinning in his grave. He was the former federal judge who tried Chicago’s notorious “Black Sox” for throwing the 1919 World Series at the behest of New York gamblers, then became baseball commissioner to clean up the national pastime. For decades, Major League Baseball shunned even the slightest whiff of gambling connections that might taint the sport — but times have changed. My Inquirer colleague David Gambacorta — one of the best investigative reporters in the business — last week broke a remarkable story about how the lucrative betting site FanDuel egged on a local addicted gambler to keep playing until he lost some $1.5 million. Plot twist: FanDuel’s effort included having Phillies slugger Bryce Harper send a personalized video to please the local bettor. It’s disturbing that a) Harper, with a 13-year $330 million contract, also feels the need to peddle $899 videos on Cameo and b) he has a relationship with people at a gambling website. But FanDuel is now “the official sports betting partner” of MLB — an appalling relationship that only encourages morally dubious behavior like the Harper video. The rank corruption of modern American society, including sports, is why we need investigative reporters like Gambacorta. You can read the next installments in this saga, and support his work, when you subscribe to The Inquirer.

    By submitting your written, visual, and/or audio contributions, you agree to The Inquirer’s Terms of Use, including the grant of rights in Section 10.